Uploading through P2P counts as commercial distribution due to the potential number of receivers so even if they got that pushed through it wouldn't legalize P2P.
I don't think they'll get it through but they'll add a useful opposing voice to votes that basically screw natural people as well as those stupid anti-terror laws.
I'm pretty sure they were elected on their broader anti-authoritarian stance, after all the neo-liberal FDP had a massive vote loss which I'd guess is at least partially caused by the people who voted FDP for the opposition to anti-terror nonsense migrating to the PP instead. It probably helped the pirates that their polling results showed a result above the 5% threshold shortly before the actual vote so people would be encouraged to vote PP, not go with "the lesser evil" on a belief that PP votes wouldn't count.
Sony is doing business in the US, it even has a US subsidiary (SCEA in this case) and most likely the ToS is written for individual countries (they don't write contracts in English in Japan).
Also as a member of the RIAA Sony is no stranger to bribing US politicians.
The EU has a directive on the limitations of non-negotiated contracts. I'm sure that most EULAs will be trimmed down hard by that before you even consider that EULAs are administered in an even more evil fashion.
I'm thinking the severability clause needs to be banned. An average citizen is not able to tell which clauses are not going to be enforceable so he's going to follow clauses that aren't legal and companies can make him believe he's bound to all kinds of things. The severability clause is used as an excuse to throw a ton of clauses in there that aren't legal and confuse the customer. Nobody can afford a lawyer for all the thousands of EULAs that get thrown at them.
Don't pretty much all contracts require you to waive some rights? There are special rights that are flagged as inalienable (the human rights, usually) but unless the law specifically states that certain rights cannot be waived in a contract or not waived at all then it can be waived.
These days you get click-through contracts thrown at you faster than you can read them, every random crappy thing comes with hundreds of pages attached and everything gets updated regularly and expects you to agree to another contract.
There really needs to be a law limiting those damn things, companies are abusing the nature of electronic products to shove dozens of contracts at people by making the software not work if people don't click "I Agree". Why can I buy a fucking CAR, a ton of steel that can kill people if I'm messing up or be converted to all kinds of monstrous weapons, without being handed a single EULA but I need to sign like five of them just to make an entertainment device play videogames online?
Er, I don't know about the rest of Europe but Germany's economy is growing. Not that strongly this year but it'll probably recover. You can't use the economic development in a recession as an argument against inflation.
Earth Defense Force 2 on the freaking PS2 had groups of civilians fleeing from the monsters in addition to the 50 enemies you were fighting. That's the PS2!
Entity counts are more determined by what the game developer wants to have, not by what the hardware can handle.
There's Conflict Zone, an RTS where your popularity is the resource that decides what tech you get access to. Killing civilians is the quickest way to drop that popularity rating.
There's also the opposite in Iron Grip: Warlords where you get bonus resources by tricking enemies into killing civilians (but get penalized for killing them yourself, of course) and the goal of each level is to anger the invading army enough to make them firebomb the entire city.
In the German version the No Russian mission acts the same as the Favela mission. I.e. shoot a civilian, game over.
It's not really trying for anything realistic though, in Favela the civs only appear so briefly at the start you barely notice them and No Russian is just there for the shock value.
Sure but the Arma games taught me enough about war to know that all I'd get done is run around for five minutes before getting shot dead by a guy I didn't even spot.
So what would you do with all the employees of things like software companies? Their works need to be protected under copyright to be marketable but they also need to become property of the company to be manageable.
What are the musicians whose works won't even sell ten years after their release do with that "retirement help"? They aren't going to make money off the songs anyway.
Using B2s would need a really damn good justification. You could probably nuke the entirety of NK and still not do as much damage as one of those planes is worth.
If they do that they can count on a lot of US bombers deliberately entering NK airspace.
It's kind of a cold war there, NK has Seoul as a hostage with tons of artillery placed near the border so the west doesn't want to piss NK off unnecessarily but the west is otherwise powerful enough to crush NK underfoot. In an open war both sides would lose something and not get anything good out of it.
So basically neither side would benefit from a war and we're just sitting back and hoping NK starves to death by itself.
Hm, that reminds me, the 80 game Atari 2600 collection I got from Steam contains most of the games as ROM files that can be read by standard 2600 emulators. It's not listed in the store currently but there's probably a disc version of that floating around.
It's quite relevant as those are the kind of relics that Germany has running. And our politicians wanted to make those relics run even longer until the public opinion turned against them.
These plants have to go, they're really old and outdated. If we're going to put nuclear back into the country we need to do that with new powerplants, not the relics we're running now.
As for the "strategic move", the shutdown was decided on ten years ago but lobbyists made the govt reverse that decision. Then a few months later Fukushima blows up and the polls of both ruling parties drop through the floor, suddenly they're taking back their decision to extend the runtimes.
Slashdot Mirror
We have a guaranteed income already, it's colloquially known as Hartz IV and designed to be the absolute minimum you can survive on.
Uploading through P2P counts as commercial distribution due to the potential number of receivers so even if they got that pushed through it wouldn't legalize P2P.
I don't think they'll get it through but they'll add a useful opposing voice to votes that basically screw natural people as well as those stupid anti-terror laws.
I'm pretty sure they were elected on their broader anti-authoritarian stance, after all the neo-liberal FDP had a massive vote loss which I'd guess is at least partially caused by the people who voted FDP for the opposition to anti-terror nonsense migrating to the PP instead. It probably helped the pirates that their polling results showed a result above the 5% threshold shortly before the actual vote so people would be encouraged to vote PP, not go with "the lesser evil" on a belief that PP votes wouldn't count.
Sony is doing business in the US, it even has a US subsidiary (SCEA in this case) and most likely the ToS is written for individual countries (they don't write contracts in English in Japan).
Also as a member of the RIAA Sony is no stranger to bribing US politicians.
The EU has a directive on the limitations of non-negotiated contracts. I'm sure that most EULAs will be trimmed down hard by that before you even consider that EULAs are administered in an even more evil fashion.
I'm thinking the severability clause needs to be banned. An average citizen is not able to tell which clauses are not going to be enforceable so he's going to follow clauses that aren't legal and companies can make him believe he's bound to all kinds of things. The severability clause is used as an excuse to throw a ton of clauses in there that aren't legal and confuse the customer. Nobody can afford a lawyer for all the thousands of EULAs that get thrown at them.
Don't pretty much all contracts require you to waive some rights? There are special rights that are flagged as inalienable (the human rights, usually) but unless the law specifically states that certain rights cannot be waived in a contract or not waived at all then it can be waived.
These days you get click-through contracts thrown at you faster than you can read them, every random crappy thing comes with hundreds of pages attached and everything gets updated regularly and expects you to agree to another contract.
There really needs to be a law limiting those damn things, companies are abusing the nature of electronic products to shove dozens of contracts at people by making the software not work if people don't click "I Agree". Why can I buy a fucking CAR, a ton of steel that can kill people if I'm messing up or be converted to all kinds of monstrous weapons, without being handed a single EULA but I need to sign like five of them just to make an entertainment device play videogames online?
Er, I don't know about the rest of Europe but Germany's economy is growing. Not that strongly this year but it'll probably recover. You can't use the economic development in a recession as an argument against inflation.
Earth Defense Force 2 on the freaking PS2 had groups of civilians fleeing from the monsters in addition to the 50 enemies you were fighting. That's the PS2!
Entity counts are more determined by what the game developer wants to have, not by what the hardware can handle.
Al Gore isn't a news network. It doesn't matter what the parties say, we're complaining about Fox News here.
There's Conflict Zone, an RTS where your popularity is the resource that decides what tech you get access to. Killing civilians is the quickest way to drop that popularity rating.
There's also the opposite in Iron Grip: Warlords where you get bonus resources by tricking enemies into killing civilians (but get penalized for killing them yourself, of course) and the goal of each level is to anger the invading army enough to make them firebomb the entire city.
In the German version the No Russian mission acts the same as the Favela mission. I.e. shoot a civilian, game over.
It's not really trying for anything realistic though, in Favela the civs only appear so briefly at the start you barely notice them and No Russian is just there for the shock value.
Sure but the Arma games taught me enough about war to know that all I'd get done is run around for five minutes before getting shot dead by a guy I didn't even spot.
So what would you do with all the employees of things like software companies? Their works need to be protected under copyright to be marketable but they also need to become property of the company to be manageable.
What are the musicians whose works won't even sell ten years after their release do with that "retirement help"? They aren't going to make money off the songs anyway.
It's North Korea, I wouldn't put stupid moves past them.
Using B2s would need a really damn good justification. You could probably nuke the entirety of NK and still not do as much damage as one of those planes is worth.
If they do that they can count on a lot of US bombers deliberately entering NK airspace.
It's kind of a cold war there, NK has Seoul as a hostage with tons of artillery placed near the border so the west doesn't want to piss NK off unnecessarily but the west is otherwise powerful enough to crush NK underfoot. In an open war both sides would lose something and not get anything good out of it.
So basically neither side would benefit from a war and we're just sitting back and hoping NK starves to death by itself.
You easily counter it with the aforementioned Anti-Radiation Missile in case of a real war.
I guess the GPS was used for tracking where the intel photos were taken so with the GPS jammed that tracking would be unnecessarily difficult.
Hm, that reminds me, the 80 game Atari 2600 collection I got from Steam contains most of the games as ROM files that can be read by standard 2600 emulators. It's not listed in the store currently but there's probably a disc version of that floating around.
So you simply declare this toxic waste that can't be safely stored anywhere not pollution?
It's quite relevant as those are the kind of relics that Germany has running. And our politicians wanted to make those relics run even longer until the public opinion turned against them.
Germany tried a pebble bed, it produced nuclear dust and was pretty leaky. The site where it was is still contaminated.
These plants have to go, they're really old and outdated. If we're going to put nuclear back into the country we need to do that with new powerplants, not the relics we're running now.
As for the "strategic move", the shutdown was decided on ten years ago but lobbyists made the govt reverse that decision. Then a few months later Fukushima blows up and the polls of both ruling parties drop through the floor, suddenly they're taking back their decision to extend the runtimes.
Yeah but at least you wouldn't be turning additional fossil fuels into diesel to power whatever needs that diesel.