I've had Metroid Prime crash on me once, sounded like the drive was given conflicting orders as it kept moving the head around and clacked all the time before the BSOD came up. Granted, that was only once but have a look at the bugsinconsolegames.
Doom3, while I gave up after a while because it sucked so badly, required me to look up those stupid keycodes for cabinets (or, I should say, drove me to do so thanks to shitty gameplay).
All of the keycodes were found in the texts or audio messages. Well, except for the bonus lockers that required you to go to a website that was referred in the game. If you didn't want to wait while listening to the audio messages you could start them, run to the next room and fight a bit while your doomPod plays the message.
If I create things where I work, do I own the results of my creativity or does the company that I work for own it?
Depends on what you were hired for. If your job is to create copyrighted works for the company then of course you can't take both the works and the money home. You agreed that any works you make (usually at work, sometimes at home depending on the contract) belong to the company and that the company gives you money in return. Don't like the contract, don't sign it. Look for another job that doesn't have this requirement.
Re:De-regionalize your DVD player
on
30 Days of DRM
·
· Score: 1
DVD Region Coding has been ruled to not constitute a copy protection measure in several legislations, no idea if anyone tested it in the US but most likely the courts will find the same.
Well, are you using a multiuser-capable OS like Windows NT or Linux? Then you've already got DRM on your harddrive. What else do you think user permissions are? But as the name says, DRM defines what a user can do with a file and you're free to set a file to "copyable and modifiable by everyone". DRM your files without any restrictions enabled and it's just another file format.
Re:If I am the copyright owner
on
30 Days of DRM
·
· Score: 1
Keep in mind that copyright applies to more than just music. Making copyright completely untransferable would mean you cannot hire a programmer for a software project because he could decide to take his copyright with him any day, possibly to a competitor. So you'd either need provisions that ensure that doesn't happen or a sneaky lawyer who can do the same. Net effect: Zero.
Dunno if it was the same guy but I recall a top executivwe from the RIAA or IFPI stating things like "of course we pay the bands badly, after all it's our effort, not theirs that makes the money".
The DMCA says "without consent of the copyright holder". No idea how that gets treated for PD works though I think it means the copyright holder of the copy protection, not the work (so even un-DRMing a file you encoded yourself using someone else's tools is a felony). On the other hand that could mean that if Macrovision/other DRM provider went out of business and the copyright wasn't bought up by an RIAA company you could break files using their DRM system. In that case, let's hope Apple goes out of business:p.
Re:Great idea
on
30 Days of DRM
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No, I meant you'd need dictatorial powers if you wanted to extent the hate speech definition to basically mean "disagreeing with the party". A dictator wouldn't give a damn about the law and an elected official won't be able to modify that definition that far without getting into serious trouble. The poster I replied to used the US mentality that any restriction to free speech will be abused to outlaw crimethink.
A self-replicating catalyst could work like that provided you can make it work with water (which is unlikely since hydrogen and oxygen alone can't be used to form many things, though you may be able to make that work with oil). Hm, that'd be a nice way to kill the economy: A catalyst that turns oil into itself (plus some waste substances possibly), can't be used for the things oil can be used for and isn't easy to spot when converting oil... Drop that into a central pipeline or storage and watch the western economy break apart.
If the peak has already happened AND demand is increasing, shouldn't there be much greater impact already? And wouldn't governments already be frantically investing into non-oil alternatives? I mean, with all the talk about peak oil killing the world economy I'd assume we'd have seen it crash within a year or less.
Life will always survive. If you nuke a country to the ground there will be life remaining. What most people are worried about is the fact that it's not going to be human life.
Pfft, adding Canada to the Axis of Evil TM is just as silly as declaring war on Poland, by the time you're done with the paperwork you've already conquered the country.
I disagree. They train their followers to be suicide bombers but I'd be surprised if even ONE of their leaders truly believes he'll go to "heaven" after death under these circumstances.
An even better question is "What is the fastest way to de-capitate the Iranian government and Iranian society?"
Synchronized long-range missile (non nuclear if possible to avoid the diplomatic desaster that a nuclear strike is) strikes on all potential locations of the top govt officials? That would at least cause confusion and disarray, enough to destroy all major military capabilities of the country. After that you'll still have to deal with the loyalists among the populace (and those that were indoctrinated by false preachers to hate everyone who isn't under control of these false preachers) but those lack WMD capabilities. That would at least reduce their ability to cause damage to the point of no longer posing a major threat, completely pacifying the country would require removing the indoctrination of the war mongers and that's far too widespread to be feasible in any timeframe of less than a few generations.
Slashdot Mirror
PETA-Flop? You mean it can throw molotov cocktails at scientists?
I've had Metroid Prime crash on me once, sounded like the drive was given conflicting orders as it kept moving the head around and clacked all the time before the BSOD came up. Granted, that was only once but have a look at the bugs in console games.
Doom3, while I gave up after a while because it sucked so badly, required me to look up those stupid keycodes for cabinets (or, I should say, drove me to do so thanks to shitty gameplay).
All of the keycodes were found in the texts or audio messages. Well, except for the bonus lockers that required you to go to a website that was referred in the game. If you didn't want to wait while listening to the audio messages you could start them, run to the next room and fight a bit while your doomPod plays the message.
If I create things where I work, do I own the results of my creativity or does the company that I work for own it?
Depends on what you were hired for. If your job is to create copyrighted works for the company then of course you can't take both the works and the money home. You agreed that any works you make (usually at work, sometimes at home depending on the contract) belong to the company and that the company gives you money in return. Don't like the contract, don't sign it. Look for another job that doesn't have this requirement.
DVD Region Coding has been ruled to not constitute a copy protection measure in several legislations, no idea if anyone tested it in the US but most likely the courts will find the same.
Well, are you using a multiuser-capable OS like Windows NT or Linux? Then you've already got DRM on your harddrive. What else do you think user permissions are? But as the name says, DRM defines what a user can do with a file and you're free to set a file to "copyable and modifiable by everyone". DRM your files without any restrictions enabled and it's just another file format.
Keep in mind that copyright applies to more than just music. Making copyright completely untransferable would mean you cannot hire a programmer for a software project because he could decide to take his copyright with him any day, possibly to a competitor. So you'd either need provisions that ensure that doesn't happen or a sneaky lawyer who can do the same. Net effect: Zero.
Dunno if it was the same guy but I recall a top executivwe from the RIAA or IFPI stating things like "of course we pay the bands badly, after all it's our effort, not theirs that makes the money".
The DMCA says "without consent of the copyright holder". No idea how that gets treated for PD works though I think it means the copyright holder of the copy protection, not the work (so even un-DRMing a file you encoded yourself using someone else's tools is a felony). On the other hand that could mean that if Macrovision/other DRM provider went out of business and the copyright wasn't bought up by an RIAA company you could break files using their DRM system. In that case, let's hope Apple goes out of business :p.
In other words, abolish property?
No, I meant you'd need dictatorial powers if you wanted to extent the hate speech definition to basically mean "disagreeing with the party". A dictator wouldn't give a damn about the law and an elected official won't be able to modify that definition that far without getting into serious trouble. The poster I replied to used the US mentality that any restriction to free speech will be abused to outlaw crimethink.
Wait, I thought that used to be Hemos?
And it's a sad thought that Zonk has really been around for years now...
A self-replicating catalyst could work like that provided you can make it work with water (which is unlikely since hydrogen and oxygen alone can't be used to form many things, though you may be able to make that work with oil). Hm, that'd be a nice way to kill the economy: A catalyst that turns oil into itself (plus some waste substances possibly), can't be used for the things oil can be used for and isn't easy to spot when converting oil... Drop that into a central pipeline or storage and watch the western economy break apart.
Yes but what did Intelligent Design resurface as?
Second you can't patent math.
Fortunately you can patent algorithms in software which is esentially math.
I trust Alex Jones as much as Josef Göbbels.
If the peak has already happened AND demand is increasing, shouldn't there be much greater impact already? And wouldn't governments already be frantically investing into non-oil alternatives? I mean, with all the talk about peak oil killing the world economy I'd assume we'd have seen it crash within a year or less.
And even if, you'd need dictatorial powers to restrict such a basic right and at that point you don't really need to care about the law anyway.
I don't think that's US-specific, looks pretty much the same here in Germany.
Life will always survive. If you nuke a country to the ground there will be life remaining. What most people are worried about is the fact that it's not going to be human life.
They're going to put them in their mouths, of course.
Last I checked North Korea already HAS nukes. And South Korea and Japan ARE sitting around.
Pfft, adding Canada to the Axis of Evil TM is just as silly as declaring war on Poland, by the time you're done with the paperwork you've already conquered the country.
I disagree. They train their followers to be suicide bombers but I'd be surprised if even ONE of their leaders truly believes he'll go to "heaven" after death under these circumstances.
Those gas attacks happened when Iraq was a US ally and were covered up by the US at the time, remember? Iraq was armed by the US to fight Iran.
An even better question is "What is the fastest way to de-capitate the Iranian government and Iranian society?"
Synchronized long-range missile (non nuclear if possible to avoid the diplomatic desaster that a nuclear strike is) strikes on all potential locations of the top govt officials? That would at least cause confusion and disarray, enough to destroy all major military capabilities of the country. After that you'll still have to deal with the loyalists among the populace (and those that were indoctrinated by false preachers to hate everyone who isn't under control of these false preachers) but those lack WMD capabilities. That would at least reduce their ability to cause damage to the point of no longer posing a major threat, completely pacifying the country would require removing the indoctrination of the war mongers and that's far too widespread to be feasible in any timeframe of less than a few generations.