you won't believe it, but a huge majority is actually keen on playing by the rules (as long as those rules are not too restrictive/stupid: Re drug laws). That's how society works. If a significant number of people where robers, murderes, rapists there would be nothing the police could do about it. This is actually pretty well demonstrated when mass-riots happen (like in France a while ago). There, and in other cases, the police just leaves. They usually come back only after order has been restored.
Banning people for breaking the rules is hardly altruistic. You do it because for every rule-breaker account there are X > 1 number of people that will quit because of the rule-breaker being in the game. On the other hand, Blizzard can't appear to ban people at random. They must be able to justify each and every case because if just one innocent person is banned, a lot of people will be quite upset. They can absolutely not afford that their customer base believes that anyone can be banned at anytime for no reason at all (secret-police esque).
so supply and demand do exist? Interessting. Just because the resources are limited on whim the economy evolving because of limited supply doesn't become less real. In the case of WoW , you can be very certain that Blizzard would abstain from any action that would destroy the economy. They really like the money they make from subscribers. Subscribers like the ingame economy.
you'd have a point if the content would come into existance from nothingness without any effort put into it. As this is the real world, it doesn't. If content producers aren't paid, they'll stop making content.
wow, you are quite the economist. Noble price shouldn't be far out.
But seriously, supply and demand exists everywhere. It's like a natural law of human interaction.
... because this problem exists precisely because there is no 100% agreement in the community that gold-buying is bad. Also, as long as thottbot exists, it doesn't really matter if "serious" websites refuse gold-ads. Thottbot is actually run by a gold-farming company and I'd venture to guess it's also the most visited single site from the target audience.
The only way to get rid of slurs like that is to embrace them. Large parts of the respective communities have already realized that. This is why you hear "nigger" the most in black-rap:-). Also, people should realize that calling something "gay" or someone a "fag" is a strong indication that there might be a very immature mind involved. Immature people, as a general rule, are offensive and annoying to everybody regardless of skin color or sexual orientation. The way to handle this for the last 10.000 years has been to basically ignore/slap-around anyone under the age of 16. It works, try it!
It's not about assuming everybody is heterosexual. It's about keeping your sexuality where it belongs: in your bedroom. Nobody I knows thinks "me, the hetero guy, will now play wow, together with all my hetero friends, in the guild that is all about being hetero". Gays could really take a page and quit making sexual preferences into a complete lifestyle, centering everything around with whom you'd like to go to bed with. Not that they "have" to . It would just limit the number of "wtf?" reactions from people that don't give a rats ass about what you want to do to whom sexually. And yeah, about being offended by others in WoW. Guess what? It happens to everyone, regardless of sexuality. Most 14 year olds tend to be annoying and stupid, so what you do is, not join a guild full of them.
no, fucking animals is not illegal because it would be "exploitation". It's illegal because most people think it's goddamn sick. And it is. It lessens humanities value.
I really wonder what protocol(s) this is supposed to be. Are they talking about Remote Desktop? Thinking about the IT at work, this would be the only service that comes to mind that really is Windows specific.
You know, I'm arguing about how useful and justfied a certain law/verdict is. You just keep pointing me to that same law. It's like the cycle of stupidity: Here, I think this law sucks and X shouldn't be called a Y. You: hurr hurr, moron, read the law that says X is indeed an Y. I wonder whos really the idiot.
I'm arguing semantics. Maybe I was assuming to much, but I thought it was plain as day to everyone that Windows isn't the only operating system available. Despite this fact, stating that MS IS a monopoly without backing it up will never net you a troll moderation here.
Calling a company that hasn't got a 100% marketshare a monopoly is plain wrong. It's also evil because the users of this 85%-truth speculate that some of the negative feelings associated with the word "monopoly" rub onto the company so falsly accused.
Microsoft is a monopoly because it's strong arming the market. It's strong arming the market because it's a monopoly. QED. That was easy. Arguing either of those points is useless because you'll just be refered futher around the circular argument. Same for discussing the merits of anti-trust laws using the example of Microsoft.
What exactly gives you the right to demand that an application protocol written for my application should be "open" and "standardized"? I think you are forgetting that every single person has the fundamental right to do whatever they please as long as they are not infringing on the liberty, property and well being of others.
Except that it doesn't really. My very first windows supported TCP/IP and IPX/SPX and still does today. What exactly precludes otheres from "driving on the same road" as I do or vice versa?
RE: Troll moderation. I really wonder how I could get to excellent karma with my opinions on this website. Finally, the day of reckoning is here. At least nobody pretents that this is a site for debate anymore, where presentation of an opionion gets moderated instead of the opinion itself.
However, they were found to be guilty of abusing their marketpower eventhough they only did what's common place in the auto industry, RE: making it impossible to integrate a third party [browser|air conditioner] into their [operating system|car].
It's really funny to watch. It's like arguing the merits of anti-drug laws. You'd be the one inisting I look up the the law that says people in possesion of dope are criminals -> QED.
hmm, maybe Uncle Tom hasn't much use for open standards in Windows either. I'd be very glad if Microsoft would be judged by the same standards everybody uses to judge the auto-industry.
So is the computer you bought 10 years ago just as powerful as the one you could buy today for the same money?
Is the Model T an equal car to what you get today for the same work*hours?
Products are, generally speaking, improving at the same price or staying the same but decreasing in price. That's the part where everybody gets richer. Or if you prefer, the part where you don't need to worry about mass-starvation and can actually employ people to make up fancy wealth-distribution statistics.
Mono means ONE. Not two, not three, just one. IF micrsoft really was the sole supplier of operating systems, which is really not the case, you'd be right in calling them a monopoly. In reality, though, there are countless "rival" operating systems for the desktop, the bulk of which are *free*. Still, an overwhelming number of people chooses to buy Windows. Microsofts point about not being punished for success still stands.
Are people at Microsoft writing viruses? Are they instructing people to NOT use AV? Are they telling people to download shady software from untrusted sources? Are they insisting you log-on as Administrator to do every day tasks like browsing the web and reading emails? Yes, Windows has security flaws. Just as every software ever written. Want to compare Windows to the real world? Did you know that standard doors and locks can not withstand any serious attempt to break in? If the same number of attacks that happen to computers would happen to houses, chances are your laptop would just have been stolen today while you were at work. What you demand is a fortress when all MS has to offer is a normal house. It's certainly not unreasonably of you to want to be secure. What is unreasonable is to put the blame for an internet full of criminals (the hackers) on Microsoft. Could Windows do a better job at security? Absolutely. Is Microsoft to blame if you catch the latest Sober/MyLove etc? Certainly not. Just as the producer of your door and lock is not to blame if criminals clear out your stuff.
Regarding the pain: if you don't like a product, in example when the beeping your car does when not buckeling up causes you pain, you are free to not buy it.
Slashdot Mirror
you won't believe it, but a huge majority is actually keen on playing by the rules (as long as those rules are not too restrictive/stupid: Re drug laws). That's how society works. If a significant number of people where robers, murderes, rapists there would be nothing the police could do about it. This is actually pretty well demonstrated when mass-riots happen (like in France a while ago). There, and in other cases, the police just leaves. They usually come back only after order has been restored.
Banning people for breaking the rules is hardly altruistic. You do it because for every rule-breaker account there are X > 1 number of people that will quit because of the rule-breaker being in the game. On the other hand, Blizzard can't appear to ban people at random. They must be able to justify each and every case because if just one innocent person is banned, a lot of people will be quite upset. They can absolutely not afford that their customer base believes that anyone can be banned at anytime for no reason at all (secret-police esque).
so supply and demand do exist? Interessting. Just because the resources are limited on whim the economy evolving because of limited supply doesn't become less real. In the case of WoW , you can be very certain that Blizzard would abstain from any action that would destroy the economy. They really like the money they make from subscribers. Subscribers like the ingame economy.
you'd have a point if the content would come into existance from nothingness without any effort put into it. As this is the real world, it doesn't. If content producers aren't paid, they'll stop making content.
wow, you are quite the economist. Noble price shouldn't be far out.
But seriously, supply and demand exists everywhere. It's like a natural law of human interaction.
... because this problem exists precisely because there is no 100% agreement in the community that gold-buying is bad. Also, as long as thottbot exists, it doesn't really matter if "serious" websites refuse gold-ads. Thottbot is actually run by a gold-farming company and I'd venture to guess it's also the most visited single site from the target audience.
The only way to get rid of slurs like that is to embrace them. Large parts of the respective communities have already realized that. This is why you hear "nigger" the most in black-rap :-). Also, people should realize that calling something "gay" or someone a "fag" is a strong indication that there might be a very immature mind involved. Immature people, as a general rule, are offensive and annoying to everybody regardless of skin color or sexual orientation. The way to handle this for the last 10.000 years has been to basically ignore/slap-around anyone under the age of 16. It works, try it!
It's not about assuming everybody is heterosexual. It's about keeping your sexuality where it belongs: in your bedroom. Nobody I knows thinks "me, the hetero guy, will now play wow, together with all my hetero friends, in the guild that is all about being hetero". Gays could really take a page and quit making sexual preferences into a complete lifestyle, centering everything around with whom you'd like to go to bed with. Not that they "have" to . It would just limit the number of "wtf?" reactions from people that don't give a rats ass about what you want to do to whom sexually.
And yeah, about being offended by others in WoW. Guess what? It happens to everyone, regardless of sexuality. Most 14 year olds tend to be annoying and stupid, so what you do is, not join a guild full of them.
no, fucking animals is not illegal because it would be "exploitation". It's illegal because most people think it's goddamn sick. And it is. It lessens humanities value.
I really wonder what protocol(s) this is supposed to be. Are they talking about Remote Desktop? Thinking about the IT at work, this would be the only service that comes to mind that really is Windows specific.
You know, I'm arguing about how useful and justfied a certain law/verdict is. You just keep pointing me to that same law. It's like the cycle of stupidity: Here, I think this law sucks and X shouldn't be called a Y. You: hurr hurr, moron, read the law that says X is indeed an Y. I wonder whos really the idiot.
I'm arguing semantics. Maybe I was assuming to much, but I thought it was plain as day to everyone that Windows isn't the only operating system available. Despite this fact, stating that MS IS a monopoly without backing it up will never net you a troll moderation here.
did they use there alledged position of power or is it simply the better product (winxp server)? How could you (or a judge) tell the difference?
Calling a company that hasn't got a 100% marketshare a monopoly is plain wrong. It's also evil because the users of this 85%-truth speculate that some of the negative feelings associated with the word "monopoly" rub onto the company so falsly accused.
Microsoft is a monopoly because it's strong arming the market. It's strong arming the market because it's a monopoly. QED. That was easy. Arguing either of those points is useless because you'll just be refered futher around the circular argument. Same for discussing the merits of anti-trust laws using the example of Microsoft.
What exactly gives you the right to demand that an application protocol written for my application should be "open" and "standardized"? I think you are forgetting that every single person has the fundamental right to do whatever they please as long as they are not infringing on the liberty, property and well being of others.
Except that it doesn't really. My very first windows supported TCP/IP and IPX/SPX and still does today. What exactly precludes otheres from "driving on the same road" as I do or vice versa?
RE: Troll moderation. I really wonder how I could get to excellent karma with my opinions on this website. Finally, the day of reckoning is here. At least nobody pretents that this is a site for debate anymore, where presentation of an opionion gets moderated instead of the opinion itself.
So they are in anti-trust violation because they did things that are illegal when you are in anti-trust violation? Nice going. MONOpoly, not so much.
I'm confused. The highway maps to which thing in software/operating systems exactly?
However, they were found to be guilty of abusing their marketpower eventhough they only did what's common place in the auto industry, RE: making it impossible to integrate a third party [browser|air conditioner] into their [operating system|car].
It's really funny to watch. It's like arguing the merits of anti-drug laws. You'd be the one inisting I look up the the law that says people in possesion of dope are criminals -> QED.
there can be a difference between what you might want to ship and what you might want to call a product :-D.
hmm, maybe Uncle Tom hasn't much use for open standards in Windows either. I'd be very glad if Microsoft would be judged by the same standards everybody uses to judge the auto-industry.
So is the computer you bought 10 years ago just as powerful as the one you could buy today for the same money?
Is the Model T an equal car to what you get today for the same work*hours?
Products are, generally speaking, improving at the same price or staying the same but decreasing in price. That's the part where everybody gets richer. Or if you prefer, the part where you don't need to worry about mass-starvation and can actually employ people to make up fancy wealth-distribution statistics.
Mono means ONE. Not two, not three, just one. IF micrsoft really was the sole supplier of operating systems, which is really not the case, you'd be right in calling them a monopoly. In reality, though, there are countless "rival" operating systems for the desktop, the bulk of which are *free*. Still, an overwhelming number of people chooses to buy Windows. Microsofts point about not being punished for success still stands.
Are people at Microsoft writing viruses? Are they instructing people to NOT use AV? Are they telling people to download shady software from untrusted sources? Are they insisting you log-on as Administrator to do every day tasks like browsing the web and reading emails?
Yes, Windows has security flaws. Just as every software ever written. Want to compare Windows to the real world? Did you know that standard doors and locks can not withstand any serious attempt to break in? If the same number of attacks that happen to computers would happen to houses, chances are your laptop would just have been stolen today while you were at work. What you demand is a fortress when all MS has to offer is a normal house. It's certainly not unreasonably of you to want to be secure. What is unreasonable is to put the blame for an internet full of criminals (the hackers) on Microsoft. Could Windows do a better job at security? Absolutely. Is Microsoft to blame if you catch the latest Sober/MyLove etc? Certainly not. Just as the producer of your door and lock is not to blame if criminals clear out your stuff.
Regarding the pain: if you don't like a product, in example when the beeping your car does when not buckeling up causes you pain, you are free to not buy it.