the change in difficulty is not something that has impact on whether it was "good" or "bad".
To try to say that lowering the difficulty of games is "good" or "terrible" creates an argument that makes absolutely no sense.
I, as a gamer, am offended that games have gotten so damn easy. However, plenty of people like it. So there's both ends of the spectrum on that.
Yes, quality in a variety of ways has gotten better for gaming, but that doesn't mean that we don't want a history of what was.
On your same concept, should we just throw out (insert prominent art piece's name) because the newer art is better? No. History is there for a reason. Or, in a more relevant way, should we just throw away all the old apple II's because the new stuff runs better? no.
Originally, from Groklaw: "So, why doesn't Florian and the folks he is lobbying for release the earlier letter from Bowler, in which he apparently expressed that he was unaware that "IBM has intellectual property rights in this area"? This letter, then is addressing that expression and responding to it with incredulity. The list is to show Bowler that, indeed, IBM has rights that it believes TurboHercules would infringe if it goes forward, and I see that IBM is saying that the infringement is not just patents. That's how I understand this sentence: "Apart from concerns about unauthorized use of proprietary IBM information by one or more TurboHercules contributors, IBM therefore has substantial concerns about infringement of patented IBM technology." So patents are not the whole story, from IBM's point of view. The letter, then, was a refusal letter, letting Bowler know that IBM's answer to what was evidently a request that IBM alter its position was no, it would not. And it's essentially implying that Bowler couldn't really be unaware of IBM's rights, that IBM simply did not believe they didn't know, but if they didn't, here's a list of patents, and by the way that is not the only issue IBM had with their plan, which IBM was not agreeable to. Now go back and read again what Florian wrote. Seriously."
What the hell is this guy's point? Bing could release a "trends" the same as google, yet everyone is acting like google is god.
If anything, a blog post on a site called search engine land, which is all about SEO, hating on google, sounds like a competitor disliking their own competitor.
This guy is claiming that IBM is being monopolistic for not changing their own software license to what turbohercules has asked for.
Meanwhile, turbohercules is shitting their pants, saying oh! IBM threatened us! (advised by Florian on that, notably) When they have done absolutely nothing in court.
Will they do something now? Who knows. Would they have before? They didn't.
Nothing of the phrase go away has anything to do with being aimed at people, other than this time with florian. Who cares about my verbiage? I post a lot on slashdot. Is it any surprise that some of my words are used more than once?
Do you have any idea how many times you've posted? Oh right, it doesn't matter.
Florian is all spin. He should be shut down before he tries to mislead people with his false statements. There are plenty of other people who pay attention when he posts too.
many of us are pretty sure that florian's lobbying is beginning to show either a: mission creep or b: that he's willing to compromise his ethics for pay, since everything going on here's end result is an attack on the GPL.
"check my blog! I've got great insight!" The source for EC says they're investigating. It doesn't have your spin where you continue to parade that somehow the turbohercules scenario is monopolistic as if IBM should suddenly license the way turbohercules wants just because they ask. That part, is misleading. I guess I should pull up old comments again, where you are clearly the party to this entire scenario.
That's the biggest stretch I have ever seen. Where do you come up with this? Just because someone isn't complaining about something doesn't mean the openly support it.
Oh wait. Hey, Florian, you never say anything bad about terrorism. You must support it!
That's how off base your concept is. People can be against software patents while acknowledging contracts, which is something you clearly are forgetting. If Turbohercules causes a stir, it's going to hurt open source and be very pro software patents, actually.
Your view is narrower than a thread through a needle, and I hope you realize that someday.
blinders on how? PJ is a paralegal and has no ties to IBM whatsoever.
Florian is doing nothing but spin lately. I debunked him before on this article and if he tries this again, I'll debunk him again. We don't need his spin on slashdot.
maybe you want to look at what happens if you try to dual or tri-screen on an integrated graphics card. Hint: doesn't go well even at moderate resolutions.
My point was, what people think is general work, it's not always cpu-focused. Some of the time? sure. Most of the time? I wouldn't say so.
it isn't really complicated. GPL at it's basis, works like this: use something under one license - new stuff using that something comes under that same license. That's not a difficult concept to grasp - everyone uses that concept for the most part whether it's MSPL, BSD, or GPL.
Lots of businesses use open source software. In fact, probably 95% of all businesses worldwide uses open source backends, even if the rest of their software is microsoft (which is also equally unlikely).
tell that to apple, android, and windows 7. Don't think win7 isn't going to have spam equivalents. They'd have to raise it to $1000/app if they wanted to try to prevent such.
Also, this guarantees that nobody is going to release *any* applications on it for free. Everyone's going to demand that they recoup their $99 in the same fashion that the RIAA/MPAA demands their money.
dunno, but I'd think you can tackle the entire museum in about a week. It's a big building, but it's not that big. So I have no idea what people would do for the rest of the month.
Re:United States Government Accountability Office?
on
Top Secret America
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
okay, so the issue here is that top secret is a requirement for a lot of things that might not be top secret. Say you're doing some kind of database for the gov't? It could be as basic as library of congress but they might require someone with top secret clearance at some level of the company.
It's the wrong issue to focus on if you simply look at "are top secret jobs productive/worthwhile or not", essentially.
While I am sure there are some positions that are overpaid and won government contracts for more money than the minimal BS they're doing, the bigger issue should be : why do we need this many programs top secret?
re evaluate? what do you think that means? I'll give you a clue: it means absolutely nothing, because it can mean anything they want.
There are plenty of good and bad ways that could go, but to assume they're going to follow the existing free bumper option when there isn't an angry mob, I wouldn't really expect nor can anyone predict.
Slashdot Mirror
the change in difficulty is not something that has impact on whether it was "good" or "bad".
To try to say that lowering the difficulty of games is "good" or "terrible" creates an argument that makes absolutely no sense.
I, as a gamer, am offended that games have gotten so damn easy. However, plenty of people like it. So there's both ends of the spectrum on that.
Yes, quality in a variety of ways has gotten better for gaming, but that doesn't mean that we don't want a history of what was.
On your same concept, should we just throw out (insert prominent art piece's name) because the newer art is better? No. History is there for a reason. Or, in a more relevant way, should we just throw away all the old apple II's because the new stuff runs better? no.
PJ tried to bury? dude you are asinine, by far.
Originally, from Groklaw: "So, why doesn't Florian and the folks he is lobbying for release the earlier letter from Bowler, in which he apparently expressed that he was unaware that "IBM has intellectual property rights in this area"? This letter, then is addressing that expression and responding to it with incredulity. The list is to show Bowler that, indeed, IBM has rights that it believes TurboHercules would infringe if it goes forward, and I see that IBM is saying that the infringement is not just patents. That's how I understand this sentence: "Apart from concerns about unauthorized use of proprietary IBM information by one or more TurboHercules contributors, IBM therefore has substantial concerns about infringement of patented IBM technology." So patents are not the whole story, from IBM's point of view. The letter, then, was a refusal letter, letting Bowler know that IBM's answer to what was evidently a request that IBM alter its position was no, it would not. And it's essentially implying that Bowler couldn't really be unaware of IBM's rights, that IBM simply did not believe they didn't know, but if they didn't, here's a list of patents, and by the way that is not the only issue IBM had with their plan, which IBM was not agreeable to. Now go back and read again what Florian wrote. Seriously."
Go read http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=2010041107355659 as well.
Note the florian/TH involvement.
Florian is a reporter? No. Florian is a lobbyist. go look it up.
What the hell is this guy's point? Bing could release a "trends" the same as google, yet everyone is acting like google is god.
If anything, a blog post on a site called search engine land, which is all about SEO, hating on google, sounds like a competitor disliking their own competitor.
likewise the average program, even plenty of games, can't even make proper use of 4 cores. Wasn't there an article about this on slashdot recently?
They call it the iProselytize.
okay, have you read the original issue?
This guy is claiming that IBM is being monopolistic for not changing their own software license to what turbohercules has asked for.
Meanwhile, turbohercules is shitting their pants, saying oh! IBM threatened us! (advised by Florian on that, notably) When they have done absolutely nothing in court.
Will they do something now? Who knows. Would they have before? They didn't.
Nothing of the phrase go away has anything to do with being aimed at people, other than this time with florian. Who cares about my verbiage? I post a lot on slashdot. Is it any surprise that some of my words are used more than once?
Do you have any idea how many times you've posted? Oh right, it doesn't matter.
Florian is all spin. He should be shut down before he tries to mislead people with his false statements. There are plenty of other people who pay attention when he posts too.
many of us are pretty sure that florian's lobbying is beginning to show either a: mission creep or b: that he's willing to compromise his ethics for pay, since everything going on here's end result is an attack on the GPL.
You are tooting your own horn.
"check my blog! I've got great insight!" The source for EC says they're investigating. It doesn't have your spin where you continue to parade that somehow the turbohercules scenario is monopolistic as if IBM should suddenly license the way turbohercules wants just because they ask. That part, is misleading. I guess I should pull up old comments again, where you are clearly the party to this entire scenario.
And then we have when you get debunked bigtime
get real.
because I don't post anonymously with a whole lot of spin.
My old comments were on the last article re: florian mueller. go pull it up yourself, and don't think I'm going to waste my time on an AC for that.
That's the biggest stretch I have ever seen. Where do you come up with this? Just because someone isn't complaining about something doesn't mean the openly support it.
Oh wait. Hey, Florian, you never say anything bad about terrorism. You must support it!
That's how off base your concept is. People can be against software patents while acknowledging contracts, which is something you clearly are forgetting. If Turbohercules causes a stir, it's going to hurt open source and be very pro software patents, actually.
Your view is narrower than a thread through a needle, and I hope you realize that someday.
blinders on how? PJ is a paralegal and has no ties to IBM whatsoever.
Florian is doing nothing but spin lately. I debunked him before on this article and if he tries this again, I'll debunk him again. We don't need his spin on slashdot.
are you really going to start again florian? You are the only one who has been pushing this hype while citing your own blog.
please go away
maybe you want to look at what happens if you try to dual or tri-screen on an integrated graphics card. Hint: doesn't go well even at moderate resolutions.
My point was, what people think is general work, it's not always cpu-focused. Some of the time? sure. Most of the time? I wouldn't say so.
wow, obvious troll much?
Ever tried to do anything graphically intensive on a celeron with 2gb of ram? Here's a hint: it won't work.
so your statement means what exactly?
first person is in the game and not exactly hidden.
it isn't really complicated. GPL at it's basis, works like this:
use something under one license - new stuff using that something comes under that same license. That's not a difficult concept to grasp - everyone uses that concept for the most part whether it's MSPL, BSD, or GPL.
Lots of businesses use open source software. In fact, probably 95% of all businesses worldwide uses open source backends, even if the rest of their software is microsoft (which is also equally unlikely).
tell that to apple, android, and windows 7. Don't think win7 isn't going to have spam equivalents. They'd have to raise it to $1000/app if they wanted to try to prevent such.
Also, this guarantees that nobody is going to release *any* applications on it for free. Everyone's going to demand that they recoup their $99 in the same fashion that the RIAA/MPAA demands their money.
guess what? at least the good apps are also free.
have you seen apple's store lately? It's all premium fart apps.
haha. that and lots of people knew working for the gov't as a "cybersecurity warrior" would be a lot of fluff and short on reality.
we,the democratic public, are not willing to compromise our rights for safety. The republican public, is.
The corporatism favoring lobbyists, absolutely are.
Lets not get things such as nepotism and corporatism are primarily the cause here.
dunno, but I'd think you can tackle the entire museum in about a week. It's a big building, but it's not that big. So I have no idea what people would do for the rest of the month.
okay, so the issue here is that top secret is a requirement for a lot of things that might not be top secret. Say you're doing some kind of database for the gov't? It could be as basic as library of congress but they might require someone with top secret clearance at some level of the company.
It's the wrong issue to focus on if you simply look at "are top secret jobs productive/worthwhile or not", essentially.
While I am sure there are some positions that are overpaid and won government contracts for more money than the minimal BS they're doing, the bigger issue should be : why do we need this many programs top secret?
re evaluate? what do you think that means? I'll give you a clue: it means absolutely nothing, because it can mean anything they want.
There are plenty of good and bad ways that could go, but to assume they're going to follow the existing free bumper option when there isn't an angry mob, I wouldn't really expect nor can anyone predict.
Maybe you are a bit shortsighted, or fail to understand economics, but, NEWSFLASH: the phone is going to be sold for more than two months from now.
This also could have been a nonstarter if apple had owned up earlier.