as it was stated, a: some people can't even buy it (paypal isn't in every country), b: some people are too young to have credit cards, and c: some people find it easier than doing a paypal donation for 0$.
Add all 3 of those together and you have reasons to pirate.
This just gives people more reasons to pirate a game again, as all those "online additions" are included in the pirated version.
Meanwhile, you can still buy the original(used) and get a crack/hack to add in the addons, which is even easier to obtain.
So what does this change? Nothing.
EA just doesn't like the used market, and they can't do anything about it. I hope they try to take someone to court over it so that a judge can prove they basically can't (and shouldn't) get rid of it.
he implied that it might be used for muni-wifi. It is obviously not for outdoors in general. However, there are ways that an outdoors powerline ethernet system *could* be set up by a local municipality if they wanted to, for outdoors use. It'd be just as easy to snoop as wifi and probably not as practical, however.
again, they don't have to be on the same circuit. It is claimed but it will work anyway, but that's what you can get small amounts of interference. We're talking a 54mb connection down to 50mb. However, packetloss vs wifi? Packetloss ends up around the ethernet equivalent.
do you have an actual argument here or are you just ranting against open source concepts? Open source can use patented software if they so choose, first off. Second, even Microsoft declares themselves open source (even if obviously false), although they claim that the MS-PL is open source (and codeforge or whatever their version is called). Are you saying MS also uses tech from the cold war?
umm, smartphone marketshare has been significantly increasing lately. I don't even remember what the numbers are, but if I recall it was like 50% or 75% of phones nowadays?
Plus, 4g is coming. By the time AT&T has good 3g coverage, well, won't happen. AT&T's spending is influenced by their profits. Since profits are a bit down, imagine how their spending in 3g and such is as far as priority.
This has 0 to do with DSL or cable. Neither does the article. What's your point of that sidetrack? This isn't broadband over powerline. Why didn't you read anything. This is ethernet over wiring, not even powerline. It's not intended for long distance. Way to go on the reading comprehension there.
You'll find the RF interference is nonexistent for this class of device. The devices are tolerant of it and have built in compensation. TV's on, microwave on, wireless networking on, cellphones on, no issues.
I have used and purchased both the current gigabit and previous slower versions. No problems in houses that are not only on entirely different switches in the outlet box, but no problems with RF either.
It's a common misnomer that people think the RF interference is the issue when the real issue is shitty wiring. It's also common people mix up powerline networking with the kind of crap people tried to spin involving broadband over powerline. those are entirely different. These devices (in some forms) are good enough for enterprise - you can have a RSA or DES key encrypting your packets over it.
wow. just how much stuff can texas schooling screw up? Am I confusing this guy with Jack Bauer? Id swear this Jack Ellis name has come up with texass problems before.
Well, you are correct that 60 Ghz will be horrible for distance. However, the wiring just has to be smart. There is gigabit powerline ethernet, which requires no additional wiring. So you could have that, and then a wireless AP (7Gbps) in the room if you really want the wireless/ Meanwhile, you may as well just have a regular ethernet line from that powerline ethernet adapter. Really, that thing is pretty portable on it's own and makes me question why people even want wifi in some instances. The portability of these devices is merely limited to an outlet in a house, which is about the same concept of an AP (which has to be plugged in), except that it doesn't get interference from surrounding wifi channels.
The differences in how to gain administrator access do affect up front security requirements.
It's not about profit, it's that windows gives people administrator by default (and you can still enable it in Windows 7).
iexplore.exe is asking for administrator access. grant forever/don't ask again? Way to go, giving viruses admin access. It happens all the time.
The rest of the security is no different in most scenarios whether windows or linux. However, on this front, UAC doesn't do squat (especially when you can get around UAC).
no, 42 was correct. that was clarified later. They meant they started the system 42 times. Thousands of photos each time though. "whoops" is an understatement.
Why they spun the 42 in the first place is horrifically stupid and beyond bad pr. It's like "We only shot people using 42 guns" (but shout 42 thousand bullets) etc.
it's kinda hard to say a kid might have done drugs and then later state you couldn't have possibly looked at the photos. It's contradictory for the defense. I'm guessing that Lower Marion doesn't want to accept that they are totally screwed.
you are certainly creative with what you're saying. I never said IE9 will fail. I'm saying that IE8 and IE9 are not secure solutions. Failure is not something I even care, really. I thought the first time you had an issue with my specifying IE9.
why? IE8 fixes none of the issues that were present with IE6. You still get shit performance and plenty of security issues. So we can either say what they might do, or play on reality. Neither way is exactly pretty for MS.
Yes, there are ways to stop a malicious insider from connecting to a device. It goes back to the original plan: unapproved devices don't connect to the network, or keep them on their own separate VLAN.
I agree with you on the rest - that you can watch for malware, but I'm skeptical as to how much this is actually done in reality. I also agree on watching for ports, but I guess it depends on what kind of things you are expecting to happen.
Actually, beyond the "I won't fix it if they use IE" part, the rest sounds like a good idea, as long as it simply totals up how many times IE has been run (and does the same for firefox).
Slashdot Mirror
maybe it 's because nobody cares.
as it was stated, a: some people can't even buy it (paypal isn't in every country), b: some people are too young to have credit cards, and c: some people find it easier than doing a paypal donation for 0$.
Add all 3 of those together and you have reasons to pirate.
Are you disregarding that the console itself IS drm?
This isn't better, it's just a different flavor of DRM and just as bad.
This means you can't even take the game over to your friends house to play online together (2v2).
Again, there are situations that this affects other than just the used game market.
how will the used market survive? Easily.
This just gives people more reasons to pirate a game again, as all those "online additions" are included in the pirated version.
Meanwhile, you can still buy the original(used) and get a crack/hack to add in the addons, which is even easier to obtain.
So what does this change? Nothing.
EA just doesn't like the used market, and they can't do anything about it. I hope they try to take someone to court over it so that a judge can prove they basically can't (and shouldn't) get rid of it.
he implied that it might be used for muni-wifi. It is obviously not for outdoors in general. However, there are ways that an outdoors powerline ethernet system *could* be set up by a local municipality if they wanted to, for outdoors use. It'd be just as easy to snoop as wifi and probably not as practical, however.
again, they don't have to be on the same circuit. It is claimed but it will work anyway, but that's what you can get small amounts of interference. We're talking a 54mb connection down to 50mb. However, packetloss vs wifi? Packetloss ends up around the ethernet equivalent.
how much does open source software/hardware make? It's hard to examine, but it's probably more than 50 million.
way to go with a comment that proved nothing as it also qualifies in the opposite scenario, sopssa.
do you have an actual argument here or are you just ranting against open source concepts? Open source can use patented software if they so choose, first off. Second, even Microsoft declares themselves open source (even if obviously false), although they claim that the MS-PL is open source (and codeforge or whatever their version is called). Are you saying MS also uses tech from the cold war?
it'd sure explain plenty of things.
umm, smartphone marketshare has been significantly increasing lately. I don't even remember what the numbers are, but if I recall it was like 50% or 75% of phones nowadays?
Plus, 4g is coming. By the time AT&T has good 3g coverage, well, won't happen. AT&T's spending is influenced by their profits. Since profits are a bit down, imagine how their spending in 3g and such is as far as priority.
hahahahaha, what?
you think apple will ever license the iphone os? are you joking? Maybe you are wondering what the psystar case is about, for example?
Mac by design basically will never license anything mac to non apple products. That's both a flaw and a feature.
meanwhile, it shows something more significant: apple interest is not raising anywhere near the interest that android is and has now.
I mixed up some of the links. There were 3 or 4. Other things from this area of texas specifically.
if only our raises were based on slashdot karma. I'd be a millionaire!
This has 0 to do with DSL or cable. Neither does the article. What's your point of that sidetrack? This isn't broadband over powerline. Why didn't you read anything. This is ethernet over wiring, not even powerline. It's not intended for long distance. Way to go on the reading comprehension there.
You'll find the RF interference is nonexistent for this class of device. The devices are tolerant of it and have built in compensation. TV's on, microwave on, wireless networking on, cellphones on, no issues.
I have used and purchased both the current gigabit and previous slower versions. No problems in houses that are not only on entirely different switches in the outlet box, but no problems with RF either.
It's a common misnomer that people think the RF interference is the issue when the real issue is shitty wiring. It's also common people mix up powerline networking with the kind of crap people tried to spin involving broadband over powerline. those are entirely different. These devices (in some forms) are good enough for enterprise - you can have a RSA or DES key encrypting your packets over it.
wow. just how much stuff can texas schooling screw up? Am I confusing this guy with Jack Bauer? Id swear this Jack Ellis name has come up with texass problems before.
"always remember my decision for this application"? never heard of that? Way to go troll.
Well, you are correct that 60 Ghz will be horrible for distance. However, the wiring just has to be smart. There is gigabit powerline ethernet, which requires no additional wiring. So you could have that, and then a wireless AP (7Gbps) in the room if you really want the wireless/ Meanwhile, you may as well just have a regular ethernet line from that powerline ethernet adapter. Really, that thing is pretty portable on it's own and makes me question why people even want wifi in some instances. The portability of these devices is merely limited to an outlet in a house, which is about the same concept of an AP (which has to be plugged in), except that it doesn't get interference from surrounding wifi channels.
you are quite a jokester, sir.
The differences in how to gain administrator access do affect up front security requirements.
It's not about profit, it's that windows gives people administrator by default (and you can still enable it in Windows 7).
iexplore.exe is asking for administrator access. grant forever/don't ask again? Way to go, giving viruses admin access. It happens all the time.
The rest of the security is no different in most scenarios whether windows or linux. However, on this front, UAC doesn't do squat (especially when you can get around UAC).
no, 42 was correct. that was clarified later. They meant they started the system 42 times. Thousands of photos each time though. "whoops" is an understatement.
Why they spun the 42 in the first place is horrifically stupid and beyond bad pr. It's like "We only shot people using 42 guns" (but shout 42 thousand bullets) etc.
and it's complicated enough that it's going to piss people off. You forgot that part.
so you psoted that anonymously to avoid serious downmodding? Whats a hoot.
Honestly, H264 is a horrible idea. They're signing up now when this thing isn't even GPL compatible. Do you have any diea what that means?
oh, right, you don't. Way to troll.
it's kinda hard to say a kid might have done drugs and then later state you couldn't have possibly looked at the photos. It's contradictory for the defense. I'm guessing that Lower Marion doesn't want to accept that they are totally screwed.
Fark was also one of the few places to cover Iran instead of going for ratings.
you are certainly creative with what you're saying. I never said IE9 will fail. I'm saying that IE8 and IE9 are not secure solutions. Failure is not something I even care, really. I thought the first time you had an issue with my specifying IE9.
why? IE8 fixes none of the issues that were present with IE6. You still get shit performance and plenty of security issues. So we can either say what they might do, or play on reality. Neither way is exactly pretty for MS.
Yes, there are ways to stop a malicious insider from connecting to a device. It goes back to the original plan: unapproved devices don't connect to the network, or keep them on their own separate VLAN.
I agree with you on the rest - that you can watch for malware, but I'm skeptical as to how much this is actually done in reality. I also agree on watching for ports, but I guess it depends on what kind of things you are expecting to happen.
Actually, beyond the "I won't fix it if they use IE" part, the rest sounds like a good idea, as long as it simply totals up how many times IE has been run (and does the same for firefox).