for him to fairly make the comparison, he needs to try banning motorcycles and then telling us which is scarier
To be fair, he did introduce "guilt by association" legislation to make bikie gangs illegal in South Australia. That is why he is making this particular comparison.
No, it is also missing an entire type of special infected that looks like a police officer (or so I am reliably told. I personally have managed to work around the censorship in question).
So the changes are not just superficial.
Having said that, I don't buy into the logic of "if it is just gore that is missing then the game should be unaffected, otherwise it must suck". Remember, this is a _zombie_ shooter. In terms of generating an appropriate atmosphere for the game, like it or not, blood and gore are critical.
Watch 28 Days Later or Dawn of the Dead, then imagine watching them with zero blood and bodies that instantly vanished when killed.
Um, what?
I middle click on the might mouse all the time.
It is somewhat fiddly though, if you're not exactly in the centre you get a left or right click instead.
The thing that no one ever talks about is the smugness and derision mac users were forced to tolerate for at least ten years during the Dark Ages of Apple.
What about the smugness and derision that mac users are still forced to tolerate today?
Whenever I mention that I use a mac, and by whenever I mean with near 90% predictability, at least one PC user will pipe up and make some snide remark about getting a "real computer".
I grin and bear it, but I always cringe when those same people talk about "smug" mac users.
People can accuse mac users of being smug all they want, but it pales in comparison with the shit we cop from overly-defensive PC users.
The article you quote is referring to the specification rather than the implementation. At the current version, ODF is freely implementably by all vendors, including open-source. OOXML is not.
Specifically, the ODF page says:
The Sun OpenDocument Patent Statement applies to any implementation of the Open Document Format for Office Applications, or of any subsequent version of the format thereof only if Sun Microsystems participates in development of the subsequent standard version
Notice the language: Any implementation under the current version. Future versions only if Sun is involved in making the new version of the standard.
With regard to implementations, IBM defines their "covered implementation" as:
"Covered Implementations" are those specific portions of a product (hardware, software, services or combinations thereof) that implement and comply with a Covered Specification and are included in a fully compliant implementation of that Covered Specification. Reference to IBM (or you) includes entities controlled by, controlling, and under common control with IBM (or you), based on majority control.
Which is referring to Sun participating in subsequent versions of the standard, not participating in creating the implementation of the current standard. This is a very different thing.
and the ODF Patent pledge reads:
Sun irrevocably covenants that, subject solely to the reciprocity requirement described below, it will not seek to enforce any of its enforceable U.S. or foreign patents against any implementation of the Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) v1.0 Specification, or of any subsequent version thereof ("OpenDocument Implementation") in which development Sun participates to the point of incurring an obligation
So as far as I can tell, IBM and Sun have explicitly waived their ability to sue any implementation of the current ODF standard for patent infringement.
I admit i hadn't heard about that, thanks for the heads-up.
So that just leaves the staggering complexity of the format and the fact that it cannot be legally implemented by commercial open-source projects (unless there has been some change in the latter regard that I am unaware of).
Still, that _is_ an improvement. Of sorts.
2.15.3.6 autoSpaceLikeWord95 (Emulate Word 95 Full-Width Character Spacing)
This element specifies that applications shall emulate the behavior of a previously existing word processing application (Microsoft Word 95) when determining the spacing between full-width East Asian characters in a document's content.
[Guidance: To faithfully replicate this behavior, applications must imitate the behavior of that application, which involves many possible behaviors and cannot be faithfully placed into narrative for this Office Open XML Standard. If applications wish to match this behavior, they must utilize and duplicate the output of those applications. It is recommended that applications not intentionally replicate this behavior as it was deprecated due to issues with its output, and is maintained only for compatibility with existing documents from that application. end guidance]
-----
Now, can people please stop pretending that this stuff doesn't exist?
It's real, and it is laughable.
Thanks.
I hear this, and I've also heard all of Steven Conroy's announcements, but the TFA seems to suggest this has been in the pipeline an awful lot longer
It has been in Labor Party policy for at least the last two years, and was even detailed on their website. Didn't make it into many big public announcements, for obvious reasons.
I knew about it, despised it, and still voted for Labor (/Greens). As bad as the policy is, the Howard government had much more serious issues in other areas. Lesser of two evils, if you will.
It is my hope that this system will fail miserably in trials, but I accept the possibility that I may have helped vote in this monstrosity.
I had one of those Castlevania games ("Harmony of Dissonance", I think?), and while it was kinda fun to play through once, it didn't have any lasting appeal. I think it was too easy
I don't want to go too far offtopic, but had to step up for a quick defence of the Castlevania series.
While I didn't think it was quite that bad, Harmony of Dissonance was definitely the weakest Castlevania title in recent years.
'Symphony of the Night' for the PS1 was an incredible game, and I recommend trying that if you can find a copy. It's lasting appeal cannot be measured using mere mortal numbers. (ie. in most Castlevania games you have to be very suspicious when you think you've just 'finished' them)
'Aria of Sorrow' (GBA) was also extremely good, head-and-shoulders above both Harmony of Dissonance and Circle of the Moon.
I agree with the grandparent - as long as the Castlevania series survives, 2D gaming will also survive.
Whenever there is a story about the RIAA and DRM, I always read hundreds of posts about how the RIAA needs to adapt to the digital age. How they can't live in the past, and their business model needs to adapt to the future of music.
And hey, in general when I read this I have always thought "Hell yeah!"
What I find interesting is now I am seeing posts saying the DRM is bad because it "erodes the fair use rights we have always traditionally had when we purchased music on CDs".
This just got me thinking. Maybe the adaptation to the digital age has to be a two-way street? In addition to the RIAA needing to rethink its evil ways, maybe we also have to consider that the world has changed since the days of CDs. And not all changes are good for everybody.
Perhaps our "traditional" fair use rights also need to adapt with technology. Remember that with power comes responsibility (no Spiderman references please. I know, I also winced when I typed that). We now have the power to digitally transmit music anywhere in the world for close to zero cost. Unfortunately there will always be a few people that will abuse this power. Maybe something does need to change?
Not saying I agree with that idea or not, because I haven't really had time to think it through yet. Just putting it out there for consideration.
Slashdot Mirror
Roy and HG thoughtfully provide us with a goldmine of shark memes, just waiting to be plundered: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-yeJbKbbMU/
Typo or no, I would have modded this one up if I had points :)
for him to fairly make the comparison, he needs to try banning motorcycles and then telling us which is scarier
To be fair, he did introduce "guilt by association" legislation to make bikie gangs illegal in South Australia. That is why he is making this particular comparison.
No, it is also missing an entire type of special infected that looks like a police officer (or so I am reliably told. I personally have managed to work around the censorship in question).
So the changes are not just superficial.
Having said that, I don't buy into the logic of "if it is just gore that is missing then the game should be unaffected, otherwise it must suck". Remember, this is a _zombie_ shooter. In terms of generating an appropriate atmosphere for the game, like it or not, blood and gore are critical.
Watch 28 Days Later or Dawn of the Dead, then imagine watching them with zero blood and bodies that instantly vanished when killed.
What fun.
Um, what? I middle click on the might mouse all the time. It is somewhat fiddly though, if you're not exactly in the centre you get a left or right click instead.
Excellent, thanks for proving my point. Exhibit A.
I hope you're a Linux user, because it would take some balls to try and characterise OS X as inferior to Windows :)
What about the smugness and derision that mac users are still forced to tolerate today?
Whenever I mention that I use a mac, and by whenever I mean with near 90% predictability, at least one PC user will pipe up and make some snide remark about getting a "real computer".
I grin and bear it, but I always cringe when those same people talk about "smug" mac users.
People can accuse mac users of being smug all they want, but it pales in comparison with the shit we cop from overly-defensive PC users.
If you haven't already, get Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow and unlock the hidden character mode for your Alucard fix.
Probably the only token 'replay' mode in a Castlevania that I've enjoyed more than the actual game.
Specifically, the ODF page says:
Notice the language: Any implementation under the current version. Future versions only if Sun is involved in making the new version of the standard.
With regard to implementations, IBM defines their "covered implementation" as:
Which is referring to Sun participating in subsequent versions of the standard, not participating in creating the implementation of the current standard. This is a very different thing.
and the ODF Patent pledge reads:
So as far as I can tell, IBM and Sun have explicitly waived their ability to sue any implementation of the current ODF standard for patent infringement.
Unfortuantely I can't find a clear definition of "Covered Implementation" on the applicable Microsoft page, but the objections to it have been fairly well documented (ie. http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/osp-gpl.html).
I admit i hadn't heard about that, thanks for the heads-up.
So that just leaves the staggering complexity of the format and the fact that it cannot be legally implemented by commercial open-source projects (unless there has been some change in the latter regard that I am unaware of).
Still, that _is_ an improvement. Of sorts.
I proveded evidence for my assertions. Care to return the favor, or do you prefer unsubstantiated one-liners?
Since I'm not too lazy to look it up for myself:
-----
2.15.3.6 autoSpaceLikeWord95 (Emulate Word 95 Full-Width Character Spacing)
This element specifies that applications shall emulate the behavior of a previously existing word processing application (Microsoft Word 95) when determining the spacing between full-width East Asian characters in a document's content.
[Guidance: To faithfully replicate this behavior, applications must imitate the behavior of that application, which involves many possible behaviors and cannot be faithfully placed into narrative for this Office Open XML Standard. If applications wish to match this behavior, they must utilize and duplicate the output of those applications. It is recommended that applications not intentionally replicate this behavior as it was deprecated due to issues with its output, and is maintained only for compatibility with existing documents from that application. end guidance]
-----
Now, can people please stop pretending that this stuff doesn't exist?
It's real, and it is laughable.
Thanks.
It has been in Labor Party policy for at least the last two years, and was even detailed on their website. Didn't make it into many big public announcements, for obvious reasons.
I knew about it, despised it, and still voted for Labor (/Greens). As bad as the policy is, the Howard government had much more serious issues in other areas. Lesser of two evils, if you will.
It is my hope that this system will fail miserably in trials, but I accept the possibility that I may have helped vote in this monstrosity.
And you know what? I still think it was worth it.
Strange game.
The only winning move is not to play.
Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?
I don't want to go too far offtopic, but had to step up for a quick defence of the Castlevania series.
While I didn't think it was quite that bad, Harmony of Dissonance was definitely the weakest Castlevania title in recent years.
'Symphony of the Night' for the PS1 was an incredible game, and I recommend trying that if you can find a copy. It's lasting appeal cannot be measured using mere mortal numbers. (ie. in most Castlevania games you have to be very suspicious when you think you've just 'finished' them)
'Aria of Sorrow' (GBA) was also extremely good, head-and-shoulders above both Harmony of Dissonance and Circle of the Moon.
I agree with the grandparent - as long as the Castlevania series survives, 2D gaming will also survive.
Either you don't watch many horror movies, or this is some new usage of the phrase "stop being a problem" of which I was not previously aware.
And hey, in general when I read this I have always thought "Hell yeah!"
What I find interesting is now I am seeing posts saying the DRM is bad because it "erodes the fair use rights we have always traditionally had when we purchased music on CDs".
This just got me thinking. Maybe the adaptation to the digital age has to be a two-way street? In addition to the RIAA needing to rethink its evil ways, maybe we also have to consider that the world has changed since the days of CDs. And not all changes are good for everybody.
Perhaps our "traditional" fair use rights also need to adapt with technology. Remember that with power comes responsibility (no Spiderman references please. I know, I also winced when I typed that). We now have the power to digitally transmit music anywhere in the world for close to zero cost. Unfortunately there will always be a few people that will abuse this power. Maybe something does need to change?
Not saying I agree with that idea or not, because I haven't really had time to think it through yet. Just putting it out there for consideration.