Well, poster, all the stuff you listed is major publishing mainstream content. It is widely known that usually, and even more so in times of low sales, slow economy, etc., mainstream publishers will shun any and all risk and put out nothing but surefire titles, i.e. either sequels or stuff with a movie license.
So if you look for originality, you're simply looking in the wrong place.
Some of the original games I've bought and/or played (some are free) this year: (note: I'm Linux-only, so these games are as well, you might find even more in the windos or console world)
Marble Blast 3D roll-marble-around and complete puzzles game. Originality factor: Combining marble games with FPS and turning it into a fast-paced, thrilling action game.
Bridge Construction Set (only played the demo on this one) Build a bridge game. Simple, fun, addictive. It is a sequel to an older game of the same kind, by the same guy. Originality factor: I don't know any other games of this kind, the idea is brilliant.
Orbz Shoot-yourself-around-the-track game. Somewhat tricky to describe what exactly it is about. Originality factor: No other game of this kind exists, AFAIK.
Scorched 3D 3D Clone of Scorched Earth. Originality factor: While the idea is old, this is one of the few games really benefiting from the 3rd dimension, and it was done greatly. It is one of the few "clone" games that are actually more original than most of the "original" games you find which just rehash a basic idea (FPS, RTS,...) without adding anything new.
Savage A blend between RTS and FPS. Originality factor: Combining two genres in a unique blend. No, it wasn't done this way before. It's not an RTS with first-person perspective for the commander, it actually is a full-blown FPS for all the non-commander players.
BattleMaster Ok, shameless plug, this is my own game. I do, however, honestly think that it's quite original. (it's a turn-based, multiplayer strategy game)
You will note all of these games come from small or independent developers.
Games are really like music in that regard: If you are looking for originality, look to the small and unknown. If you are looking for polished, perfectly produced, know-what-you-get stuff, shop in the mainstream.
I'm sorry, but any kind of hashcash scheme that doesn't effectively centralise mail delivery (and thus create a whole new single-point-of-failure problem, casting another chilling effect on the use of email) is going to be impotant, wasteful, and damaging.
Maybe you should read up a little. All the actual proposals I read recently seem to address what the usual concerns (and then following that, the same conclusions you make) are.
You can do this *now*. You don't have to wait for "a good system". I do this now (without the money) to keep my wife and kids from getting spam and it works. Why wait?
Because all the current whitelist systems (and what you are proposing is just that) have one critical problem: They still bash everyone over the head, except that you restrict it to everyone you don't know.
I want a system that is RFC so there's no excuse for not using it, and the barriers-to-entry are minimal. See, the point is this:
Imagine you are the author of ThisIsGreat (TIG), a new and totally cool Free Software program. As a fan and user, I've just downloaded the latest CVS version. Now as I am a security researcher, I happen to stumble upon a critical security vulnerability. So I mail you about it. The mail bounces with "send me $2.50 if you want me to read this". What are your chances of me saying "fuck it, I'm not signing up with paypal just for this" and you never learning about the problem?
Now if this was RFC, and integrated in the mail software, then all of this would happen automatically. Somewhere behind the scenes, my MTA talks to your MTA, finds out you want 10 cents per mail, looks at what my settings are, sees that I instructed it to send any mail under 20 cents (max total of 5 Euros per day) without asking, and goes sending it.
If you had read about HC, you'd know that you are wrong.
I do agree on the "stamps" solution, though. It works reasonably well for the real world, where junk mail exists, but the level is tolerable. In computers, a good stamp system would allow me instead of the post office to set the prices and collect the money. i.e. mailing me costs x cents. And if junk starts to pile up, I'll just raise the prices a little. In fact, if people would insist on sending me their spam (which'd be filtered by SA anyways) even though it costs them 10 cent each, I'm all for it. At the current rate, I'd make about 5 a day, which I'd consider a reasonable rate for setting up and maintaining SA.
Bringing this out on xmas is right with the spirit.
And all the posters who complain about the violence: Go see a shrink and have yourself explained what the difference between the world on a computer screen and the world outside the window is. For us who can make the difference - this is a mightily cool game.
Why not just have the receiving SMTP process call sleep(10) at the beginning of the SMTP session?
Because simple doesn't always mean better.
In this case, you would kill all the legitimate mailing lists, newsletters and other solicited mass-mailings.
See, the fault in your system is that you don't check at all whether or not you want that particular kind of mail. So you just bash everyone on the head when they come through the door, arguing that there have been too many rude guests lately.
There are modifications of your idea around, noteably spamd from OpenBSD and tarproxy from some other guy, who try to slow down mail delivery after verifying that what is incoming is spam.
The technology is fairly old, it's known as Hash Cash.
It has known shortcomings, but it is one of the best solutions out there.
Its main problem, however, was not yet known when it was invented: That spammers would control huge zombie networks, as they do today. With 100k zombies (which is not uncommon), the spammers can still send out 10k mails per second, or those 25 mio. spams the topic speaks about in under one hour.
What doesn't it have that would cater more to people with diverse ways of reading email?
A ton. I'm forced to use Outlook at work. I'd switch it for mutt, thunderbird, heck I'd probably switch it for mail without second thoughts.
I could write a book about why I hate Outlook (going from technical to UI design). I'll just throw two things here: Top-Quoting and plain-text formatting.
One, it is a simplistic view towards a conversation, which more often than not is not linear and between multiple persons (especially when it comes to mailing lists, newsgroups, or such like).
Two, it isolated discussions. In real life, threads don't stand next to each other, they are interwoven with other threads, sometimes in a complicated manner.
Three, it's a matter of habbit. I've probably learned to do my own threading internally, so I don't need a computer to do his incompatible threading for me.
Four, it interferes with the way I keep messages stored in various folders depending on whether or not they need to be check on again, are done with, should be archived, etc.
As I said: Different people have different wants and needs. If threading works for you, then go for it.
It had the most blatantly obvious CGI ever. I know a few stop-motion movies from the 1940s that look more "real".
Yes, I know it's a comic adaption. The problem is that everything in the movie is trimmed to look real. Neither the tanks nor the guns, soldiers, streets, etc. are "comic styled". Only that green monsters stands out so obviously as CGI that any suspension of disbelief requires a massive dose of illegal drugs.
Have they seen the movie, or do they go by box-office numbers?
So what exactly is the problem with the way the rest of the civilized world does elections? (i.e. pen and paper and counting by hand)
It works, it has a paper-trail, any idiot understands the ballots, there are no hanging chads, and the entire voting system is entirely political and not commercia... oh, I see.
It takes a lot for general purpose to do better than specialized devices.
Only in edge areas. In mainstream, there is enough incentive to improve the general purpose device.
Your virtual VCR is a great example. All the software I've seen, be it MythTV or Freevo or others, far surpass any physical VCR I have ever seen when it comes to functionality.
From Queue comes a piece...that shows clearly just how little the author knows about computing.
The entire point of computers is that they are general purpose devices. The "workshop" idea surely sounds cool to someone who doesn't know about computers, because it resembles the world before "general purpose" was a graspable concept.
Would I rather want my workplace to be a collection of specialized devices, or a single device that can be configured to be any of the others, plus whatever else or new is necessary? Now that's a difficult question, right?
I have a nice library of Linux games right here. In fact, I own more Linux games than I can play and some still sit here with that "gonna play that more once I come around to it again" invisible sticker.
Of course, if you go to school or are unemployed or otherwise have 16 hours a day to kill on gaming. Then... uh, wait. You could go and play A Tale in the Desert, that easily takes care of that (been there, done that).
These are some awesome videos. Very good work, and a few nice allegations to geekdom, such as the fake MPAA prefix or the catchphrases ("Without risk, there is no reward" - no what does that remind me of?:) )
When spammers operate semi-legitimately, however evil and bestial they may be, they will take some concern to avoid breaking other laws.
So that's why we see no scams or 419-frauds in spam mails, right?
Has the pirated PC be detected and shut down? OK, destroy all data on it, to avoid detection.
What exactly makes you think they aren't doing that already? They've already violated whatever the local computer misuse laws are (hacking into and using someone elses PC for yourself is illegal, you know?).
Perhaps a few bombs in the mail, or even a knock on the door some foggy morning.
Doesn't pay. Spam works because it's cost-efficient (for the spammer). Mailbombs aren't.
It lies in the protocols and gateways that allow malware to propagate.
Spam is not malware. Spam is bad content. As long as computers are not AI enough to understand that I'm not really interested in helping ex-dictators of Viagra or buying some Nigeria or whatever way round it was, technology will not be the answer.
Jail all the American spammers and watch the problem just keep on getting worse.
Doubt that. The USofA is not only the #1 offender when it comes to spam, it also is way ahead of the competition.
True, I do get the occasional german or dutch spam, plus some in what I can only assume is chinese or japanese, but the total of that is at most 10%.
Kill or jail all US spammers today, and the worldwide spam volume will drop so far, you'll think it's 1995 again.
Prohibition was trying to outlaw something that (almost) everybody wanted. I don't exactly see spam in that category.
Outlawing spam will work. It won't eliminate spam completely, just like making robbery and murder illegal didn't eliminate those - but as with other crimes it would drive it down to a tolerable level.
Jesus. Myopic much? We're talking about worldwide releases. The market is not equally free the entire world over.
This particular market isn't free anywhere, and region coding is there to ensure that.
OTOH, globally speaking, markets are pretty much free. Sure, no country follows the theory exactly (they'd be dead if they did - never confuse theory with reality), but compare world trade today with world trade 300 years ago.
One, hate them as much as the next guy, but one thing I can't say about M$ is that they sue everyone and their dog, so the court doesn't seem to be their primary weapon.
Two, such a lawsuit would open a lot of eyes to the fact that your documents are being taken hostage.
Nah. What they'll do is double the efforts for the next format to be even harder to import.
See, country X might be covered by trader A, but country Y may be under monopoly distribution from trader B. The movie Titanic was/is distributed in the US by Paramount, but by 20th Century Fox everywhere else.
They're protecting themselves from the forces of a free market, that's true. They're doing it in more than one way, though.
Doing additional dubs and subtitling takes time, making simultaneous release worldwide somewhat tricky,
So? In a free market, if the customer demands it, then you'd better figure out a way to do it.
Which, ironically, Hollywood has done. Most of the recent blockbusters did have simultaneous releases in the theaters, and there's no reason why the same can't be done for DVDs.
It ain't technical reasons. The movie studios have at times been very open with the real reason, which usually boil down to timing, i.e. "we can make more bucks if we release in X after their holiday season, and in Y just before that national celebration, and in Z half a year later since they're on the southern half and this is a summer movie".
Slashdot Mirror
Well, poster, all the stuff you listed is major publishing mainstream content. It is widely known that usually, and even more so in times of low sales, slow economy, etc., mainstream publishers will shun any and all risk and put out nothing but surefire titles, i.e. either sequels or stuff with a movie license.
...) without adding anything new.
So if you look for originality, you're simply looking in the wrong place.
Some of the original games I've bought and/or played (some are free) this year:
(note: I'm Linux-only, so these games are as well, you might find even more in the windos or console world)
Marble Blast
3D roll-marble-around and complete puzzles game.
Originality factor: Combining marble games with FPS and turning it into a fast-paced, thrilling action game.
Bridge Construction Set (only played the demo on this one)
Build a bridge game. Simple, fun, addictive. It is a sequel to an older game of the same kind, by the same guy.
Originality factor: I don't know any other games of this kind, the idea is brilliant.
Orbz
Shoot-yourself-around-the-track game. Somewhat tricky to describe what exactly it is about.
Originality factor: No other game of this kind exists, AFAIK.
Scorched 3D
3D Clone of Scorched Earth.
Originality factor: While the idea is old, this is one of the few games really benefiting from the 3rd dimension, and it was done greatly. It is one of the few "clone" games that are actually more original than most of the "original" games you find which just rehash a basic idea (FPS, RTS,
Savage
A blend between RTS and FPS.
Originality factor: Combining two genres in a unique blend. No, it wasn't done this way before. It's not an RTS with first-person perspective for the commander, it actually is a full-blown FPS for all the non-commander players.
BattleMaster
Ok, shameless plug, this is my own game. I do, however, honestly think that it's quite original.
(it's a turn-based, multiplayer strategy game)
You will note all of these games come from small or independent developers.
Games are really like music in that regard: If you are looking for originality, look to the small and unknown. If you are looking for polished, perfectly produced, know-what-you-get stuff, shop in the mainstream.
I'm sorry, but any kind of hashcash scheme that doesn't effectively centralise mail delivery (and thus create a whole new single-point-of-failure problem, casting another chilling effect on the use of email) is going to be impotant, wasteful, and damaging.
Maybe you should read up a little. All the actual proposals I read recently seem to address what the usual concerns (and then following that, the same conclusions you make) are.
You can do this *now*. You don't have to wait for "a good system". I do this now (without the money) to keep my wife and kids from getting spam and it works. Why wait?
Because all the current whitelist systems (and what you are proposing is just that) have one critical problem: They still bash everyone over the head, except that you restrict it to everyone you don't know.
I want a system that is RFC so there's no excuse for not using it, and the barriers-to-entry are minimal. See, the point is this:
Imagine you are the author of ThisIsGreat (TIG), a new and totally cool Free Software program. As a fan and user, I've just downloaded the latest CVS version.
Now as I am a security researcher, I happen to stumble upon a critical security vulnerability. So I mail you about it. The mail bounces with "send me $2.50 if you want me to read this".
What are your chances of me saying "fuck it, I'm not signing up with paypal just for this" and you never learning about the problem?
Now if this was RFC, and integrated in the mail software, then all of this would happen automatically. Somewhere behind the scenes, my MTA talks to your MTA, finds out you want 10 cents per mail, looks at what my settings are, sees that I instructed it to send any mail under 20 cents (max total of 5 Euros per day) without asking, and goes sending it.
If you had read about HC, you'd know that you are wrong.
I do agree on the "stamps" solution, though. It works reasonably well for the real world, where junk mail exists, but the level is tolerable.
In computers, a good stamp system would allow me instead of the post office to set the prices and collect the money. i.e. mailing me costs x cents. And if junk starts to pile up, I'll just raise the prices a little.
In fact, if people would insist on sending me their spam (which'd be filtered by SA anyways) even though it costs them 10 cent each, I'm all for it. At the current rate, I'd make about 5 a day, which I'd consider a reasonable rate for setting up and maintaining SA.
Bringing this out on xmas is right with the spirit.
And all the posters who complain about the violence: Go see a shrink and have yourself explained what the difference between the world on a computer screen and the world outside the window is. For us who can make the difference - this is a mightily cool game.
Why not just have the receiving SMTP process call sleep(10) at the beginning of the SMTP session?
Because simple doesn't always mean better.
In this case, you would kill all the legitimate mailing lists, newsletters and other solicited mass-mailings.
See, the fault in your system is that you don't check at all whether or not you want that particular kind of mail. So you just bash everyone on the head when they come through the door, arguing that there have been too many rude guests lately.
There are modifications of your idea around, noteably spamd from OpenBSD and tarproxy from some other guy, who try to slow down mail delivery after verifying that what is incoming is spam.
The technology is fairly old, it's known as Hash Cash.
It has known shortcomings, but it is one of the best solutions out there.
Its main problem, however, was not yet known when it was invented: That spammers would control huge zombie networks, as they do today.
With 100k zombies (which is not uncommon), the spammers can still send out 10k mails per second, or those 25 mio. spams the topic speaks about in under one hour.
What doesn't it have that would cater more to people with diverse ways of reading email?
A ton. I'm forced to use Outlook at work. I'd switch it for mutt, thunderbird, heck I'd probably switch it for mail without second thoughts.
I could write a book about why I hate Outlook (going from technical to UI design). I'll just throw two things here: Top-Quoting and plain-text formatting.
Threading sucks in multiple ways.
One, it is a simplistic view towards a conversation, which more often than not is not linear and between multiple persons (especially when it comes to mailing lists, newsgroups, or such like).
Two, it isolated discussions. In real life, threads don't stand next to each other, they are interwoven with other threads, sometimes in a complicated manner.
Three, it's a matter of habbit. I've probably learned to do my own threading internally, so I don't need a computer to do his incompatible threading for me.
Four, it interferes with the way I keep messages stored in various folders depending on whether or not they need to be check on again, are done with, should be archived, etc.
As I said: Different people have different wants and needs. If threading works for you, then go for it.
This is intended to do a better job than that:
Yepp, and we all know how incredibly useful "intelligent agents" made in Redmond are, right?
I really need Clippy and Bob sorting and filtering my e-mail.
that email is probably better interfaced as a forum.
For some people.
I hate forums, and their uncomfortable UI is one reason. I also keep my mutt in sort-by-date because threading sucks.
You see, the #1 UI wisdom that M$ will never get is that different people have different wants and needs.
I don't care what some bigname at some bigcompany thinks is good for me. I already know, thank you, now go away.
Hulk made the list?
It had the most blatantly obvious CGI ever. I know a few stop-motion movies from the 1940s that look more "real".
Yes, I know it's a comic adaption. The problem is that everything in the movie is trimmed to look real. Neither the tanks nor the guns, soldiers, streets, etc. are "comic styled". Only that green monsters stands out so obviously as CGI that any suspension of disbelief requires a massive dose of illegal drugs.
Have they seen the movie, or do they go by box-office numbers?
em, excuse me. Are you trying to say that the US votes on workdays?
I never even thought about that. Every election I've ever been conciously aware of happened on a sunday or other free day.
God, you guys seriously need help in basics of democracy.
but apparantly, the U.S. is opposing a french site because France opposed the war in Iraq.
Oh, please. Blocking an unrelated project because someone doesn't want to play your silly games with you? That's so childish.
Please elect a grown-up this year.
So what exactly is the problem with the way the rest of the civilized world does elections? (i.e. pen and paper and counting by hand)
It works, it has a paper-trail, any idiot understands the ballots, there are no hanging chads, and the entire voting system is entirely political and not commercia... oh, I see.
It takes a lot for general purpose to do better than specialized devices.
Only in edge areas. In mainstream, there is enough incentive to improve the general purpose device.
Your virtual VCR is a great example. All the software I've seen, be it MythTV or Freevo or others, far surpass any physical VCR I have ever seen when it comes to functionality.
From Queue comes a piece ...that shows clearly just how little the author knows about computing.
The entire point of computers is that they are general purpose devices. The "workshop" idea surely sounds cool to someone who doesn't know about computers, because it resembles the world before "general purpose" was a graspable concept.
Would I rather want my workplace to be a collection of specialized devices, or a single device that can be configured to be any of the others, plus whatever else or new is necessary? Now that's a difficult question, right?
Weird, you must be living in a timeloop.
I have a nice library of Linux games right here. In fact, I own more Linux games than I can play and some still sit here with that "gonna play that more once I come around to it again" invisible sticker.
Of course, if you go to school or are unemployed or otherwise have 16 hours a day to kill on gaming. Then... uh, wait. You could go and play A Tale in the Desert, that easily takes care of that (been there, done that).
These are some awesome videos. Very good work, and a few nice allegations to geekdom, such as the fake MPAA prefix or the catchphrases ("Without risk, there is no reward" - no what does that remind me of? :) )
When spammers operate semi-legitimately, however evil and bestial they may be, they will take some concern to avoid breaking other laws.
So that's why we see no scams or 419-frauds in spam mails, right?
Has the pirated PC be detected and shut down? OK, destroy all data on it, to avoid detection.
What exactly makes you think they aren't doing that already? They've already violated whatever the local computer misuse laws are (hacking into and using someone elses PC for yourself is illegal, you know?).
Perhaps a few bombs in the mail, or even a knock on the door some foggy morning.
Doesn't pay. Spam works because it's cost-efficient (for the spammer). Mailbombs aren't.
It lies in the protocols and gateways that allow malware to propagate.
Spam is not malware. Spam is bad content. As long as computers are not AI enough to understand that I'm not really interested in helping ex-dictators of Viagra or buying some Nigeria or whatever way round it was, technology will not be the answer.
Jail all the American spammers and watch the problem just keep on getting worse.
Doubt that. The USofA is not only the #1 offender when it comes to spam, it also is way ahead of the competition.
True, I do get the occasional german or dutch spam, plus some in what I can only assume is chinese or japanese, but the total of that is at most 10%.
Kill or jail all US spammers today, and the worldwide spam volume will drop so far, you'll think it's 1995 again.
Prohibition does not work.
Prohibition was trying to outlaw something that (almost) everybody wanted. I don't exactly see spam in that category.
Outlawing spam will work. It won't eliminate spam completely, just like making robbery and murder illegal didn't eliminate those - but as with other crimes it would drive it down to a tolerable level.
Jesus. Myopic much? We're talking about worldwide releases. The market is not equally free the entire world over.
This particular market isn't free anywhere, and region coding is there to ensure that.
OTOH, globally speaking, markets are pretty much free. Sure, no country follows the theory exactly (they'd be dead if they did - never confuse theory with reality), but compare world trade today with world trade 300 years ago.
Soon you will find the spammers using them to damage the competition.
Spammers fighting amongst themselves? How could that be a bad thing?
I doubt you will see any of that.
One, hate them as much as the next guy, but one thing I can't say about M$ is that they sue everyone and their dog, so the court doesn't seem to be their primary weapon.
Two, such a lawsuit would open a lot of eyes to the fact that your documents are being taken hostage.
Nah. What they'll do is double the efforts for the next format to be even harder to import.
It is a tiny bit more complicated.
See, country X might be covered by trader A, but country Y may be under monopoly distribution from trader B.
The movie Titanic was/is distributed in the US by Paramount, but by 20th Century Fox everywhere else.
They're protecting themselves from the forces of a free market, that's true. They're doing it in more than one way, though.
Doing additional dubs and subtitling takes time, making simultaneous release worldwide somewhat tricky,
So? In a free market, if the customer demands it, then you'd better figure out a way to do it.
Which, ironically, Hollywood has done. Most of the recent blockbusters did have simultaneous releases in the theaters, and there's no reason why the same can't be done for DVDs.
It ain't technical reasons. The movie studios have at times been very open with the real reason, which usually boil down to timing, i.e. "we can make more bucks if we release in X after their holiday season, and in Y just before that national celebration, and in Z half a year later since they're on the southern half and this is a summer movie".