In theory, the idea of a bailout would be to slow the out-of-control car down so the rest of us can jump out before it goes careening off the cliff. In practice, they seem to be desperately jerking on the broken steering wheel, hoping to turn the car around.
(I was duty-bound by the laws of Slashdot to use a car analogy)
There's nothing "wrong" with it. What I'm saying is that modding an existing commercial game (non-libre, non-gratis), or taking a commercial engine that was sold non-gratis/non-libre and then building your game off of it, doesn't exactly demonstrate the ability for FOSS to deliver quality games. Its taking work that was done outside of the development model being promoted, and claiming it for its own.
Somehow, I'm skeptical of the advantages of FOSS engines. There are a lot of great ones, don't get me wrong, but they always seem to be one step behind the commercial. I would love it if the FOSS scene could give me equivalents of Call of Duty 4 or WoW, but it hasn't so far, and I don't see it doing so in the future. Based on experience, the best I can hope for is small polished indie games, or large unpolished games that look like they should have been released 10 years ago.
Thats interesting. It would be nice if you could look up the account name in general, not just for chat purposes. Players with bad reputations tend to re-roll or get their names changed in order to cover up their bad reputations.
And if two people with the same name on two servers are online at the same time?/w Rycross@[Server]? Friends lists? There are UI implications, so its not quite as straightforward as you make it out to be. In the end, you can just run your IM client beside WoW.
Hey if that works for you then that's great, but I personally don't want to play the same three games all the time, especially if they're equivalent to what the commercial gaming scene put out ten years ago. I like variety and polish, and when FOSS can put out the depth and breadth of the commercial sector without re-using old commercially-developed engines, then I'll start looking at it as a viable option. Just because you enjoy the FOSS gaming scene doesn't mean its good enough for everyone.
You either 1) standardize on something or 2) reformat it in the client to a format that the server understands. Sheesh, this isn't rocket science. It wouldn't be the first time a programmer has written a translation layer to convert an internal format to an external one. Hell, we had this problem with endian-ness.
The problems of re-formatting data are trivial compared to the issues with terminated strings. There's not a perfect fool-proof way of doing it, but a length/data representation is much better than termination.
Viewing something as immoral is not the same as "[seeing] them unquestioningly as sick pedophiles that are destroying society, inhuman evil monsters that can not be related to." Sure, they want their kids to think its immoral so that they "don't become gay," but they don't consider homosexuals pedophiles or monsters.
You're projecting your own negative feelings towards Christians onto them. It seems to me that you are trying to paint them as malicious rather than ignorant, and portray them in such a negative light that you can justify hating them. The same thing that you accuse them of.
I spent my formative years around a lot of people who were fundamentalists and thought homosexuality was "wrong," but the message was always that they were sinners that needed to be saved and reformed, which is an ignorant point of view, but hardly what you are making it out to be.
Your efforts at hyperbole are pretty hypocritical. In writing your screeds about how they are unjustly trying to make homosexuals seem like "inhuman monsters," you are dehumanizing them by trying to assign very evil intentions that they do not harbor. What they are doing is not right, but neither is what you are doing, and its only going to alienate people that might have been allies.
Er no. These parents don't see homosexuals as monsters or anything like that. That's an absurd characterization, and its made so that you can, in turn, demonize the opposition. What they do feel is that homosexuality is immoral, and showing it in a "normal" light promotes the view that it is normal. This, in turn, encourages people to act on their homosexual urges. They are not worried that their kids will see homosexuals as normal people, but rather that they will cease to view homosexuality as immoral, and possibly be "recruited" as homosexuals.
An ignorant belief? You bet. Bigoted? Yep. Portraying homosexuals as monsters and pedophiles? No way.
Just because some people are bigoted asshats doesn't mean you should likewise engage in hyperbole to demonize them. Its counter-productive.
100k sounds a bit fishy. If they stood there for 8 hours a day, and "worked" every single day in the year, they'd have to be pulling in $34 in donations every hour. I've seen some of these guys/gals, and I find it hard to believe that they're raking in that much.
Well I would guess that the poster isn't simple-minded enough to believe that you have to pick one system and stick to it ideologically 100%. Its possible to have capitalism, along with some regulations and socialism that prevent the lower classes from being exploited. Its what we have in America and Europe today. It makes libertarians feel all icky, but thus far they haven't really bothered to show how its a bad idea. Well, at least not in a way that basically ignores history or reality.
I am? You don't know what policies I support for dealing with global climate change, so don't push accusations on me, ok buddy? I suspect you'd find my position on this subject a lot more nuanced than your beloved strawman.
Again, the problem here is that you're assuming that keeping your thermostat on at 60 all day produces no rights conflict. The scientists are producing evidence that using more fossil-fuel based energy does have consequences on people, which means that there is some validity to making policy around the use of that energy.
Denyers' solution to this "dilemma" is to loudly and boldly proclaim that using fossil-based energy doesn't affect other people, despite the evidence.
Lets assume for the case of argument that keeping your thermostat at 60 degrees means that I have to abandon my house next to the coast? Or we have food shortages from drought? Are you going to boldly proclaim that you have the right to fuck over everyone else? If so, why don't you respect the rights of others? Are only yours important?
L4D didn't sell well for $50 because it has very little content. You only have 4 campaigns, each of which only last 1 1/2 hours. Only two are playable in vs mode. The game, while extremely fun, doesn't have a lot of depth. You can't really generalize this to include games that have double-digits of hours worth of content.
And if its free, who's going to produce that "information"? Music? Sure, concerts and whatnot can make up for that. Games? I haven't heard any sort of credible idea about how one could fund a game if the end product is free. Open source (and FOSS) has completely failed to match the output of the game industry in both quantity and quality. I'm sure people could make a similar argument about movies and TV shows as well.
Forgive me for not yearning for the days when all my entertainment is free but crap.
No, it is the government's business deciding whose affairs are more important. When two peoples' rights come into conflict, there has to be some sort of compromise. That's the entire friggen point of the legal system.
A bit off-topic, but I'm not so sure a netbook is a good development environment even if you could set something like this up. Of all the ones I've seen, the keyboard is way too small to be able to type very quickly. Then again, maybe I just have big gorilla hands.
You know, your posts really paint you as an extremely violent and ill-tempered person. I'm going to wager that you are not a violent person, so you may want to try not to come off as such an internet-tough-guy.
That being said, I mostly agree with you. If something like this happened once, by accident, then removal of the pictures and a good talking-to would probably be in order. Its typically not well-advised to sue people or companies over simple accidents that can be resolved amicably. The question in my mind is whether Google is repeatedly doing this, whether on purpose or on accident, and whether appropriate information is there for Google to avoid this.
If the appropriate information isn't there, then I'm going to call no-foul on Google's part and wag my finger at the city and the property owners for not properly making public where public property ends and private property begins. One cannot reasonably hold someone accountable if they cannot tell what is private or public property.
I'm guessing, however, that the information is out there. So the question is whether this is a one-off accident, systematic negligence, or a beg-forgiveness-instead-of-ask-permission case. If its negligence, then Google needs to be fined and held accountable. If its the latter... then they need to be hit hard.
You're an idiot for leaving your door open, and the person who took it is a thief who deserves fines and jail time. Blame and fault are not zero-sum games.
Damn man, damn. Well guys, you heard it! Some guy on the internet has called the victory for the PS3. Apparently one game is all it took. I know! It surprised me too!
So you game developers, stop making PC, XBox, and Wii games. Gamers, you need to throw away all your non-PS3 games. I know I'm going to go home right now and snap each of my XBox 360 games in half one by one, in a highly ritualized manner. I'm know I'll be crying myself to sleep over this bitter loss.
We knew that gaming was about which system won, not having fun, when we all signed up. We simply have to treat this like the serious business this is. Otherwise people might get the idea that we buy systems for the games we want to play, and we simply can't have that!
Anonymous Coward, thank you for having the keen intelligence, foresight, and integrity of character for recognizing Killzone 2's heavy impact on the gaming scene, and appropriately calling a victor. Generations will sing songs of praise in your name!
Well I guess, but there's not really a better way of phrasing it. No action is no action, whether its because he hasn't had enough time, or because he just doesn't care. Hopefully we, as the voters, are smart and attentive enough to find out which is which.
The person using that book does not necessitate making an unauthorized copy, nor is it implied that the library is lending it to them for the purpose of making an unauthorized copy. That's the point!
No, you didn't understand mine. A library lends me a book. I can read that book. I can also copy it. But the act of the library lending me that book doesn't necessitate or, in and of itself, promote copying that book. Providing a torrent link promotes copying that material, and in order to use the material pointed to by the torrent, you have to copy it. That's why its different, and that's why the post was stupid.
A copyright holder freely distributing their copyright (in your examples of Tor and the publishers' site), is perfectly acceptable under copyright. Last time I went to a library, they did not give me free copies of digital materials in their entirety. In other words, they provided digital materials, but they did not break copyright.
Again, the post showed such a grievous misunderstanding of copyright and the prosecution's argument that I can't call it anything other than moronic. I hate the RIAA, I want copyright reform, and I don't like this lawsuit, but that doesn't mean I'm going to give a thumbs up to an argument against these when it's founded on complete and utter bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
In theory, the idea of a bailout would be to slow the out-of-control car down so the rest of us can jump out before it goes careening off the cliff. In practice, they seem to be desperately jerking on the broken steering wheel, hoping to turn the car around.
(I was duty-bound by the laws of Slashdot to use a car analogy)
There's nothing "wrong" with it. What I'm saying is that modding an existing commercial game (non-libre, non-gratis), or taking a commercial engine that was sold non-gratis/non-libre and then building your game off of it, doesn't exactly demonstrate the ability for FOSS to deliver quality games. Its taking work that was done outside of the development model being promoted, and claiming it for its own.
Somehow, I'm skeptical of the advantages of FOSS engines. There are a lot of great ones, don't get me wrong, but they always seem to be one step behind the commercial. I would love it if the FOSS scene could give me equivalents of Call of Duty 4 or WoW, but it hasn't so far, and I don't see it doing so in the future. Based on experience, the best I can hope for is small polished indie games, or large unpolished games that look like they should have been released 10 years ago.
Thats interesting. It would be nice if you could look up the account name in general, not just for chat purposes. Players with bad reputations tend to re-roll or get their names changed in order to cover up their bad reputations.
And if two people with the same name on two servers are online at the same time? /w Rycross@[Server]? Friends lists? There are UI implications, so its not quite as straightforward as you make it out to be. In the end, you can just run your IM client beside WoW.
Hey if that works for you then that's great, but I personally don't want to play the same three games all the time, especially if they're equivalent to what the commercial gaming scene put out ten years ago. I like variety and polish, and when FOSS can put out the depth and breadth of the commercial sector without re-using old commercially-developed engines, then I'll start looking at it as a viable option. Just because you enjoy the FOSS gaming scene doesn't mean its good enough for everyone.
You either 1) standardize on something or 2) reformat it in the client to a format that the server understands. Sheesh, this isn't rocket science. It wouldn't be the first time a programmer has written a translation layer to convert an internal format to an external one. Hell, we had this problem with endian-ness.
The problems of re-formatting data are trivial compared to the issues with terminated strings. There's not a perfect fool-proof way of doing it, but a length/data representation is much better than termination.
Viewing something as immoral is not the same as "[seeing] them unquestioningly as sick pedophiles that are destroying society, inhuman evil monsters that can not be related to." Sure, they want their kids to think its immoral so that they "don't become gay," but they don't consider homosexuals pedophiles or monsters.
You're projecting your own negative feelings towards Christians onto them. It seems to me that you are trying to paint them as malicious rather than ignorant, and portray them in such a negative light that you can justify hating them. The same thing that you accuse them of.
I spent my formative years around a lot of people who were fundamentalists and thought homosexuality was "wrong," but the message was always that they were sinners that needed to be saved and reformed, which is an ignorant point of view, but hardly what you are making it out to be.
Your efforts at hyperbole are pretty hypocritical. In writing your screeds about how they are unjustly trying to make homosexuals seem like "inhuman monsters," you are dehumanizing them by trying to assign very evil intentions that they do not harbor. What they are doing is not right, but neither is what you are doing, and its only going to alienate people that might have been allies.
Er no. These parents don't see homosexuals as monsters or anything like that. That's an absurd characterization, and its made so that you can, in turn, demonize the opposition. What they do feel is that homosexuality is immoral, and showing it in a "normal" light promotes the view that it is normal. This, in turn, encourages people to act on their homosexual urges. They are not worried that their kids will see homosexuals as normal people, but rather that they will cease to view homosexuality as immoral, and possibly be "recruited" as homosexuals.
An ignorant belief? You bet.
Bigoted? Yep.
Portraying homosexuals as monsters and pedophiles? No way.
Just because some people are bigoted asshats doesn't mean you should likewise engage in hyperbole to demonize them. Its counter-productive.
No, some programs on my Macbook still open Safari instead of Firefox, so its not just Windows/IE. The frequency of occurrence is much lower, however.
I calculated that for the whole year. I guess its possible, but I'm still pretty skeptical. 30k? I could believe that.
100k sounds a bit fishy. If they stood there for 8 hours a day, and "worked" every single day in the year, they'd have to be pulling in $34 in donations every hour. I've seen some of these guys/gals, and I find it hard to believe that they're raking in that much.
Well I would guess that the poster isn't simple-minded enough to believe that you have to pick one system and stick to it ideologically 100%. Its possible to have capitalism, along with some regulations and socialism that prevent the lower classes from being exploited. Its what we have in America and Europe today. It makes libertarians feel all icky, but thus far they haven't really bothered to show how its a bad idea. Well, at least not in a way that basically ignores history or reality.
I am? You don't know what policies I support for dealing with global climate change, so don't push accusations on me, ok buddy? I suspect you'd find my position on this subject a lot more nuanced than your beloved strawman.
Again, the problem here is that you're assuming that keeping your thermostat on at 60 all day produces no rights conflict. The scientists are producing evidence that using more fossil-fuel based energy does have consequences on people, which means that there is some validity to making policy around the use of that energy.
Denyers' solution to this "dilemma" is to loudly and boldly proclaim that using fossil-based energy doesn't affect other people, despite the evidence.
Lets assume for the case of argument that keeping your thermostat at 60 degrees means that I have to abandon my house next to the coast? Or we have food shortages from drought? Are you going to boldly proclaim that you have the right to fuck over everyone else? If so, why don't you respect the rights of others? Are only yours important?
L4D didn't sell well for $50 because it has very little content. You only have 4 campaigns, each of which only last 1 1/2 hours. Only two are playable in vs mode. The game, while extremely fun, doesn't have a lot of depth. You can't really generalize this to include games that have double-digits of hours worth of content.
And if its free, who's going to produce that "information"? Music? Sure, concerts and whatnot can make up for that. Games? I haven't heard any sort of credible idea about how one could fund a game if the end product is free. Open source (and FOSS) has completely failed to match the output of the game industry in both quantity and quality. I'm sure people could make a similar argument about movies and TV shows as well.
Forgive me for not yearning for the days when all my entertainment is free but crap.
No, it is the government's business deciding whose affairs are more important. When two peoples' rights come into conflict, there has to be some sort of compromise. That's the entire friggen point of the legal system.
A bit off-topic, but I'm not so sure a netbook is a good development environment even if you could set something like this up. Of all the ones I've seen, the keyboard is way too small to be able to type very quickly. Then again, maybe I just have big gorilla hands.
You know, your posts really paint you as an extremely violent and ill-tempered person. I'm going to wager that you are not a violent person, so you may want to try not to come off as such an internet-tough-guy.
That being said, I mostly agree with you. If something like this happened once, by accident, then removal of the pictures and a good talking-to would probably be in order. Its typically not well-advised to sue people or companies over simple accidents that can be resolved amicably. The question in my mind is whether Google is repeatedly doing this, whether on purpose or on accident, and whether appropriate information is there for Google to avoid this.
If the appropriate information isn't there, then I'm going to call no-foul on Google's part and wag my finger at the city and the property owners for not properly making public where public property ends and private property begins. One cannot reasonably hold someone accountable if they cannot tell what is private or public property.
I'm guessing, however, that the information is out there. So the question is whether this is a one-off accident, systematic negligence, or a beg-forgiveness-instead-of-ask-permission case. If its negligence, then Google needs to be fined and held accountable. If its the latter... then they need to be hit hard.
You're an idiot for leaving your door open, and the person who took it is a thief who deserves fines and jail time. Blame and fault are not zero-sum games.
Damn man, damn. Well guys, you heard it! Some guy on the internet has called the victory for the PS3. Apparently one game is all it took. I know! It surprised me too!
So you game developers, stop making PC, XBox, and Wii games. Gamers, you need to throw away all your non-PS3 games. I know I'm going to go home right now and snap each of my XBox 360 games in half one by one, in a highly ritualized manner. I'm know I'll be crying myself to sleep over this bitter loss.
We knew that gaming was about which system won, not having fun, when we all signed up. We simply have to treat this like the serious business this is. Otherwise people might get the idea that we buy systems for the games we want to play, and we simply can't have that!
Anonymous Coward, thank you for having the keen intelligence, foresight, and integrity of character for recognizing Killzone 2's heavy impact on the gaming scene, and appropriately calling a victor. Generations will sing songs of praise in your name!
He did say he was an artist, so, very likely.
Well I guess, but there's not really a better way of phrasing it. No action is no action, whether its because he hasn't had enough time, or because he just doesn't care. Hopefully we, as the voters, are smart and attentive enough to find out which is which.
That is an awesome link. Thank you for that.
The person using that book does not necessitate making an unauthorized copy, nor is it implied that the library is lending it to them for the purpose of making an unauthorized copy. That's the point!
No, you didn't understand mine. A library lends me a book. I can read that book. I can also copy it. But the act of the library lending me that book doesn't necessitate or, in and of itself, promote copying that book. Providing a torrent link promotes copying that material, and in order to use the material pointed to by the torrent, you have to copy it. That's why its different, and that's why the post was stupid.
A copyright holder freely distributing their copyright (in your examples of Tor and the publishers' site), is perfectly acceptable under copyright. Last time I went to a library, they did not give me free copies of digital materials in their entirety. In other words, they provided digital materials, but they did not break copyright.
Again, the post showed such a grievous misunderstanding of copyright and the prosecution's argument that I can't call it anything other than moronic. I hate the RIAA, I want copyright reform, and I don't like this lawsuit, but that doesn't mean I'm going to give a thumbs up to an argument against these when it's founded on complete and utter bullshit.