I think its fine for games as long as the company in questions is still responsible for providing several seeds themselves and providing incentives for other people to seed it as well. For HL2 would you have been willing to give up a lot of your bandwidth in exchange for a discount or early access to additional map packs/mods/etc. Probably.
For everyone else the benefit of letting a corporation use your bandwidth while you're downloading is the fact that you'll get the game a few hours earlier and most people aren't using most of their upload bandwidth anyway.
Plus how much bigger is HL2 that a lot of *nix distros that are commonly downloaded through Bittorrent?
I agree with you on the inane fighting to post something funny and the karma whoring. I also tire of the repeated "Slashdot is being paid", cliched responses I feel I see too much of. I wish people would say what they mean, rather than bitch about everything. You think its a useless article, either don't read it, submit something better, or post why its not news, but don't just complain. There is much too much of that here as it is.
At the same time, I do get the feeling that article submissions are based more on what topic will generate the most responses (not necessarily thoughtful responses), as opposed to which article is the most news worthy. I think that is an inherent issue with the type of site Slashdot is. Its not a news site dispite its catchy slogan. Its a website for people to discuss the news.
Wait, are you telling me that someone found a cure for cancer and instead slashdot posted an article about Google?
I certainly hope you took the time to complain about the article posted about the play Spamalot, and the one on the latest reviews of Star Wars. I imagine you're just complaining to complain and didn't even take the time to come up with a coherent arguement (as is evident by the lame "Slashdot must be paid by google", do you honestly think Google needs to advertise?). So what "News for Nerds" should have been posted instead?
Re:when a product reaches verb status
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
I agree, I always thought science fiction was grounded in using science to explore the issues of the human condition. Along those lines, I'll happily toss Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind in the Sci-Fi category, but leave Being John Malkovitch in the Fantasy category. Infact I'd harbor that most Star Trek episodes would fall into my fantasy category (along with Star Wars, Buffy and their ilk).
I have to take this opportunity to recommend the movie PRIMER. Best science fiction I've seen in ages. Now out on DVD.
Actually you should have picked a better example of Hollywood playing it safe. Both of those were risky productions. If I recall Titanic was the most expensive movie of all time and Fox was so worried that it would flop that they spit some of the costs with other production companies to offset a potential loss.
As far as Lord of the Rings goes, the decision to greenlight the trilogy and shoot them back to back without confirmation that the first one was a success and to put it in the hands of a director without any real commercial success was a rather risky.
A better example of Hollywood's by commitee approach would be any big budget sequel (Spiderman 2, Lethal Weapon 2-4, etc.), or any movie starring Sandra Bullock, but Titanic and Lord of the Rings I'll credit those as risky decisions.
Ah, the bitter words of someone with both a small penis and small TV.
How tired and cliched is this arguement. At least you didn't say it was bought by men going through a mid life crisis.
Hell this overcompensating logic could apply to just about everything posted on slashdot. Why do people buy iPods? Small penis. Why do people overclock a mac mini? Inadequate in bed.
Sorry its just this combined with another comment using the term "Jump the Shark" was a little too much for me. Lets just Skip the Monkeys and stop spouting tired cliches to give meaning to our opinions.
I read the article and didn't find a mention of what impacts this will have on computer DVD playback. I'm sure alot of people use their laptops to playback DVDs when they travel (I'm one of them), and was curious if this new copy protection would impede that.
On a side note, does anyone know if DVD companies are required to print on the box if the DVD has copy protection and what kind? The obvious response is going to be that people should not purchase DVDs with this copy protection so that the Motion Picture Industry will get the message, but who wants to try and track down what DVDs have copy protection in place before you buy them. DVDs are a huge impluse buy (hence their presence at most checkout counters), and it would be nice to know right then if you are making a bad purchase.
Its the same reason people focus on men being sexist towards women, or straight people being homophobic towards gays as opposed to the reverse.
Its not a level playing field and until it is these ism's just aren't equal. Just like its incorrect to assume that sexism and racism are the same, you can't assume that white racism and black racism cause the same amount of damage. The group with power is the one with the responsibility.
Its like that tired racist arguement "How come there are all black fraternities, but if we had an all white fraternity people would call us racist?". I hate it when people (particularly white people) say that they don't think about race... its because they (we) don't fucking have to. You don't need a white fraternity because chances are you live in a predominately white neighborhood, your group of friends are all white and so are your coworkers.
Your arguement is flawed because despite your claims, you KNOW you are infringing on copyrighted materials. Your statement that "I don't particularly care what media I am consuming, just as long as it suffiently enterains me at that time."... chances are if someone took the time to make something sufficently entertaining, they also took the time to copyright it. If it looks like it cost 100,000s of dollars, it probably did.
The reason you've stopped paying for media is because you don't have to, not because that media isn't worth paying for. There is a reason newspapers, dvds, cable costs money. You aren't paying for the physical newspaper, but for the content inside. Content costs money to create. I'm not saying that media isn't over-priced, it is, but to say that you don't know what media is copyrighted or not is silly. If you want to download something for free, then take the time to find out if it is free (a quick trip to google could clear it up for you). I would assume you've at least slightly researched whatever it is your downloading. Otherwise how do you know what that movie/show/etc is about. I don't imagine you just randomly click download links, but I could be wrong.
Uh... EA already did this like 3 weeks ago. EA already signed a deal with the NFL, Madden is going to be the only NFL football game on the block for quite some time.
This ESPN deal is just the nail in any SEGA attempts at masqurading their next football game as an NFL game. Now they are pretty much forced to explore either an entirely fictional league, or go after one of the lesser known leagues. I know EA also has a deal with the Arena league, and I would assume the NFL deal also has rights to the World League (isn't that an NFL subsidiary?). I think the CFL is all thats left for SEGA.
The real shame is that EA isn't going to do anything with these other licenses other than makes sure that SEGA doesn't do anything with them. Maybe they'll make a game with them, but utlimately it will just be the same Madden engine with different teams, rules, etc (the differences between EA's college and pro football games are negligible).
Realistically I don't blame EA for making the deal as much as I blame the NFL for agreeing to it.
The intersting point is whether or not this is an area that RIAA should actually be involved in. Currently the solution to this problem of incompatiblity is to burn the songs to a CD and then re-rip them. This removes the copy protection and lets them play on any.mp3 player. The RIAA if they are really concerned about losing money to piracy, they should be concerned that online music stores are encouraging people to remove copy protection. The RIAA should be enforcing a unified copy protection that works across platforms so that people won't need to remove copy protection making to more difficult to casually trade copywrited material.
Also, can people please stop the terrible analogies, this is nothing like the fact that your VCR won't play DVDs. If you want to compare it to anything compare it to AIM and MSN Messenger, closed networks that are unwilling to allow competitors access to their subscribers.
If people truely need an analogy, a good example would be a cell phone company that lets you call anyone who is also on their network or anyone's home phone, but if someone has a cell phone though a different company you can't call them. Because of the size of their network and the fact their phones look really pretty everyone buys one. You think they are overpriced, but if you buy a competitors you can't call any of your friends.
Slashdot Mirror
I think its fine for games as long as the company in questions is still responsible for providing several seeds themselves and providing incentives for other people to seed it as well. For HL2 would you have been willing to give up a lot of your bandwidth in exchange for a discount or early access to additional map packs/mods/etc. Probably.
For everyone else the benefit of letting a corporation use your bandwidth while you're downloading is the fact that you'll get the game a few hours earlier and most people aren't using most of their upload bandwidth anyway.
Plus how much bigger is HL2 that a lot of *nix distros that are commonly downloaded through Bittorrent?
...or in video form at systm.org
Minor correction, but both Warhawk and Devil May Cry 4 are for the PS3.
I agree with you on the inane fighting to post something funny and the karma whoring. I also tire of the repeated "Slashdot is being paid", cliched responses I feel I see too much of. I wish people would say what they mean, rather than bitch about everything. You think its a useless article, either don't read it, submit something better, or post why its not news, but don't just complain. There is much too much of that here as it is.
At the same time, I do get the feeling that article submissions are based more on what topic will generate the most responses (not necessarily thoughtful responses), as opposed to which article is the most news worthy. I think that is an inherent issue with the type of site Slashdot is. Its not a news site dispite its catchy slogan. Its a website for people to discuss the news.
Wait, are you telling me that someone found a cure for cancer and instead slashdot posted an article about Google?
I certainly hope you took the time to complain about the article posted about the play Spamalot, and the one on the latest reviews of Star Wars. I imagine you're just complaining to complain and didn't even take the time to come up with a coherent arguement (as is evident by the lame "Slashdot must be paid by google", do you honestly think Google needs to advertise?). So what "News for Nerds" should have been posted instead?
Tell that to TiVo
I agree, I always thought science fiction was grounded in using science to explore the issues of the human condition. Along those lines, I'll happily toss Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind in the Sci-Fi category, but leave Being John Malkovitch in the Fantasy category. Infact I'd harbor that most Star Trek episodes would fall into my fantasy category (along with Star Wars, Buffy and their ilk).
I have to take this opportunity to recommend the movie PRIMER. Best science fiction I've seen in ages. Now out on DVD.
Actually you should have picked a better example of Hollywood playing it safe. Both of those were risky productions. If I recall Titanic was the most expensive movie of all time and Fox was so worried that it would flop that they spit some of the costs with other production companies to offset a potential loss.
As far as Lord of the Rings goes, the decision to greenlight the trilogy and shoot them back to back without confirmation that the first one was a success and to put it in the hands of a director without any real commercial success was a rather risky.
A better example of Hollywood's by commitee approach would be any big budget sequel (Spiderman 2, Lethal Weapon 2-4, etc.), or any movie starring Sandra Bullock, but Titanic and Lord of the Rings I'll credit those as risky decisions.
Ah, the bitter words of someone with both a small penis and small TV.
How tired and cliched is this arguement. At least you didn't say it was bought by men going through a mid life crisis.
Hell this overcompensating logic could apply to just about everything posted on slashdot. Why do people buy iPods? Small penis. Why do people overclock a mac mini? Inadequate in bed.
Sorry its just this combined with another comment using the term "Jump the Shark" was a little too much for me. Lets just Skip the Monkeys and stop spouting tired cliches to give meaning to our opinions.
I read the article and didn't find a mention of what impacts this will have on computer DVD playback. I'm sure alot of people use their laptops to playback DVDs when they travel (I'm one of them), and was curious if this new copy protection would impede that.
On a side note, does anyone know if DVD companies are required to print on the box if the DVD has copy protection and what kind? The obvious response is going to be that people should not purchase DVDs with this copy protection so that the Motion Picture Industry will get the message, but who wants to try and track down what DVDs have copy protection in place before you buy them. DVDs are a huge impluse buy (hence their presence at most checkout counters), and it would be nice to know right then if you are making a bad purchase.
Its the same reason people focus on men being sexist towards women, or straight people being homophobic towards gays as opposed to the reverse.
Its not a level playing field and until it is these ism's just aren't equal. Just like its incorrect to assume that sexism and racism are the same, you can't assume that white racism and black racism cause the same amount of damage. The group with power is the one with the responsibility.
Its like that tired racist arguement "How come there are all black fraternities, but if we had an all white fraternity people would call us racist?". I hate it when people (particularly white people) say that they don't think about race... its because they (we) don't fucking have to. You don't need a white fraternity because chances are you live in a predominately white neighborhood, your group of friends are all white and so are your coworkers.
Your arguement is flawed because despite your claims, you KNOW you are infringing on copyrighted materials. Your statement that "I don't particularly care what media I am consuming, just as long as it suffiently enterains me at that time."... chances are if someone took the time to make something sufficently entertaining, they also took the time to copyright it. If it looks like it cost 100,000s of dollars, it probably did.
The reason you've stopped paying for media is because you don't have to, not because that media isn't worth paying for. There is a reason newspapers, dvds, cable costs money. You aren't paying for the physical newspaper, but for the content inside. Content costs money to create. I'm not saying that media isn't over-priced, it is, but to say that you don't know what media is copyrighted or not is silly. If you want to download something for free, then take the time to find out if it is free (a quick trip to google could clear it up for you). I would assume you've at least slightly researched whatever it is your downloading. Otherwise how do you know what that movie/show/etc is about. I don't imagine you just randomly click download links, but I could be wrong.
Uh... EA already did this like 3 weeks ago. EA already signed a deal with the NFL, Madden is going to be the only NFL football game on the block for quite some time.
This ESPN deal is just the nail in any SEGA attempts at masqurading their next football game as an NFL game. Now they are pretty much forced to explore either an entirely fictional league, or go after one of the lesser known leagues. I know EA also has a deal with the Arena league, and I would assume the NFL deal also has rights to the World League (isn't that an NFL subsidiary?). I think the CFL is all thats left for SEGA.
The real shame is that EA isn't going to do anything with these other licenses other than makes sure that SEGA doesn't do anything with them. Maybe they'll make a game with them, but utlimately it will just be the same Madden engine with different teams, rules, etc (the differences between EA's college and pro football games are negligible).
Realistically I don't blame EA for making the deal as much as I blame the NFL for agreeing to it.
The intersting point is whether or not this is an area that RIAA should actually be involved in. Currently the solution to this problem of incompatiblity is to burn the songs to a CD and then re-rip them. This removes the copy protection and lets them play on any .mp3 player. The RIAA if they are really concerned about losing money to piracy, they should be concerned that online music stores are encouraging people to remove copy protection. The RIAA should be enforcing a unified copy protection that works across platforms so that people won't need to remove copy protection making to more difficult to casually trade copywrited material.
Also, can people please stop the terrible analogies, this is nothing like the fact that your VCR won't play DVDs. If you want to compare it to anything compare it to AIM and MSN Messenger, closed networks that are unwilling to allow competitors access to their subscribers.
If people truely need an analogy, a good example would be a cell phone company that lets you call anyone who is also on their network or anyone's home phone, but if someone has a cell phone though a different company you can't call them. Because of the size of their network and the fact their phones look really pretty everyone buys one. You think they are overpriced, but if you buy a competitors you can't call any of your friends.