Sell customers thin clients that connects to Cloud computing resources and stream the game.
Sure will prevent piracy, you don't even have the hardware anymore. Forget 'jailbreaking' or otherwise tampering with their console, all you got is basically a lame Chromebook.
Oh and forget forking over your payment and getting a console. This baby will be subscription based, like EVERYTHING is turning into. This last point I'm still on the fence of it being good or bad, there's some nice pros to subscriptions.
During a parliamentary debate, lawmakers from Macron's La Republique En Marche party said banning phones in schools meant all children now had a legal "right to disconnect" from digital pressures during their school day.
Sort of like my right to not kill people in public? Seriously, 'right to disconnect' is totally the wrong choice of words. How the hell did 'banning phones' morph into 'right to disconnect'? Even for a euphemism, that's a pretty serious stretch.
but they have the right (though not a responsibility) to form their own definitions of what is objectionable and decide how to enforce that.
Valve has a lot of rights here. They are wisely choosing to stay out of the conversation by saying "We don't give a shit. We just wanna sell games." Unless it's illegal or "Straight up Trolling." That's how it should be. Valve could exercise all sorts of rights, but they are not. And I commend them.
They should not be in the business of judging games on any sort of criteria except the ones they already are: Illegality, and/or "Straight up Trolling" Leave it up to the consumers to decide which games are good and which are not.
Allowing a controversial game of any kind on Steam, by Valve, is a very bold move. Far too often companies are getting sucked into political and/or moral debates they have no business being involved in. Valve is one of the braver ones deciding that caving to social pressure isn't such a good idea. Good for them.
I use Chrome myself, for all my browsing. I'm fully aware the thing is spying on my browsing habits every day, all day.
But then, pretty much every website is doing this regardless of my browser choice. It's not difficult to build a 'profile' of what any particular given user looks like (to a computer.) The point being, I could use something like Pale Moon, Firefox, or any other non-Chrome browser, but does that increase my privacy and security? Probably not.
By electing to use the most nosy browser there is (and I just like Chrome), I am never lulling myself in to a false sense of privacy or security. I know it's watching me and I use it accordingly.
I know it's a pilot, but come on, this doesn't take a lot of braincells to figure out. The entire concept hinges on UNIVERSAL. You don't have to have any special need, in fact, the way it's supposed to work in theory, you can even have a job.
Bottom line, this pilot isn't going to tell you jack about how this is going to work cuz you're not doing it right. It's UNIVERSAL, everyone needs to get it, or your test is null and void.
I'd even go as far to say, your pilot is folly, you're going to create resentments in the community cuz someone is getting a free lunch and someone else isn't. That's not how this idea works. For it to work, EVERYONE gets a free lunch, if they want.
Not quite, you can play parts of the game now: ship racing, dog-fighting and the FPS deathmatch. It's not a complete experience by any means, but at least it's something. Still, they really need to stop adding features and just finish a basic experience that they can expand upon later.
This and all the other defensive posts. Really? You guys are defending the game by saying it sort of works? That's some fan dedication. You're jazzed about pieces of overall game experience that's frankly, never going to happen, at this rate. By the time Star Citizen ever comes close to it's lofty goals, the hardware it's designed to run on will be obsolete.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love the conceptual ideas behind this game. They were lofty at the beginning of the entire ordeal. But many years down the road and nothing even remotely close to what this game is SUPPOSED to be, I lost interest a long time ago.
I stand by my vaporware accusation. They have not delivered THE GAME they imagined so many years ago.
Star Citizen has been 'in the works' for what, 5 years now? Longer? VAPORWARE. And those of you forking over money for this never-will-be-completed game... a fool and their dollars are easily separated.
Gotta hand it to Cloud Imperium, they're duping everyone out of money and already litigating in courts (VERY EXPENSIVE.) Fools. This has to be the greatest thing ever for Cloud Imperium, they're making tons of money and have NEVER delivered a product. Amazing.
So where are the alternatives to plastic items? Especially in the food storage and trash bag departments. Do we really have anything in the pipeline to address these two huge contributors to plastic waste?
What about those 'to go' boxes almost every restaurant in America use, the plastic Styrofoam things?
Basically what I'm trying to point out is, if there is no alternatives to the plastics we're using NOW, they will continue to be used until alternatives are as good or better than what we have now, regardless of the waste impact. Humans don't think like that.
Wrong target if you wanna reduce plastic waste. Plastic utensils are a minute portion of the problem, and probably a good exception.
If they were being realistic, they'd be targeting plastic wrappers, bottles, containers and *BAGS*, like trash bags, leaf bags, etc. These are your big ticket plastic waste items, not utensils.
It takes a special kind of stupid to single out utensils while leaving the big contributors unmentioned.
All modern PC's were never designed with the thought in mind: There will be millions of attacks against this to try and break in.
We just didn't think about that when we designed this stuff, which was before the internet really took off. Of course it's all insecure and broken, it wasn't designed to be hardened against the countless ways security researchers are finding into these designs.
When the "forces that be" decide to scrap everything we've created upto now, and start anew, with a security focus right at the starting line, then we'd get some hardware and software platforms that're truly hardened against any attack.
Bandaids over the x86 paradigm? Waste of time. It's never going to be secure, not against everything everytime. It's just not designed to be secure, we didn't think it needed to be. We didn't think there'd be millions of malicious actors in the wild, with our computers all interconnected by the internet, so everything is exposed to everyone. We just didn't think that'd ever happen. It shows.
This is exactly the reason you don't pay someone for your VM architecture. It's all insecure garbage... and this is igoring the fact that the NSA/BSA is deeply imbedded in evehing you do.. At least support the people that do it for free.
This is really bad advice. Hosted in your basement, or on someone elses data center, it really doesn't matter, you're vulnerable to attacks. All you can ever hope to do is mitigate the effects of any successful attack, and do everything you can to isolate things from each other, so an attacker has limited access and has to start anew to break into another isolated service.
Economically, it doesn't even make dollar sense anymore to host internet servers in your basement. When one calculates the cost of owner ship, maintenance, support, etc, of having a physical server.. well, it just doesn't make sense. You can have the same thing in someone elses data center, without all the cost of ownership. You pay your bill, someone else deals with all the technicalities of keeping a computer up and running.
Even an "insecure" data center hosted server can be hardened against attack, both externally and internally. The sheer volume of virtual machines running in a data center with literally 1000's of computers, all running VMs... yeah, unless you're some state intelligence agency, data center is good enough and secure enough. The levels of effort needs to FIND your VM, tamper with it in a way you're not going to know about. Who does this? And if was being done, why do you think just because you have the physical hardware in your basement, you're magically immune to attack? Silly.
The bottom line, the one no one wants to admit to, or hear: You're not important enough for anyone to give a flying f about you or your server(s). If you were, you wouldn't be discussing it here on Slashdot. You'd have your own data center.
Even graphically simple games like The Binding of Isaac ran at an unplayably slowed-down rate on this connection, with frequent dropped inputs to boot.
This is awful. But I have to scratch my head and ask WHY?!!? You can use in-home streaming between devices on some pretty lousy wifi and it works great?
I imagine this was done on purpose. And from where I'm sitting, I'm thinking, it did not have malicious intent. It was probably a choice made so Cisco can bail out IT departments that lost passwords to their gear and need a way in. Just my 2 dollars. Inflation sucks, doesn't it?
Agree with this 100000%. I don't understand why more sites on the internet don't use a moderation system like the one here on Slashdot. It's super effective, we self-moderate ourselves here. Get your comment downmodded to -1? Got no one to blame but your peers who think you're an idiot. And it's not censorship, your comment is still right there, for anyone to see, assuming they want to see stuff that's been modded down to -1.
More of the internet needs Slashdot's moderation system.
Twitter. It’s their site and their rules. You’re perfectly free not to go there if you disagree. You may have a Consitutional right to free speech in the US, but no one is obligated to listen to you.
This was disingenuous before it was stale, get a new talking point if you want to remain interesting.
Damn, that's usually my stance! Stop trolling me! Also, it's true. Free speech never extends to private entities. And hopefully never will. But then, I don't use Twitter, so at the end of the day, I am not invested in this discussion and I don't actually care. I just like to present my perspective, then let y'all fight it out.
So I was thinking.. where have I seen this before? What does this remind me of? OH YEAH, the Ultima Online forums about 15 years ago.
I remember taking note that there's a lot of people bitching about the game's problems. Then I dunno where I came across this, but something to the effect of "The people posting here are the disgruntled ones, a very small percentage of our users, maybe 1%, they're the ones making all the stink, everyone else either doesn't care, doesn't know the forum exists, or has nothing to say."
The same can be applied to Twitter, in my opinion. A lot of tweets, and I'd wager a vast majority of them are from a fairly regular noisy selection of the entire service, and when you tally up that selection, they'll be probably about 1% of total accounts. 1% of the users making 99% of the noise. And you're gunna censor these people? Good luck. For starters, these are people who have an axe to grind, they want people to read their tirades and toxic posts. They will find a way to make enough noise to drown out everyone else. They always do.
So in short, Twitter is dealing with a problem the "online community" has known about for many many years. There exists a very vocal but definitely minority that is disproportionally prolific in their dissent.
It's not even unique to any particular platform, forum, service, or anything else where messages are written and others may read what's written. It always happens. Even right here on Slashdot, I bet the percentages are about the same too, 99% of those visiting this site never post anything, it's almost certainly that 1% that is prolific that's doing all the posting on this site.
Twitter will be censoring certain users and accounts from appearing prominently in any feeds, unless explicitly searched for.
Which is fine, I'm all for stepping on the trolls, but then I remembered, censorship is bad, even in this situation. Who decides what gets published and what gets buried? That's what bothers me.
If it's an algorithm, then I gotta ask, who wrote the algorithm? Explain it to us, in all the gritty details, because otherwise, it's just censorship based on some unknown criteria. Censorship is bad enough, but censorship without an obvious target? Scary.
But instead of charging Mr. Schulte in the breach, referred to as the Vault 7 leak, prosecutors charged him last August with possessing child pornography, saying agents had found the material on a server he created as a business in 2009 while he was a student at the University of Texas.
And if you believe this, I got a bridge for sale. Bullshit. I don't believe this even for an instant. And this is yet another use-case for encryption. It protects you from having evidence planted, as well! This is very obviously a planting of evidence when they couldn't build a real case against the guy. Despicable.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this segment of the population just hell bend on NO PROGRESS for anything or anyone? Seriously, shut up.
My ISP doesn't give me IPv6 connectivity. So I'm sunk.
Time to recycle you, your bitterness vs. the world that doesn't agree with you is toxic.
Sell customers thin clients that connects to Cloud computing resources and stream the game.
Sure will prevent piracy, you don't even have the hardware anymore. Forget 'jailbreaking' or otherwise tampering with their console, all you got is basically a lame Chromebook.
Oh and forget forking over your payment and getting a console. This baby will be subscription based, like EVERYTHING is turning into. This last point I'm still on the fence of it being good or bad, there's some nice pros to subscriptions.
But you know, no internet, no gaming for you.
During a parliamentary debate, lawmakers from Macron's La Republique En Marche party said banning phones in schools meant all children now had a legal "right to disconnect" from digital pressures during their school day.
Sort of like my right to not kill people in public? Seriously, 'right to disconnect' is totally the wrong choice of words. How the hell did 'banning phones' morph into 'right to disconnect'? Even for a euphemism, that's a pretty serious stretch.
but they have the right (though not a responsibility) to form their own definitions of what is objectionable and decide how to enforce that.
Valve has a lot of rights here. They are wisely choosing to stay out of the conversation by saying "We don't give a shit. We just wanna sell games." Unless it's illegal or "Straight up Trolling." That's how it should be. Valve could exercise all sorts of rights, but they are not. And I commend them.
They should not be in the business of judging games on any sort of criteria except the ones they already are: Illegality, and/or "Straight up Trolling" Leave it up to the consumers to decide which games are good and which are not.
Allowing a controversial game of any kind on Steam, by Valve, is a very bold move. Far too often companies are getting sucked into political and/or moral debates they have no business being involved in. Valve is one of the braver ones deciding that caving to social pressure isn't such a good idea. Good for them.
Steam should not be a place to express a viewpoint. It's a platform to hook game devs and game players up. Nothing more.
No one is forcing you to buy a game you find objectionable.
I use Chrome myself, for all my browsing. I'm fully aware the thing is spying on my browsing habits every day, all day.
But then, pretty much every website is doing this regardless of my browser choice. It's not difficult to build a 'profile' of what any particular given user looks like (to a computer.) The point being, I could use something like Pale Moon, Firefox, or any other non-Chrome browser, but does that increase my privacy and security? Probably not.
By electing to use the most nosy browser there is (and I just like Chrome), I am never lulling myself in to a false sense of privacy or security. I know it's watching me and I use it accordingly.
UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME.
I know it's a pilot, but come on, this doesn't take a lot of braincells to figure out. The entire concept hinges on UNIVERSAL. You don't have to have any special need, in fact, the way it's supposed to work in theory, you can even have a job.
Bottom line, this pilot isn't going to tell you jack about how this is going to work cuz you're not doing it right. It's UNIVERSAL, everyone needs to get it, or your test is null and void.
I'd even go as far to say, your pilot is folly, you're going to create resentments in the community cuz someone is getting a free lunch and someone else isn't. That's not how this idea works. For it to work, EVERYONE gets a free lunch, if they want.
Not quite, you can play parts of the game now: ship racing, dog-fighting and the FPS deathmatch. It's not a complete experience by any means, but at least it's something. Still, they really need to stop adding features and just finish a basic experience that they can expand upon later.
This and all the other defensive posts. Really? You guys are defending the game by saying it sort of works? That's some fan dedication. You're jazzed about pieces of overall game experience that's frankly, never going to happen, at this rate. By the time Star Citizen ever comes close to it's lofty goals, the hardware it's designed to run on will be obsolete.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love the conceptual ideas behind this game. They were lofty at the beginning of the entire ordeal. But many years down the road and nothing even remotely close to what this game is SUPPOSED to be, I lost interest a long time ago.
I stand by my vaporware accusation. They have not delivered THE GAME they imagined so many years ago.
Star Citizen has been 'in the works' for what, 5 years now? Longer? VAPORWARE. And those of you forking over money for this never-will-be-completed game... a fool and their dollars are easily separated.
Gotta hand it to Cloud Imperium, they're duping everyone out of money and already litigating in courts (VERY EXPENSIVE.) Fools. This has to be the greatest thing ever for Cloud Imperium, they're making tons of money and have NEVER delivered a product. Amazing.
So where are the alternatives to plastic items? Especially in the food storage and trash bag departments. Do we really have anything in the pipeline to address these two huge contributors to plastic waste?
What about those 'to go' boxes almost every restaurant in America use, the plastic Styrofoam things?
Basically what I'm trying to point out is, if there is no alternatives to the plastics we're using NOW, they will continue to be used until alternatives are as good or better than what we have now, regardless of the waste impact. Humans don't think like that.
Wrong target if you wanna reduce plastic waste. Plastic utensils are a minute portion of the problem, and probably a good exception.
If they were being realistic, they'd be targeting plastic wrappers, bottles, containers and *BAGS*, like trash bags, leaf bags, etc. These are your big ticket plastic waste items, not utensils.
It takes a special kind of stupid to single out utensils while leaving the big contributors unmentioned.
All modern PC's were never designed with the thought in mind: There will be millions of attacks against this to try and break in.
We just didn't think about that when we designed this stuff, which was before the internet really took off. Of course it's all insecure and broken, it wasn't designed to be hardened against the countless ways security researchers are finding into these designs.
When the "forces that be" decide to scrap everything we've created upto now, and start anew, with a security focus right at the starting line, then we'd get some hardware and software platforms that're truly hardened against any attack.
Bandaids over the x86 paradigm? Waste of time. It's never going to be secure, not against everything everytime. It's just not designed to be secure, we didn't think it needed to be. We didn't think there'd be millions of malicious actors in the wild, with our computers all interconnected by the internet, so everything is exposed to everyone. We just didn't think that'd ever happen. It shows.
This is exactly the reason you don't pay someone for your VM architecture. It's all insecure garbage... and this is igoring the fact that the NSA/BSA is deeply imbedded in evehing you do.. At least support the people that do it for free.
This is really bad advice. Hosted in your basement, or on someone elses data center, it really doesn't matter, you're vulnerable to attacks. All you can ever hope to do is mitigate the effects of any successful attack, and do everything you can to isolate things from each other, so an attacker has limited access and has to start anew to break into another isolated service.
Economically, it doesn't even make dollar sense anymore to host internet servers in your basement. When one calculates the cost of owner ship, maintenance, support, etc, of having a physical server.. well, it just doesn't make sense. You can have the same thing in someone elses data center, without all the cost of ownership. You pay your bill, someone else deals with all the technicalities of keeping a computer up and running.
Even an "insecure" data center hosted server can be hardened against attack, both externally and internally. The sheer volume of virtual machines running in a data center with literally 1000's of computers, all running VMs... yeah, unless you're some state intelligence agency, data center is good enough and secure enough. The levels of effort needs to FIND your VM, tamper with it in a way you're not going to know about. Who does this? And if was being done, why do you think just because you have the physical hardware in your basement, you're magically immune to attack? Silly.
The bottom line, the one no one wants to admit to, or hear: You're not important enough for anyone to give a flying f about you or your server(s). If you were, you wouldn't be discussing it here on Slashdot. You'd have your own data center.
"Technology ALWAYS wins, workers ALWAYS lose." --CGP Grey from https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU
This entire topic is the very definition of flamebait, especially on this site.
Also, not news for nerds.
Fear of the unknown.
Even graphically simple games like The Binding of Isaac ran at an unplayably slowed-down rate on this connection, with frequent dropped inputs to boot.
This is awful. But I have to scratch my head and ask WHY?!!? You can use in-home streaming between devices on some pretty lousy wifi and it works great?
I imagine this was done on purpose. And from where I'm sitting, I'm thinking, it did not have malicious intent. It was probably a choice made so Cisco can bail out IT departments that lost passwords to their gear and need a way in. Just my 2 dollars. Inflation sucks, doesn't it?
Censorship might be bad but moderation is good.
Agree with this 100000%. I don't understand why more sites on the internet don't use a moderation system like the one here on Slashdot. It's super effective, we self-moderate ourselves here. Get your comment downmodded to -1? Got no one to blame but your peers who think you're an idiot. And it's not censorship, your comment is still right there, for anyone to see, assuming they want to see stuff that's been modded down to -1.
More of the internet needs Slashdot's moderation system.
Twitter. It’s their site and their rules. You’re perfectly free not to go there if you disagree. You may have a Consitutional right to free speech in the US, but no one is obligated to listen to you.
This was disingenuous before it was stale, get a new talking point if you want to remain interesting.
Damn, that's usually my stance! Stop trolling me! Also, it's true. Free speech never extends to private entities. And hopefully never will. But then, I don't use Twitter, so at the end of the day, I am not invested in this discussion and I don't actually care. I just like to present my perspective, then let y'all fight it out.
So I was thinking.. where have I seen this before? What does this remind me of? OH YEAH, the Ultima Online forums about 15 years ago.
I remember taking note that there's a lot of people bitching about the game's problems. Then I dunno where I came across this, but something to the effect of "The people posting here are the disgruntled ones, a very small percentage of our users, maybe 1%, they're the ones making all the stink, everyone else either doesn't care, doesn't know the forum exists, or has nothing to say."
The same can be applied to Twitter, in my opinion. A lot of tweets, and I'd wager a vast majority of them are from a fairly regular noisy selection of the entire service, and when you tally up that selection, they'll be probably about 1% of total accounts. 1% of the users making 99% of the noise. And you're gunna censor these people? Good luck. For starters, these are people who have an axe to grind, they want people to read their tirades and toxic posts. They will find a way to make enough noise to drown out everyone else. They always do.
So in short, Twitter is dealing with a problem the "online community" has known about for many many years. There exists a very vocal but definitely minority that is disproportionally prolific in their dissent.
It's not even unique to any particular platform, forum, service, or anything else where messages are written and others may read what's written. It always happens. Even right here on Slashdot, I bet the percentages are about the same too, 99% of those visiting this site never post anything, it's almost certainly that 1% that is prolific that's doing all the posting on this site.
Twitter will be censoring certain users and accounts from appearing prominently in any feeds, unless explicitly searched for.
Which is fine, I'm all for stepping on the trolls, but then I remembered, censorship is bad, even in this situation. Who decides what gets published and what gets buried? That's what bothers me.
If it's an algorithm, then I gotta ask, who wrote the algorithm? Explain it to us, in all the gritty details, because otherwise, it's just censorship based on some unknown criteria. Censorship is bad enough, but censorship without an obvious target? Scary.
But instead of charging Mr. Schulte in the breach, referred to as the Vault 7 leak, prosecutors charged him last August with possessing child pornography, saying agents had found the material on a server he created as a business in 2009 while he was a student at the University of Texas.
And if you believe this, I got a bridge for sale. Bullshit. I don't believe this even for an instant. And this is yet another use-case for encryption. It protects you from having evidence planted, as well! This is very obviously a planting of evidence when they couldn't build a real case against the guy. Despicable.