Ok, I may've come across as a overly patronizing... wasn't my intent, sorry. But really, you and I, as gamers, have something more in common with each other than with Joe Sixpack Gamer:
...because I've read a review that says it's worth playing...
We both read reviews about games, and probably hear the opinions of others who've played the game, before we make a purchase (ie. informed decision), as opposed to those who say "ooh, Generic Shooter 3: Extreme Edition, gotta have it!" when they walk into a store, and drop down their money without bothering to investigate a bit further if a game's worth playing beyond the "merits" of its recognizable title alone (ie. brand recognition alone).
Seriously, do you wander into a game shop and buy the first thing you've never heard of that doesn't have a "2" in the title?
Obviously not; see previous paragraph. I never said that all sequals are bad (nor are all good, of course), nor that all Joe Sixpack gamers only buy sequals. My point was, those who don't take the time to do even a modest amount of research to make an informed decision about a game purchase will usually (not "always") just go with what they know. And that is why sequals continue to dominate the market. I do like some sequals myself (Diablo II, most of the Need For Speed series), but some also fail to live up to their predecessors (Age of Empires III, from what I've read so far).
And I hate to quote myself, but I think this needs to be put in broader perspective...
Keep in mind, kids -- your average, brainwashed-by-the-public-"education"-system consumer is actually more comfortable purchasing a product that is percieved as a "known quantity", rather than trying something new and different.
Let's face it, the average consumer really does follow this pattern in most of their entertainment purchasing decisions. I'm not saying they never, ever deviate from this - occasionally most people feel the need to "try something different" - but for the most part they will, unless compelled to do otherwise (eg. opinion from a friend), simply go with what they know.
These are just my opinions and observations, take 'em for what they're worth.
Interesting points. The only part of your post I definitely disagree with is your comparison of game sequals to movie sequals.
A movie must have original content, storyline, often even core charcters and concepts, with each iteration. If it's "just more of the same" then it'll likely do poorly at the box office.
Games, however, are an entirely different critter, based mostly on their freeform, interactive nature, as opposed to the entirely passive and utterly linear movie-viewing experience. Games often can get away with recycling a great deal of core material, so long as there is refinement to the gameplay, and additional functionality in some form. Civilization is the best example that comes to mind. Sure, there've been a few hicups along the way for Sid's classic franchise, but overall it is tremendously well recieved among the gaming community, and fans often look forward to the next installment -- even though they're playing essentially the same game, only with refinments made along the way. A movie plot gets old fast after the first viewing or two, but the (mostly) open-ended nature of gameplay is much more far-reaching when it's designed well.
It's no surprise at all that a game franchise can continue to thrive after repeated sequals, and sometimes even after a decade or more of endless reincarnation. So long as developers are making expected improvements, why wouldn't fans of the game's respective genre continue to play each installment?
Note: I'm not saying all sequals are good (of course some are crap), just making a point.
The plethora of sequals has nothing to do with any slumping sales. Keep in mind, kids -- your average, brainwashed-by-the-public-"education"-system consumer is actually more comfortable purchasing a product that is percieved as a "known quantity", rather than trying something new and different. Those of us who enjoy "new and different" are among the minority, and are atypical consumers.
Madden, Final Fantasy, ad infinitum will continue to sell in mass quantities, so long as the designers don't churn out pure and utter crap (ie. creating a game that even their long-time loyal fans would hate).
The last thing we need is the government telling Apple to waste time and money making their product do things that their target market doesn't care about.
Man, this is gonna get me Trolled/Flamebated into oblivion, but I can't resist...
Let's change just one tiny word in that sentence, without in any way altering its core meaning, and see what we get:
The last thing we need is the government telling Microsoft to waste time and money making their product do things that their target market doesn't care about.
Interesting, no?:)
I'm not by any stretch an MS apologist (love Firefox!), I'm just sayin'. Something to think about. Oh, and if someone is a Linux or Mac user, then they're quite clearly not in any way, shape, or form any part of Microsoft's core audiance or "target market".
However, back to the other side of the coin... While MS attempts to make their OS versatile and capable for a wide range of users (because, obviously, it's the profitable thing to do), they also cater greatly to the "ignorant masses" (ignorant as in uneducated), as that's where the money is for them. They're not only practicing vendor lock-in, they are (and have been for years) facilitaing user lock-in as well. Face it, if you're doing anything remotely professional (like the game I'm developing), and using software made for Windows to do the job, it's a massive pain in the ass to switch over to something else. Not to mention that depending on what you're trying to accomplish, you could lose a huge chunk of end-user customers by switching your product over to Mac or Linux for example.
MS is basically saying "hey end-user, wanna have access to the widest variety of professionally-made games? You'll need our OS." And, "hey game-dev, wanna SELL your game? The most gamers are on Windows." They have everyone by the short hairs. It's a win-win situation for Microsoft, and a "WTF?!" for everyone else.
The cloths aren't the problem. The assholes who think cloths matter are the problem. These buttfucks need to learn how to judge achievement based on what is achieved.
I could not possibly agree more. I've even known people to pass judgement on a person's character and integrity based simply on their attire. I've gotten into heated arguments with these superficial, self-important dumbasses who think that the way a person dresses is a direct indicator of the person's 'moral fiber' or whatnot, believing that if someone's not willing to dress and act the "right way" to fit in, then they're somehow wrong for doing so. I swear, these people actualy take it as a personal offense when they see someone with a mohawk. It's fvcking pathetic.
Personally I'm a tee-shirt-and-jeans kinda guy, though I do like to dress nice now & then. However I also have friends who dress, to put it mildly, "very punk", though I'm not into the punk scene myself. I judge them by what they say and how they treat others, not their style of dress or music or what-the-hell-ever, and they do the same for me in return (I'm into hard rock and metal, not punk, and we really have nothing in common other than the "live-and-let-live" ideals as well as a few common interests like computers and video games).
I guess what I'm getting at, is that those who prejudge others based simply on attire or musical taste have earned my profound disrespect and deep suspicion. Just my two cents.
Yeah, that works great in theory. In practice, most people -- yes, even college students (at least most of the ones I know personally) -- would much rather have a "fully functional" (and yeah, if necessary, pirated) copy of MS Office, a "mainstream" program suite, rather than go with "some unknown 3rd-party software", no matter how good it is. Most of them aren't nerds. A frightening proportion can't even be described realistically as "computer literate", except the ability to use Kazaa (whole other rant, I won't go there cuz it'd be even further off-topic).
Your arguments are sound IF you're talking to someone who knows what you're talking about. For the rest of society, it's a head-scratcher... and as such, they'll just go with the default (MS) instead of trying something new in the chance that "it might break compatability" (even though it most likely won't) and "I've never heard of it and neither have my friends so it can't be that great", etc. Insert whatever other arguments you can think of here, but the bottom line is most of the sheep won't go for it, simply because it's not from Big Huge Corporation(tm) which they think they can trust... for no other reason than because it's BHC(tm), a supposedly known quantity to them.
I'm not saying I'd recommend pirating MSW over OO, just sayin' that most "non-techies" won't go for an "unknown" alternative... unknown to THEM of course.
I just read the article that you linked to and it's about someone else who wants to prosecute porn. Either you mistakenly thought it was about Alberto Gonzales, or you linked to the wrong article. Please check again.
Try actually reading the entire linked article next time. Here are some choice quotes from said article, which I revisited through the link I supplied earlier on this topic:
But the social conservatives have gained traction with new Attorney General Gonzales, a close associate of President Bush who is considered a strong contender for a U.S. Supreme Court nomination. In May, Gonzales established an Obscenity Prosecution Task Force under the office's criminal division.
And here: Sources say Acosta was told by the FBI officials during last month's meeting that obscenity prosecution would have to be handled by the crimes against children unit. But that unit is already overworked and would have to take agents off cases of child endangerment to work on adult porn cases. Acosta replied that this was Attorney General Gonzales' mandate.
Emphasis mine.
What part of that has absolutely nothing to do with Attorny Gen. Alberto Gonzales? He didn't start the anti-porn crusade that was begun by former A.G. Alex Acosta, but he's happily continuing/expanding it.
The consequences haven't changed at all -- yet. There's a long way to go from a proposal from the attorney-general to the signing of a law.
Ah, but this is a proposal from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, hand-picked to be nominated by G.W.Bush. Gonzales also served with Bush in Texas during his governorship, the two are pretty tight. And with a Republican majority in power right now, I'm willing to bet odds in favor of this getting passed, all Gonzales has to do at this point is ask 'pretty please' and poof! it's law. And we are screwed.
And by "we" I don't mean pirates, I mean even trading/sharing of non-copyrighted or GPL'd works as well. Fair use is pretty much a dead duck at this point, you're not even allowed to make a friggin' backup of something you legally purchased and legally own. The copyright laws themselves aren't changing much if at all here (compared to changes from DMCA etc.), but this will raise penalties through the roof.
Yes, this proposed legislature will get passed. And things will start to suck so badly that the core of our galaxy will go "WTF?!".
But if you are going to use my thin-air numbers to determine that "A million Internet users violating copyright law is still a very tiny portion of total 'Net users", then I can use your thin-air number to determine that as small as that million may be, your 5 legal users is a heck of a lot smaller.
Well crap, ya got me on that one. (shrug)
BTW you're quite welcome for the civil response. I too get frustrated with the petty, closed-minded name-calling BS (amounting to little more than trolling IMO, no matter how valid the argument is there's no excuse for the hostility) that so often goes on in the world's most-used nerd forum... and probably most-used forum, period... even though I've occasionally caught myself falling into the same trap and later thought "damn, I wish I'd worded that differently so as to not be such an ass". Oh well, live 'n learn.
I am not said AC. I don't post as AC. My previous post was my first in this thread. Don't put someone else's words into my mouth, I don't appreciate it, and you wouldn't either if the situation were reversed.
Try to be a bit more careful about the assumptions you make. I stand by what I said, not what someone else said.
Great, now I gotta go back and figure out who you are quoting so I know the context of what you're talking about...
"More than a million", eh? Ok, let's examine that.
Suppose, hypothetically (and erroneously, of course) that all of those file sharers are in the U.S. Just for the sake of argument. Let's even round the number up a bit, to 1.5 million, since it was "over a million". That's 0.5% of the U.S. population sharing tunes (and other stuff, don't forget) on Kazaa. Out of how many Internet-connected U.S. households? Don't have a percentage on that one, but it's damn-sure higher than 0.5%.
Now, obviously, many of those Kazaa users are outside the U.S., so let's look at it globally. It's been recently estimated that just over a billion people worldwide are connected to the Internet. Ok, this changes things... That comes out to about 0.15% of all users sharing files on Kazaa, using our guesstimated numbers. Could be a bit more, could be less -- doesn't matter. My point is pretty clear: A million Internet users violating copyright law is still a very tiny portion of total 'Net users, by any estimation. A negligable percentage, in fact.
Let them keep trying in vein to download a tune ripped at a half-assed bit rate, probably screwed up with *AA interferance as to make the song unlistenable. I, my family, and friends (both near and abroad) will continue to enjoy the clean quality of freshly ripped songs from the latest CDs we've bought.
Disclaimer: Yes, I have used Kazaa in the past, and Napster (old version) before that. I simply find that, rather than spending hours sifting through the bullshit to get what I want, it's easier just to run to the store and buy the stuff, and actually have an original, legal copy for my own archives.
This comment makes it absolutely clear how AGAINST multi-culturalism you are
Based on your statements, I strongly suspect you've never spent any real time in the U.S., or perhaps only in a tiny microcosm within it. There are so many cultures and sub-cultures in this country you'd really need a scorecard to keep track. In my local area alone (central Pennsylvania) there are several distinct cultures I come into contact with on a routine basis, including the stereotypical big-pickup-truck-driving, deer-hunting rednecks, and the semi-isolationist Amish/Mennonite communities (to this day I still can't understand Dutch, but all the ones I've talked with speak English just fine anyway). There is also a small but growing hispanic community in the next town. I've worked with some of them at a factory that's since been shut down, and while we all got along well, they certainly didn't "conform". The topic of religion hardly ever comes up because there's such a diversity of opinion and most people know there's no point trying to preach to someone who doesn't believe the same thing you believe.
In spite of the mostly rural area, there are blacks around here, they don't "conform", they're not all Christians (no more so than any other random cross-section of the population, regardless of race).
...only Christians are welcome in your world.
You are way off base. One of my best friends is atheist (black guy), another good friend of mine is agnostic (white guy), I myself (white guy) happen to believe there is a God, and we all get along great. We never, ever preach at each other for or against religion, we simply agree to disagree and just let it go.
Blacks are tolerated as long as they stay on their side of the fence and believe in Jesus Christ.
You have no clue what you're talking about, but thanks for playing. Try again.:)
It's the fact [sic] that almost 100% of the copy protection cracking/etc is done so the product can be freely distributed...
I must disagree on that point. In fact, I know of at least five people, myself included, who rip CD tracks to MP3s not for redistribution but purely for personal use. My PC is my stereo, surround-sound speakers and all. When I buy a CD, the first thing I do is rip it to MP3s and add it to my digital collection (which is not shared), simply for the convenience of having my entire collection at my fingertips. The CD itself goes into a rack for safe-keeping -- I listen to the duplicate (MP3s) and keep the original for archive. I don't share my ripped MP3s online. Two friends of mine do exactly the same thing; so do both my sisters, and my niece. Most of us even have portable CD players that also play MP3s -- these are not "piracy-enabling devices", they're simply incredibly convenient. Why have a disc that only holds a dozen or so tracks when you can have one that holds about two-hundred and sounds just as good (when ripped at high bit rate)?
I think on this site especially, you'll find a great many users who engage in similar non- (or "less-") enfringing practices.
So, what constitutes "almost 100%"? Is it 95%? 80%? 65%? I think your "fact" is a little off.
PunchMonkey, sounds like you either had a file corrupted upon installation (happens frighteningly often in XP), or the file was corrupted post-installation, such as an older pre-XP application over-writing it. Go here for more info, it'll tell you how to proceed depending on your Windows version.
sheared, you clearly have an IRQ conflict, ie. multiple devices using the same interrupt request. Reboot, go into your BIOS, and double-check all device IRQs, especially check video and sound IRQs. Most BIOSes allow you to manually set the IRQ, pick one that's not on use. Note that on some mobos, it's quite acceptable to have two devices sharing a single IRQ; consult your documentation, and also search the 'Net for help if that's the case.
The ActiveX applet does not put your system through a battery of Direct3D, DirectDraw, or DirectSound tests to determine its real-world performance. It merely scans your system's specifications, and "guesses" how fast it "should be" based on those specs. Nothing more.
Hell, the now-ancient DXDiag utility is more useful than this for determining system capabilities.
First off, thanks to everyone who helped answer my question.
Second, it seems to me that this open hardware concept could be not only hugely profitable to all involved, but could potentially be like dropping a lit match into a keg of gunpowder in terms of the shear rate of technological advancement for any respective hardware field. Being a gamer myself, I'm immediately thinking of video cards (among other gaming hardware). And then I think, imagine the explosion in graphical power for PCs if, for ex., both nVidia and ATI would open-source their hardware specs, both making advances on each others' research cooperatively? (Yes, modern 3D hardware is rapidly approaching "total realism" in terms of graphical capability, but it's the 1st thing that came to mind.)
Ah, but there's the snag. Both of those corporations are in it for profit, first and foremost, and any advantage they can keep over the other is one that they'll fight tooth and nail to hang on to.
I suppose eventually it comes down to two or more entities mutually choosing to cooperate and share the fruits of their labor (ie. hardware specs, performance advances, etc.) for this to really take off. As po8 pointed out, there are already open-hardware projects underway in the rocketry and radio fields. My question, as a gaming-oriented consumer, is: Does anyone know of any more "mainstream" open-hardware projects currently in progress? I'd love to hear about 'em.
...to encourage open source software and hardware development...
Ok, I can see open source software development being done at minimal cost, but hardware? Not trolling here, I'm genuinely curious, can someone explain to me how open source hardware development can be economical? I mean let's face a little reality here, if someone is going to undertake the (rather expensive) industrial task of hardware development, at the very least the need to recoup their investment, and ideally they'll make a profit -- at least that's the goal, or else they wouldn't bother in the first place.
Sooo... Anyone care to chime in here and explain this to me? Thanks in advance.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I may've come across as a overly patronizing... wasn't my intent, sorry. But really, you and I, as gamers, have something more in common with each other than with Joe Sixpack Gamer:
...because I've read a review that says it's worth playing...
We both read reviews about games, and probably hear the opinions of others who've played the game, before we make a purchase (ie. informed decision), as opposed to those who say "ooh, Generic Shooter 3: Extreme Edition, gotta have it!" when they walk into a store, and drop down their money without bothering to investigate a bit further if a game's worth playing beyond the "merits" of its recognizable title alone (ie. brand recognition alone).
Seriously, do you wander into a game shop and buy the first thing you've never heard of that doesn't have a "2" in the title?
Obviously not; see previous paragraph. I never said that all sequals are bad (nor are all good, of course), nor that all Joe Sixpack gamers only buy sequals. My point was, those who don't take the time to do even a modest amount of research to make an informed decision about a game purchase will usually (not "always") just go with what they know. And that is why sequals continue to dominate the market. I do like some sequals myself (Diablo II, most of the Need For Speed series), but some also fail to live up to their predecessors (Age of Empires III, from what I've read so far).
And I hate to quote myself, but I think this needs to be put in broader perspective...
Keep in mind, kids -- your average, brainwashed-by-the-public-"education"-system consumer is actually more comfortable purchasing a product that is percieved as a "known quantity", rather than trying something new and different.
Let's face it, the average consumer really does follow this pattern in most of their entertainment purchasing decisions. I'm not saying they never, ever deviate from this - occasionally most people feel the need to "try something different" - but for the most part they will, unless compelled to do otherwise (eg. opinion from a friend), simply go with what they know.
These are just my opinions and observations, take 'em for what they're worth.
Interesting points. The only part of your post I definitely disagree with is your comparison of game sequals to movie sequals.
A movie must have original content, storyline, often even core charcters and concepts, with each iteration. If it's "just more of the same" then it'll likely do poorly at the box office.
Games, however, are an entirely different critter, based mostly on their freeform, interactive nature, as opposed to the entirely passive and utterly linear movie-viewing experience. Games often can get away with recycling a great deal of core material, so long as there is refinement to the gameplay, and additional functionality in some form. Civilization is the best example that comes to mind. Sure, there've been a few hicups along the way for Sid's classic franchise, but overall it is tremendously well recieved among the gaming community, and fans often look forward to the next installment -- even though they're playing essentially the same game, only with refinments made along the way. A movie plot gets old fast after the first viewing or two, but the (mostly) open-ended nature of gameplay is much more far-reaching when it's designed well.
It's no surprise at all that a game franchise can continue to thrive after repeated sequals, and sometimes even after a decade or more of endless reincarnation. So long as developers are making expected improvements, why wouldn't fans of the game's respective genre continue to play each installment?
Note: I'm not saying all sequals are good (of course some are crap), just making a point.
The plethora of sequals has nothing to do with any slumping sales. Keep in mind, kids -- your average, brainwashed-by-the-public-"education"-system consumer is actually more comfortable purchasing a product that is percieved as a "known quantity", rather than trying something new and different. Those of us who enjoy "new and different" are among the minority, and are atypical consumers.
Madden, Final Fantasy, ad infinitum will continue to sell in mass quantities, so long as the designers don't churn out pure and utter crap (ie. creating a game that even their long-time loyal fans would hate).
"Obvious" and "quantum physics" aren't words I normally encounter close to one another
:)
Erm... yeah, good point.
Are you mods on something? Why is this modded funny? Parent is correct.
:)
It's funny because it's absurdly obvious, in that "no s#it!" kinda way. C'mon, lighten up a little.
I changed the article by reading it! Someone tell me what it says now...?
Man, this is gonna get me Trolled/Flamebated into oblivion, but I can't resist...
Let's change just one tiny word in that sentence, without in any way altering its core meaning, and see what we get:
Interesting, no?
I'm not by any stretch an MS apologist (love Firefox!), I'm just sayin'. Something to think about. Oh, and if someone is a Linux or Mac user, then they're quite clearly not in any way, shape, or form any part of Microsoft's core audiance or "target market".
However, back to the other side of the coin... While MS attempts to make their OS versatile and capable for a wide range of users (because, obviously, it's the profitable thing to do), they also cater greatly to the "ignorant masses" (ignorant as in uneducated), as that's where the money is for them. They're not only practicing vendor lock-in, they are (and have been for years) facilitaing user lock-in as well. Face it, if you're doing anything remotely professional (like the game I'm developing), and using software made for Windows to do the job, it's a massive pain in the ass to switch over to something else. Not to mention that depending on what you're trying to accomplish, you could lose a huge chunk of end-user customers by switching your product over to Mac or Linux for example.
MS is basically saying "hey end-user, wanna have access to the widest variety of professionally-made games? You'll need our OS." And, "hey game-dev, wanna SELL your game? The most gamers are on Windows." They have everyone by the short hairs. It's a win-win situation for Microsoft, and a "WTF?!" for everyone else.
The cloths aren't the problem. The assholes who think cloths matter are the problem. These buttfucks need to learn how to judge achievement based on what is achieved.
I could not possibly agree more. I've even known people to pass judgement on a person's character and integrity based simply on their attire. I've gotten into heated arguments with these superficial, self-important dumbasses who think that the way a person dresses is a direct indicator of the person's 'moral fiber' or whatnot, believing that if someone's not willing to dress and act the "right way" to fit in, then they're somehow wrong for doing so. I swear, these people actualy take it as a personal offense when they see someone with a mohawk. It's fvcking pathetic.
Personally I'm a tee-shirt-and-jeans kinda guy, though I do like to dress nice now & then. However I also have friends who dress, to put it mildly, "very punk", though I'm not into the punk scene myself. I judge them by what they say and how they treat others, not their style of dress or music or what-the-hell-ever, and they do the same for me in return (I'm into hard rock and metal, not punk, and we really have nothing in common other than the "live-and-let-live" ideals as well as a few common interests like computers and video games).
I guess what I'm getting at, is that those who prejudge others based simply on attire or musical taste have earned my profound disrespect and deep suspicion. Just my two cents.
Yeah, that works great in theory. In practice, most people -- yes, even college students (at least most of the ones I know personally) -- would much rather have a "fully functional" (and yeah, if necessary, pirated) copy of MS Office, a "mainstream" program suite, rather than go with "some unknown 3rd-party software", no matter how good it is. Most of them aren't nerds. A frightening proportion can't even be described realistically as "computer literate", except the ability to use Kazaa (whole other rant, I won't go there cuz it'd be even further off-topic).
Your arguments are sound IF you're talking to someone who knows what you're talking about. For the rest of society, it's a head-scratcher... and as such, they'll just go with the default (MS) instead of trying something new in the chance that "it might break compatability" (even though it most likely won't) and "I've never heard of it and neither have my friends so it can't be that great", etc. Insert whatever other arguments you can think of here, but the bottom line is most of the sheep won't go for it, simply because it's not from Big Huge Corporation(tm) which they think they can trust... for no other reason than because it's BHC(tm), a supposedly known quantity to them.
I'm not saying I'd recommend pirating MSW over OO, just sayin' that most "non-techies" won't go for an "unknown" alternative... unknown to THEM of course.
hell, they managed to kill more jews than hitler...
This part is new to me. Can you please provide a reliable source to confirm that statement?
NOTE: Not trolling, just honestly curious as to whether or not the above statement is factually true. Thanks in advance.
I just read the article that you linked to and it's about someone else who wants to prosecute porn. Either you mistakenly thought it was about Alberto Gonzales, or you linked to the wrong article. Please check again.
Try actually reading the entire linked article next time. Here are some choice quotes from said article, which I revisited through the link I supplied earlier on this topic:
But the social conservatives have gained traction with new Attorney General Gonzales, a close associate of President Bush who is considered a strong contender for a U.S. Supreme Court nomination. In May, Gonzales established an Obscenity Prosecution Task Force under the office's criminal division.
And here:
Sources say Acosta was told by the FBI officials during last month's meeting that obscenity prosecution would have to be handled by the crimes against children unit. But that unit is already overworked and would have to take agents off cases of child endangerment to work on adult porn cases. Acosta replied that this was Attorney General Gonzales' mandate.
Emphasis mine.
What part of that has absolutely nothing to do with Attorny Gen. Alberto Gonzales? He didn't start the anti-porn crusade that was begun by former A.G. Alex Acosta, but he's happily continuing/expanding it.
Let's not also forget Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' hardline stance against porn depicting consenting adults as well. This is someone who is clearly the most dangerous man for the job.
And I'm speaking as a moderate conservative. This guy scares the shit outa me.
The consequences haven't changed at all -- yet. There's a long way to go from a proposal from the attorney-general to the signing of a law.
Ah, but this is a proposal from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, hand-picked to be nominated by G.W.Bush. Gonzales also served with Bush in Texas during his governorship, the two are pretty tight. And with a Republican majority in power right now, I'm willing to bet odds in favor of this getting passed, all Gonzales has to do at this point is ask 'pretty please' and poof! it's law. And we are screwed.
And by "we" I don't mean pirates, I mean even trading/sharing of non-copyrighted or GPL'd works as well. Fair use is pretty much a dead duck at this point, you're not even allowed to make a friggin' backup of something you legally purchased and legally own. The copyright laws themselves aren't changing much if at all here (compared to changes from DMCA etc.), but this will raise penalties through the roof.
Yes, this proposed legislature will get passed. And things will start to suck so badly that the core of our galaxy will go "WTF?!".
But if you are going to use my thin-air numbers to determine that "A million Internet users violating copyright law is still a very tiny portion of total 'Net users", then I can use your thin-air number to determine that as small as that million may be, your 5 legal users is a heck of a lot smaller.
Well crap, ya got me on that one. (shrug)
BTW you're quite welcome for the civil response. I too get frustrated with the petty, closed-minded name-calling BS (amounting to little more than trolling IMO, no matter how valid the argument is there's no excuse for the hostility) that so often goes on in the world's most-used nerd forum... and probably most-used forum, period... even though I've occasionally caught myself falling into the same trap and later thought "damn, I wish I'd worded that differently so as to not be such an ass". Oh well, live 'n learn.
Assuming you're the AC who posted earlier..
I am not said AC. I don't post as AC. My previous post was my first in this thread. Don't put someone else's words into my mouth, I don't appreciate it, and you wouldn't either if the situation were reversed.
Try to be a bit more careful about the assumptions you make. I stand by what I said, not what someone else said.
Great, now I gotta go back and figure out who you are quoting so I know the context of what you're talking about...
"More than a million", eh? Ok, let's examine that.
Suppose, hypothetically (and erroneously, of course) that all of those file sharers are in the U.S. Just for the sake of argument. Let's even round the number up a bit, to 1.5 million, since it was "over a million". That's 0.5% of the U.S. population sharing tunes (and other stuff, don't forget) on Kazaa. Out of how many Internet-connected U.S. households? Don't have a percentage on that one, but it's damn-sure higher than 0.5%.
Now, obviously, many of those Kazaa users are outside the U.S., so let's look at it globally. It's been recently estimated that just over a billion people worldwide are connected to the Internet. Ok, this changes things... That comes out to about 0.15% of all users sharing files on Kazaa, using our guesstimated numbers. Could be a bit more, could be less -- doesn't matter. My point is pretty clear: A million Internet users violating copyright law is still a very tiny portion of total 'Net users, by any estimation. A negligable percentage, in fact.
Let them keep trying in vein to download a tune ripped at a half-assed bit rate, probably screwed up with *AA interferance as to make the song unlistenable. I, my family, and friends (both near and abroad) will continue to enjoy the clean quality of freshly ripped songs from the latest CDs we've bought.
Disclaimer: Yes, I have used Kazaa in the past, and Napster (old version) before that. I simply find that, rather than spending hours sifting through the bullshit to get what I want, it's easier just to run to the store and buy the stuff, and actually have an original, legal copy for my own archives.
This comment makes it absolutely clear how AGAINST multi-culturalism you are
...only Christians are welcome in your world.
:)
Based on your statements, I strongly suspect you've never spent any real time in the U.S., or perhaps only in a tiny microcosm within it. There are so many cultures and sub-cultures in this country you'd really need a scorecard to keep track. In my local area alone (central Pennsylvania) there are several distinct cultures I come into contact with on a routine basis, including the stereotypical big-pickup-truck-driving, deer-hunting rednecks, and the semi-isolationist Amish/Mennonite communities (to this day I still can't understand Dutch, but all the ones I've talked with speak English just fine anyway). There is also a small but growing hispanic community in the next town. I've worked with some of them at a factory that's since been shut down, and while we all got along well, they certainly didn't "conform". The topic of religion hardly ever comes up because there's such a diversity of opinion and most people know there's no point trying to preach to someone who doesn't believe the same thing you believe.
In spite of the mostly rural area, there are blacks around here, they don't "conform", they're not all Christians (no more so than any other random cross-section of the population, regardless of race).
You are way off base. One of my best friends is atheist (black guy), another good friend of mine is agnostic (white guy), I myself (white guy) happen to believe there is a God, and we all get along great. We never, ever preach at each other for or against religion, we simply agree to disagree and just let it go.
Blacks are tolerated as long as they stay on their side of the fence and believe in Jesus Christ.
You have no clue what you're talking about, but thanks for playing. Try again.
It's the fact [sic] that almost 100% of the copy protection cracking/etc is done so the product can be freely distributed...
I must disagree on that point. In fact, I know of at least five people, myself included, who rip CD tracks to MP3s not for redistribution but purely for personal use. My PC is my stereo, surround-sound speakers and all. When I buy a CD, the first thing I do is rip it to MP3s and add it to my digital collection (which is not shared), simply for the convenience of having my entire collection at my fingertips. The CD itself goes into a rack for safe-keeping -- I listen to the duplicate (MP3s) and keep the original for archive. I don't share my ripped MP3s online. Two friends of mine do exactly the same thing; so do both my sisters, and my niece. Most of us even have portable CD players that also play MP3s -- these are not "piracy-enabling devices", they're simply incredibly convenient. Why have a disc that only holds a dozen or so tracks when you can have one that holds about two-hundred and sounds just as good (when ripped at high bit rate)?
I think on this site especially, you'll find a great many users who engage in similar non- (or "less-") enfringing practices.
So, what constitutes "almost 100%"? Is it 95%? 80%? 65%? I think your "fact" is a little off.
In lieu of mod points, I grant you a +10% experience bonus!
/. read worthwhile. :)
Funny shit, dude. Thanks for making the daily
Dude, are you friggin' drunk?!
:P
Step awaaay from the song lyrics...
PunchMonkey, sounds like you either had a file corrupted upon installation (happens frighteningly often in XP), or the file was corrupted post-installation, such as an older pre-XP application over-writing it. Go here for more info, it'll tell you how to proceed depending on your Windows version.
sheared, you clearly have an IRQ conflict, ie. multiple devices using the same interrupt request. Reboot, go into your BIOS, and double-check all device IRQs, especially check video and sound IRQs. Most BIOSes allow you to manually set the IRQ, pick one that's not on use. Note that on some mobos, it's quite acceptable to have two devices sharing a single IRQ; consult your documentation, and also search the 'Net for help if that's the case.
The ActiveX applet does not put your system through a battery of Direct3D, DirectDraw, or DirectSound tests to determine its real-world performance. It merely scans your system's specifications, and "guesses" how fast it "should be" based on those specs. Nothing more.
Hell, the now-ancient DXDiag utility is more useful than this for determining system capabilities.
Utterly pointless. Don't waste your time.
Daaaamn, and here I thought I was simply drunk and listening to headphones...
You mean that's NOT Corrosion of Conformity in my head?!
First off, thanks to everyone who helped answer my question.
Second, it seems to me that this open hardware concept could be not only hugely profitable to all involved, but could potentially be like dropping a lit match into a keg of gunpowder in terms of the shear rate of technological advancement for any respective hardware field. Being a gamer myself, I'm immediately thinking of video cards (among other gaming hardware). And then I think, imagine the explosion in graphical power for PCs if, for ex., both nVidia and ATI would open-source their hardware specs, both making advances on each others' research cooperatively? (Yes, modern 3D hardware is rapidly approaching "total realism" in terms of graphical capability, but it's the 1st thing that came to mind.)
Ah, but there's the snag. Both of those corporations are in it for profit, first and foremost, and any advantage they can keep over the other is one that they'll fight tooth and nail to hang on to.
I suppose eventually it comes down to two or more entities mutually choosing to cooperate and share the fruits of their labor (ie. hardware specs, performance advances, etc.) for this to really take off. As po8 pointed out, there are already open-hardware projects underway in the rocketry and radio fields. My question, as a gaming-oriented consumer, is: Does anyone know of any more "mainstream" open-hardware projects currently in progress? I'd love to hear about 'em.
...to encourage open source software and hardware development...
Ok, I can see open source software development being done at minimal cost, but hardware? Not trolling here, I'm genuinely curious, can someone explain to me how open source hardware development can be economical? I mean let's face a little reality here, if someone is going to undertake the (rather expensive) industrial task of hardware development, at the very least the need to recoup their investment, and ideally they'll make a profit -- at least that's the goal, or else they wouldn't bother in the first place.
Sooo... Anyone care to chime in here and explain this to me? Thanks in advance.