Yup, all this would encourage me to do is to send encrypted packets around on a TOR network. At least with more people getting sued/banned from the internet, we can raise awareness in privacy and security.
I think it depends on the genre. Telltale Games does pretty well with their games, but that's because the point-click adventure genre works well when split across multiple episodes. For shooters or mmo's on the other hand, I'd be kind of annoyed having to shell out 2$ a weapon with a different skin and tweaked stats. Ultimately, I'd have to evaluate it based on how much entertainment I might get for my buck. That's why I might shell out 10$ for a DLC episode that has 5-10 hours of content but ignore all of the gear or map addons. This is probably why people flock to mmo's too. They are essentially paying 10$ for a large dynamic world/dlc and getting their entertainment out of it; albeit obsessive compulsive level-grinding entertainment.
On a side note, I find books are the most cost effective form of entertainment.
If you really don't trust them, you could have always gotten a sealed-letter transcripts to mail to the schools of your choice. Though I only do that for stuff I'm truly paranoid about having idiots manage. Hindsight is 20-20:P.
I'd mod you down as troll, but I think you have a sincere belief that the reasons behind this ruling are correct. I and many others see this as an erosion of fundamental, constitutional rights and a limitation of what makes our culture so vibrant. Since you've written a 20page report, can you elaborate as to how this case has a narrow application that cannot be abused by someone with lobbying power?
What's that I hear? Two screens aren't enough for you.
Well we're giving you three screens. That's right three! A tertiary screen on the back of your screen so everyone can that you're only browsing the hippest websites around.
What's that? Three screens not enough? Well we've put a revolutionary new fourth screen on the bottom. So your wang can instant message your friends too!
Shit, you want screens, we'll install them in your colon! Just please buy our gadget! I need the allowance to buy my soul back.
You could have probably done equally well with a taser. Less messy and more fun watching him twitch. That being said, I find guns to be a mixed bag; for each example of proper use, you could probably dig up an example of improper use. It largely depends on the individual wielding the tool. Depending on where I lived, and the people I lived near, my tolerance of gun rights might vary. For instance, if I lived on a street with a lot of crime or gang violence, I might advocate stricter gun laws. If I lived in suburbia or near forest-y areas, where people used guns to hunt, I wouldn't be worried about their gun rights.
I believe you have the right to own a gun to defend yourself. However, I also think there are better alternatives if you're only using it for defence.
The alternative would be taking a more active role in the government in a number of ways from: writing to representatives, supporting representatives, or running as one. Several million people could have a greater impact through their advocacy and voting power, than a large sum money. In order for this to actually happen, significant effort is usually required to organize the populace. The FSF, EFF, or some other organization could act as a focal point for people wanting to be involved in stopping ACTA by organizing protests and raising awareness. Hence, I sincerely hope more is done beyond a petition.
My enthusiasm kinda dwindles when I saw that the article amounted to a simple petition. Petitions, especially internet ones, are just a way for signees to feel good about themselves while making minimal effort. Kinda like complaining on/. will change the world:P. It'd be interesting if there a more concerted effort behind the petition like showing congress critters opposed to ACTA (so we could vote for them) or raising money to actually lobby against it. Corporations have realized that lobbying, or being active in government helps bend the rules to their favor, so why can't free software institutions do so either? I'm just hoping that this petition doesn't lead to a dead end.
I think ultimately, it depends on the cost. Game purchases would have to be significantly cheaper, as I'd already be shelling out money for a monthly subscription (isp not included) and there's no mention of whether I can backup or archive my copy or whether I'd have access to the games I purchased should I decide to discontinue my subscription. I.e. it's good for games I'd only play once, but I'm skeptical about the service with regards to games that have a long shelf life: civilization, starcraft, half-life, etc.
It sounds cool at first: no high end hardware purchases, but that cost is just being moved to monthly subscriptions. Again, if I decided to discontinue their service, there's a chance I'd end up with no games OR hardware. Given that I'll need a computer regardless, I think I'll just stick with my archaic computer + disk setup until I hear more about the service.
I'd blame that on shoddy loans issued by investment bankers, while politicians are more or less in charge of covering up the mess. But your point still stands. Seriously, the amount of money lost on overpriced Oracle products is a drop in the bucket relative to everything else, and that money probably went towards paying engineers to actually do something.
Ah, but that's just the thing, the GP proposed that the company gives up control when they or their copyright expire. Beyond that point, I don't expect them to maintain and develop that media. Nor do I expect them to hassle me about it. Their one benefit in distributing expired media, if they're not stupid-greedy, is that they have a wider selection of free content to attract the user and better control over its distribution. Besides, if the information is digital, and hosted over the internet, there's not a whole lot of extra effort or cost involved; just open up a link to the bits you want available and close it down when you're done. This is why unauthorized media distributors (I'm disinclined to call them pirates), thrive so well in that environment. Creating the product is expensive, but distribution is now relatively cheap.
I saw a brief demo of a ds using the accelerometer to simulate a 3d effect. If the ds was tipped left or right, the game scene would change to provide a different depth of field perspective. It was kinda weird and neat observing a 3d effect through a 2d trailer. (might be something on gametrailers.com or youtube.)
I think that depends on how the paper trail is implemented. The best way would be if the machine printed out a hard copy, which the voter reviewed and deposited a signed carbon copy in some recount box. Otherwise the machine could give the voter one paper copy, while maintaining another internally. And, if recounts were randomly checked, with verification from the voter, I'd have more confidence that the system worked.
I can't see how even having an audit trails makes the machine full proof. All you have to do is show the voter what they choose, and select store something else internally. Add in some noise, like correct votes, and the individual will never know he's been had. Kinda like slot machines, hope you randomly get the candidate you voted for.
it depends on how much money they're gambling with
and
Otherwise, aren't investors being stupidly irrational
go hand in hand. It's sort of like how people by lottery tickets even though the chances are astronomical that they won't win. Greed tends to make people stupid and irrational. Day traders move massive amounts of money based on the rapid input of consumption/news. This is one of the reasons google hasn't split but kept it's stock price at 400-500 and releases reports less frequently. They're trying to attract long-term investors rather than have their company directed by short term goals. Larger companies tend to not have this problem, as their sheer volume makes it hard to manipulate. If stockholders were force to make less frequent trades, the risk of losing a lot of money in the interim would go up, and they'd be more cautious about investing (hypothetically).
it's ultimately the shareholders who tacitly approve of the CEO/BoD because they just watch to see if their stock goes up every single quarter.
Day traders absolutely ruin this theory. People who try to milk money out of the system are responsible for some of the erratic shifts in the market. I sometimes wonder what would happen if traders were forced to own a stock for a week to a month before selling; would that stabilize the markets, as they'd need to look for less risky ventures?
In order to efficiently produce more researchers, we must get more females into the sciences. I advocate a 1:100 male:female ratio, which will revitalize our scientific population.
Just imagine using this laser to mess with your cat. It'll go nuts chasing the laser dot AND running away from the laser dot after it's fur is set on fire.
Note: I do not advocate the abuse of animals or the lighting of cats on fire. I just find that scenario incredibly funny.
Additional note: Sharks with friggen lasers don't sound so audacious any more.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah, the next Doctor is going to be a female with big Dalek bumps and the Master as a traveling companion.
Yup, all this would encourage me to do is to send encrypted packets around on a TOR network. At least with more people getting sued/banned from the internet, we can raise awareness in privacy and security.
I always wondered what people ... erm soylent green tasted like. Our McDonald's overlords must be fattening us up for the slaughter.
I think it depends on the genre. Telltale Games does pretty well with their games, but that's because the point-click adventure genre works well when split across multiple episodes. For shooters or mmo's on the other hand, I'd be kind of annoyed having to shell out 2$ a weapon with a different skin and tweaked stats. Ultimately, I'd have to evaluate it based on how much entertainment I might get for my buck. That's why I might shell out 10$ for a DLC episode that has 5-10 hours of content but ignore all of the gear or map addons. This is probably why people flock to mmo's too. They are essentially paying 10$ for a large dynamic world/dlc and getting their entertainment out of it; albeit obsessive compulsive level-grinding entertainment.
On a side note, I find books are the most cost effective form of entertainment.
When I finger you I touch myself.
If you really don't trust them, you could have always gotten a sealed-letter transcripts to mail to the schools of your choice. Though I only do that for stuff I'm truly paranoid about having idiots manage. Hindsight is 20-20 :P.
Well, if they didn't keep Google in China, who else would they steal ideas from? MSFT? pfft...
I'd mod you down as troll, but I think you have a sincere belief that the reasons behind this ruling are correct. I and many others see this as an erosion of fundamental, constitutional rights and a limitation of what makes our culture so vibrant. Since you've written a 20page report, can you elaborate as to how this case has a narrow application that cannot be abused by someone with lobbying power?
What's that I hear? Two screens aren't enough for you.
Well we're giving you three screens. That's right three! A tertiary screen on the back of your screen so everyone can that you're only browsing the hippest websites around.
What's that? Three screens not enough? Well we've put a revolutionary new fourth screen on the bottom. So your wang can instant message your friends too!
Shit, you want screens, we'll install them in your colon! Just please buy our gadget! I need the allowance to buy my soul back.
You could have probably done equally well with a taser. Less messy and more fun watching him twitch. That being said, I find guns to be a mixed bag; for each example of proper use, you could probably dig up an example of improper use. It largely depends on the individual wielding the tool. Depending on where I lived, and the people I lived near, my tolerance of gun rights might vary. For instance, if I lived on a street with a lot of crime or gang violence, I might advocate stricter gun laws. If I lived in suburbia or near forest-y areas, where people used guns to hunt, I wouldn't be worried about their gun rights.
I believe you have the right to own a gun to defend yourself. However, I also think there are better alternatives if you're only using it for defence.
Yes, and every once in a while, the iPhone dreams up a plan to break out of jail and join its temptuous sweetheart.
The alternative would be taking a more active role in the government in a number of ways from: writing to representatives, supporting representatives, or running as one. Several million people could have a greater impact through their advocacy and voting power, than a large sum money. In order for this to actually happen, significant effort is usually required to organize the populace. The FSF, EFF, or some other organization could act as a focal point for people wanting to be involved in stopping ACTA by organizing protests and raising awareness. Hence, I sincerely hope more is done beyond a petition.
My enthusiasm kinda dwindles when I saw that the article amounted to a simple petition. Petitions, especially internet ones, are just a way for signees to feel good about themselves while making minimal effort. Kinda like complaining on /. will change the world :P. It'd be interesting if there a more concerted effort behind the petition like showing congress critters opposed to ACTA (so we could vote for them) or raising money to actually lobby against it. Corporations have realized that lobbying, or being active in government helps bend the rules to their favor, so why can't free software institutions do so either? I'm just hoping that this petition doesn't lead to a dead end.
I think ultimately, it depends on the cost. Game purchases would have to be significantly cheaper, as I'd already be shelling out money for a monthly subscription (isp not included) and there's no mention of whether I can backup or archive my copy or whether I'd have access to the games I purchased should I decide to discontinue my subscription. I.e. it's good for games I'd only play once, but I'm skeptical about the service with regards to games that have a long shelf life: civilization, starcraft, half-life, etc.
It sounds cool at first: no high end hardware purchases, but that cost is just being moved to monthly subscriptions. Again, if I decided to discontinue their service, there's a chance I'd end up with no games OR hardware. Given that I'll need a computer regardless, I think I'll just stick with my archaic computer + disk setup until I hear more about the service.
I'd blame that on shoddy loans issued by investment bankers, while politicians are more or less in charge of covering up the mess. But your point still stands. Seriously, the amount of money lost on overpriced Oracle products is a drop in the bucket relative to everything else, and that money probably went towards paying engineers to actually do something.
Ya, that's the one I was thinking of. I was guessing that's what nintendo meant for its 3ds platform.
Ah, but that's just the thing, the GP proposed that the company gives up control when they or their copyright expire. Beyond that point, I don't expect them to maintain and develop that media. Nor do I expect them to hassle me about it. Their one benefit in distributing expired media, if they're not stupid-greedy, is that they have a wider selection of free content to attract the user and better control over its distribution. Besides, if the information is digital, and hosted over the internet, there's not a whole lot of extra effort or cost involved; just open up a link to the bits you want available and close it down when you're done. This is why unauthorized media distributors (I'm disinclined to call them pirates), thrive so well in that environment. Creating the product is expensive, but distribution is now relatively cheap.
I saw a brief demo of a ds using the accelerometer to simulate a 3d effect. If the ds was tipped left or right, the game scene would change to provide a different depth of field perspective. It was kinda weird and neat observing a 3d effect through a 2d trailer. (might be something on gametrailers.com or youtube.)
I think that depends on how the paper trail is implemented. The best way would be if the machine printed out a hard copy, which the voter reviewed and deposited a signed carbon copy in some recount box. Otherwise the machine could give the voter one paper copy, while maintaining another internally. And, if recounts were randomly checked, with verification from the voter, I'd have more confidence that the system worked.
I can't see how even having an audit trails makes the machine full proof. All you have to do is show the voter what they choose, and select store something else internally. Add in some noise, like correct votes, and the individual will never know he's been had. Kinda like slot machines, hope you randomly get the candidate you voted for.
Haven't they been punished enough for watching an Uwe Boll film?
it depends on how much money they're gambling with
and
Otherwise, aren't investors being stupidly irrational
go hand in hand. It's sort of like how people by lottery tickets even though the chances are astronomical that they won't win. Greed tends to make people stupid and irrational. Day traders move massive amounts of money based on the rapid input of consumption/news. This is one of the reasons google hasn't split but kept it's stock price at 400-500 and releases reports less frequently. They're trying to attract long-term investors rather than have their company directed by short term goals. Larger companies tend to not have this problem, as their sheer volume makes it hard to manipulate. If stockholders were force to make less frequent trades, the risk of losing a lot of money in the interim would go up, and they'd be more cautious about investing (hypothetically).
it's ultimately the shareholders who tacitly approve of the CEO/BoD because they just watch to see if their stock goes up every single quarter.
Day traders absolutely ruin this theory. People who try to milk money out of the system are responsible for some of the erratic shifts in the market. I sometimes wonder what would happen if traders were forced to own a stock for a week to a month before selling; would that stabilize the markets, as they'd need to look for less risky ventures?
In order to efficiently produce more researchers, we must get more females into the sciences. I advocate a 1:100 male:female ratio, which will revitalize our scientific population.
Just imagine using this laser to mess with your cat. It'll go nuts chasing the laser dot AND running away from the laser dot after it's fur is set on fire.
Note: I do not advocate the abuse of animals or the lighting of cats on fire. I just find that scenario incredibly funny.
Additional note: Sharks with friggen lasers don't sound so audacious any more.