Re:The only way to fight the DMCA
on
Death By DMCA
·
· Score: 1
My point is I don't think there are any. And I also don't think that any candidates we could find would have a snowballs chance in hell of beating anyone with the kind of funding the **AA would throw behind anyone supporting their goals.
Re:The only way to fight the DMCA
on
Death By DMCA
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
It always amazes me when people think voting will change anything. You honestly think exactly the same think won't happen? All you vote will do will let you chose who passes these things for the **AA.
I wonder how they come up with conclusions like that. Do they actually poll people in prison who have committed the crimes? Or do they hear about content in a popular media they don't understand and blame that? Rise in game popularity, and rise in sexual assault, they must be linked... Except, gaming is still really a minority when it comes to media. If it were me, I'd be looking at the music industry and tv. There's certainly been a rise in the amount of barely clothed teenage girls girating on every "music" video they play and advertise in an almost subliminal brainwashing way. Oh, but wait, it can't be them, cause they buy the laws...
There are a number of reasons why it typically doesn't work. For a start, games are normally a hell of a lot longer than a film. Yes, Advent Children is damn good, but I'd wager that anyone that played the game was left feeling the film was over far too quickly. You just can squeeze that amount of information into a mere one and a half hours. Point the second, everyone plays games as themselves. My JC Denton from Deus Ex would be different from everyone elses. I play Master Chief as a sniper, you might play him as a rocket wielding tank. Point three, the writers are trying to sell MOVIES, not games. I think fans of a game get a little miffed when the films deviate from the games universe, was it a virus or diease instead of hell in doom the movie for example? I think films need to be truer to the games, and definitely add nods to the gameplay. Like the ring tone gag in Advent Children.
I could not agree more. I've spoken to so many people who want to get into it because they enjoy playing games, or think they have a good idea for a game. I normally advise them to try and make a demo themselves. You see the same kind of thing on any gamedev website, post after post of people looking to put together a team of programmers and artists for their game.
I managed to get a job in the game industry two months ago after leaving uni last year. I did it because I love PROGRAMMING. Game related fields, graphics and ai for example, just happen to be the areas I'm most interested in. Most people I know that like games would hate it.
Oh come on, I think it's likely that humans have killed more humans in wars this century than any other. The best among us get better, the worse get more efficient it seems.
"seems to me that we only see 'complete' species in the world today"
Hmm, arrogance. Tell me, how could you tell how a specie is complete without having seen an end point? How can you tell the difference between a 'complete' animal and an 'incomplete' one?
"It's quite amazing really how texts written thousands of years ago could still apply so readily to the world today"
I'd be willing to put money on the fact that there are many, many examples of how these same texts do not apply readily at all to the world today.
Why does it always seem to be creationism vs evolution? I don't believe in god myself, but isn't it possible to believe that god created evolution? Creating something dynamic like that would be far more impressive to me at least. The only reason I can think of is ego really, that people don't like to think they came from "lower" life?
I've had similar thoughts to this, but going off in a different direction.
I think if white people celebrated their culture or whatever in the west they'd be accused of being racist. And really, I don't need to think about it, because I've seen and heard about it. You get all kinds of ridiculous stories here in the uk (the only ones I know of are from london because thats where I know people), my favourite example having a white londoner hanging an english flag during whatever sporting event it is in which england plays football, and having complaints about it being racist from the city council. I believe the complaints originated from local muslims. Absurd really.
Then again, I find the whole idea quite absurd. I don't understand how you can be proud of yourself for being white/black/muslim/jewish/american/english/gay/str aight. These are things you typically have no control over. You did nothing to accomplish them. People should take pride more in what they do rather than what they are.
Having never played the game I might have gotten this completely wrong, but is gold farming done by going to a location where you know a certain type of creature/item spawns, waiting for it to spawn then harvesting/killing it and then selling for profit? The thought occurs that breaking the links between items and monsters and locations would cripple the gold farmers somewhat.
A better solution would be to allow offline play. Give the player the option to log off while leaving the charactor to continue in a gold making task which continues at he same diminishing rate as on a server, only without actually diminishing the resources on the server.
I've not liked any mmorpg I've played. I don't like the feeling that I'm competing against people I can't ever catch up with, I don't like the feeling that at any time another player who has been playing for ages can come along and effortlessly kill me/clean the area of resources/drive up the prices etc. I don't like having to repetitively perform the same task over and over to gain experience. It doesn't make for satisfying games for me.
I think the real problem is that people are ignoring the RP in MMORPG. Everyone in the game is trying to do the same thing really. If you are playing a game, I think it's safe to say that most people would want to be the hero, I know I would. Being the hero means probably having the toughest most damaging player, which needs items which players are going to get however they can. So really you just have to design a game around those desires.
How about a mmorpg in which the player individually has no experience or items, but players together gain experience collectively as part of an army? Imagine for example players being part of an army sent to attack a city. You could have them travelling over land having to using skills say gather food for the army or create weapons etc but the group gaining the experience. Think of it as players teaching each other. When it comes to fighting, all players are evenly matched except for weapon quality or tactics etc. You see where I'm going with this, the idea is to remove the grinding and reason for buying gold in the first place.
I always imagined there'd be a like the visual equivalent of a sonic boom when travelling at light speed. A big white flash of light of all those photons.
It is SO hard in this world today for a person to not be polarized towards one side of a debate or another. You can't take the middle road or even just plain not have an opinion.
Sounds like teaching or at least exposing kids to more than one view point is a good idea.
I can't quite see why it has to be one view or the other, is there any real reason why a creator couldn't create self modifying life forms? Seems like the move of a smart and possibly lazy deity to me.
I personally don't buy the intelligent design argument. Always feels like a bit of a cop out to me, like people these people are willing to accept science only while it tells them something they like. Evolution lowers our importance in their eyes, so they ignore it. It's ego I think. Evolution is the best we have IMHO, but I definitely think there's something about the process we are missing.
As for public schools in the UK teaching it, I think it's wrong to have religious material forcably taught. Not that kids in our public schools would actually learn it, they piss around in class too much for that.
In my view, best interest of the country includes best interests of all the entities in it, so not just people, but also corporations/business/government etc. Picking a rather extreme example, the best interest for the country might be to force all citizens to buy only American produced goods, as it would boost the ecomony (I have no idea if that is true, its just an example) but this wouldn't be in the best interests of the people, who would get less freedom in their purchases.
You are right, there is no real way of summing the best interests, the best way we have is to go with the majority.
If we don't know his actual objectives, which I think is a pretty fucking heinous crime for the leader of a democratic country, all we can judge him on is the job description and what he promised. I believe he's failed on both counts there. Politicians are supposed to work for the people they represent.
I assume he took some kind of oath when he took office to uphold the constitution and protect civil liberties and the american people and their way of life or whatever it is you have there, and it is that that people would like to hold him to, rather than any personal agenda, or the agenda of one of his cronies, had. Basically I think he failed the American people.
And history is never objective. There is always some kind of bias involved, be it the historian or his sources.
Defended the country from its enemies? If by that you mean he invaded a country and seized all of those imaginary WMDs and failed to capture the man responsible for the terrorist attacks he keeps trampling all over your freedoms for, then yes, I say bravo, he is totally not a failure.
My only real experience of cheating comes from a group project for an e-commerce course I had to do at uni. We were in groups of three, and one of our group was not the best student in the world. The assignment was fairly simple really, designing and building a website ala dabs or amazon obviously on a smaller scale. We split up the workload and got to it. The guy who will turn out to be the cheater is enthusiastic about learning how to build a site like this, he explains that it is the reason he is doing the course in the first place, he wants to make money by selling something online. A week or so later, after missing or being late to almost all the group meetings, our cheater turns up with a complete site borrowed from his friend. He wants to change the text and pictures and colours on the site and submit it. I nod and then continue working on our own one. Cut to the end of the course, where all the groups have to give a presentation about their site, how it works and how they made it. My collegue and I who actually did work prepared a nice presentation and are all ready to go, under the assumption that our cheating friend hasn't turned up for anything else so probably won't for this either. Only he does, and insists on being part of the presentation (we got marks for that too ~15% of the overall marks I think). We grudgingly allow him to take part. I don't think I've ever enjoyed another persons misery quite like that before, watching him up there in front of a class full of people when he doesn't know what he is going to have to explain, or how to explain it. At the end of the day, I passed and he didn't.
My uni was very strict on plagurism. If you got caught I think they just kicked you out. Every course started with an introductory lecture and everyone of them detailed the plagurism policy.
In my mind, a geek is someone who plays with technology (exluding gaming console and the like). Someone who given a gadget can figure out what it does and how it works and have fun in the process. Basically, if you need the manual, you're not a geek.
Now nerd, that is someone who argues about linux vs windows and the like.
Thats funny, I was always under the impression that the US got into world war 2 after they were attacked, a few years after it started... My history has always been shakey though.
Slashdot Mirror
My point is I don't think there are any. And I also don't think that any candidates we could find would have a snowballs chance in hell of beating anyone with the kind of funding the **AA would throw behind anyone supporting their goals.
It always amazes me when people think voting will change anything. You honestly think exactly the same think won't happen? All you vote will do will let you chose who passes these things for the **AA.
I wonder how they come up with conclusions like that. Do they actually poll people in prison who have committed the crimes? Or do they hear about content in a popular media they don't understand and blame that? Rise in game popularity, and rise in sexual assault, they must be linked... Except, gaming is still really a minority when it comes to media. If it were me, I'd be looking at the music industry and tv. There's certainly been a rise in the amount of barely clothed teenage girls girating on every "music" video they play and advertise in an almost subliminal brainwashing way. Oh, but wait, it can't be them, cause they buy the laws...
I think all books should be rated mature too. Do you realise what kind of filth you can make with the letters in any of them?
There are a number of reasons why it typically doesn't work. For a start, games are normally a hell of a lot longer than a film. Yes, Advent Children is damn good, but I'd wager that anyone that played the game was left feeling the film was over far too quickly. You just can squeeze that amount of information into a mere one and a half hours. Point the second, everyone plays games as themselves. My JC Denton from Deus Ex would be different from everyone elses. I play Master Chief as a sniper, you might play him as a rocket wielding tank. Point three, the writers are trying to sell MOVIES, not games. I think fans of a game get a little miffed when the films deviate from the games universe, was it a virus or diease instead of hell in doom the movie for example? I think films need to be truer to the games, and definitely add nods to the gameplay. Like the ring tone gag in Advent Children.
I could not agree more. I've spoken to so many people who want to get into it because they enjoy playing games, or think they have a good idea for a game. I normally advise them to try and make a demo themselves. You see the same kind of thing on any gamedev website, post after post of people looking to put together a team of programmers and artists for their game.
I managed to get a job in the game industry two months ago after leaving uni last year. I did it because I love PROGRAMMING. Game related fields, graphics and ai for example, just happen to be the areas I'm most interested in. Most people I know that like games would hate it.
Oh come on, I think it's likely that humans have killed more humans in wars this century than any other. The best among us get better, the worse get more efficient it seems.
"seems to me that we only see 'complete' species in the world today"
Hmm, arrogance. Tell me, how could you tell how a specie is complete without having seen an end point? How can you tell the difference between a 'complete' animal and an 'incomplete' one?
"It's quite amazing really how texts written thousands of years ago could still apply so readily to the world today"
I'd be willing to put money on the fact that there are many, many examples of how these same texts do not apply readily at all to the world today.
Why does it always seem to be creationism vs evolution? I don't believe in god myself, but isn't it possible to believe that god created evolution? Creating something dynamic like that would be far more impressive to me at least. The only reason I can think of is ego really, that people don't like to think they came from "lower" life?
That just implied every minority is special over the majority.
I've had similar thoughts to this, but going off in a different direction.
r aight. These are things you typically have no control over. You did nothing to accomplish them. People should take pride more in what they do rather than what they are.
I think if white people celebrated their culture or whatever in the west they'd be accused of being racist. And really, I don't need to think about it, because I've seen and heard about it. You get all kinds of ridiculous stories here in the uk (the only ones I know of are from london because thats where I know people), my favourite example having a white londoner hanging an english flag during whatever sporting event it is in which england plays football, and having complaints about it being racist from the city council. I believe the complaints originated from local muslims. Absurd really.
Then again, I find the whole idea quite absurd. I don't understand how you can be proud of yourself for being white/black/muslim/jewish/american/english/gay/st
Having never played the game I might have gotten this completely wrong, but is gold farming done by going to a location where you know a certain type of creature/item spawns, waiting for it to spawn then harvesting/killing it and then selling for profit? The thought occurs that breaking the links between items and monsters and locations would cripple the gold farmers somewhat.
A better solution would be to allow offline play. Give the player the option to log off while leaving the charactor to continue in a gold making task which continues at he same diminishing rate as on a server, only without actually diminishing the resources on the server.
I've not liked any mmorpg I've played. I don't like the feeling that I'm competing against people I can't ever catch up with, I don't like the feeling that at any time another player who has been playing for ages can come along and effortlessly kill me/clean the area of resources/drive up the prices etc. I don't like having to repetitively perform the same task over and over to gain experience. It doesn't make for satisfying games for me.
I think the real problem is that people are ignoring the RP in MMORPG. Everyone in the game is trying to do the same thing really. If you are playing a game, I think it's safe to say that most people would want to be the hero, I know I would. Being the hero means probably having the toughest most damaging player, which needs items which players are going to get however they can. So really you just have to design a game around those desires.
How about a mmorpg in which the player individually has no experience or items, but players together gain experience collectively as part of an army? Imagine for example players being part of an army sent to attack a city. You could have them travelling over land having to using skills say gather food for the army or create weapons etc but the group gaining the experience. Think of it as players teaching each other. When it comes to fighting, all players are evenly matched except for weapon quality or tactics etc. You see where I'm going with this, the idea is to remove the grinding and reason for buying gold in the first place.
I always imagined there'd be a like the visual equivalent of a sonic boom when travelling at light speed. A big white flash of light of all those photons.
It is SO hard in this world today for a person to not be polarized towards one side of a debate or another. You can't take the middle road or even just plain not have an opinion.
Sounds like teaching or at least exposing kids to more than one view point is a good idea.
I can't quite see why it has to be one view or the other, is there any real reason why a creator couldn't create self modifying life forms? Seems like the move of a smart and possibly lazy deity to me.
I personally don't buy the intelligent design argument. Always feels like a bit of a cop out to me, like people these people are willing to accept science only while it tells them something they like. Evolution lowers our importance in their eyes, so they ignore it. It's ego I think. Evolution is the best we have IMHO, but I definitely think there's something about the process we are missing.
As for public schools in the UK teaching it, I think it's wrong to have religious material forcably taught. Not that kids in our public schools would actually learn it, they piss around in class too much for that.
In my view, best interest of the country includes best interests of all the entities in it, so not just people, but also corporations/business/government etc. Picking a rather extreme example, the best interest for the country might be to force all citizens to buy only American produced goods, as it would boost the ecomony (I have no idea if that is true, its just an example) but this wouldn't be in the best interests of the people, who would get less freedom in their purchases.
You are right, there is no real way of summing the best interests, the best way we have is to go with the majority.
Best interests of the country != best interests of the people.
If we don't know his actual objectives, which I think is a pretty fucking heinous crime for the leader of a democratic country, all we can judge him on is the job description and what he promised. I believe he's failed on both counts there. Politicians are supposed to work for the people they represent.
I assume he took some kind of oath when he took office to uphold the constitution and protect civil liberties and the american people and their way of life or whatever it is you have there, and it is that that people would like to hold him to, rather than any personal agenda, or the agenda of one of his cronies, had. Basically I think he failed the American people.
And history is never objective. There is always some kind of bias involved, be it the historian or his sources.
Defended the country from its enemies? If by that you mean he invaded a country and seized all of those imaginary WMDs and failed to capture the man responsible for the terrorist attacks he keeps trampling all over your freedoms for, then yes, I say bravo, he is totally not a failure.
My only real experience of cheating comes from a group project for an e-commerce course I had to do at uni. We were in groups of three, and one of our group was not the best student in the world. The assignment was fairly simple really, designing and building a website ala dabs or amazon obviously on a smaller scale. We split up the workload and got to it. The guy who will turn out to be the cheater is enthusiastic about learning how to build a site like this, he explains that it is the reason he is doing the course in the first place, he wants to make money by selling something online. A week or so later, after missing or being late to almost all the group meetings, our cheater turns up with a complete site borrowed from his friend. He wants to change the text and pictures and colours on the site and submit it. I nod and then continue working on our own one. Cut to the end of the course, where all the groups have to give a presentation about their site, how it works and how they made it. My collegue and I who actually did work prepared a nice presentation and are all ready to go, under the assumption that our cheating friend hasn't turned up for anything else so probably won't for this either. Only he does, and insists on being part of the presentation (we got marks for that too ~15% of the overall marks I think). We grudgingly allow him to take part. I don't think I've ever enjoyed another persons misery quite like that before, watching him up there in front of a class full of people when he doesn't know what he is going to have to explain, or how to explain it. At the end of the day, I passed and he didn't.
My uni was very strict on plagurism. If you got caught I think they just kicked you out. Every course started with an introductory lecture and everyone of them detailed the plagurism policy.
In my mind, a geek is someone who plays with technology (exluding gaming console and the like). Someone who given a gadget can figure out what it does and how it works and have fun in the process. Basically, if you need the manual, you're not a geek.
Now nerd, that is someone who argues about linux vs windows and the like.
Thats funny, I was always under the impression that the US got into world war 2 after they were attacked, a few years after it started... My history has always been shakey though.
The question is, will the RIAA:
a) kill the project?
b) use the project as an excuse to buy laws forcing users to be responsible for their machines?
I positively encourage you to steal my idea. Just make sure you post the link sometime.