...but it ought to be said: anonymous charity doesn't set an example, and greater overall good is achieved by encouraging others to contribute. Do you really think humility is more important than helping more children? Is helping people wrong if you benefit as well?
Now I'm not intimately familiar with Gabe and Tycho's financial situations, but this I do know: they're comfortable enough to throw down $10,000 to embarrass Jack Thompson. That may have been all their givin'-away money for the year, but let's assume it isn't, and in fact, they have $100,000 squirreled away to donate anonymously. Good deal for those kids, huh?
Except during their first year, Child's Play pulled over $110,000 and it was hardly organized at that point. I'm having trouble coming up with a concrete total for their second year, but anybody who follows the strip/newsposts can confirm they did a hell of a lot better than the first run, and they generated a lot more money than they could have donated on their own. Kobe Bryant might be able to personally compete with their totals, but comic strip artists don't make quite as much money as so-called sports heroes... who I suppose are doing all their charitable work on the down-low (or on the wrong end of a community service sentence).
...if it, you know, worked better. iTunes under XP won't export videos to the iPod, just hangs... I guess it works for a lot of people, but there's a number of people complaining in the support forums. Fortunately I only care about one video, Wave Twisters...
That game was fun, but it was full of Serious Control Issues. Besides the fun speeds problem you mention, it paid attention to minor traffic violations. The speed limits really got in the way. You'd have to drive across the map and spend half of it tapping the throttle every couple seconds to keep under a 15mph limit.
Might be worth noting that I played it all the way through, too, though. I liked it a lot, overall.
Is it their bread and butter to make their own lives as difficult as possible?
In a way, it is. They hardly have to advertise their games, because some Bible-thumpin' bloke who knows what's best for everybody will get the word out for them. The trouble they get from these people is probably greatly outweighed by the benefit of the extra press. (They say any press is good press.)
Besides, it's their trademark or brand recognition or whatever. The same way you can look at animation and say "gratuitous musical numbers? big eyes? not japanese? must be Disney!" you can look at Bully and say "Rockstar's at it again." They push the "moral majority's" buttons and sell to the people who enjoy seeing those buttons pushed.
Totally. Shoplifting from Radio Shack as a kid started me on the slippery slope towards total nerdosity, and while my ethics have improved, I still find myself a little giddy in the midst of all those wires and components.
There are good and bad applications for a gun: you can rob people, you can defend people from robbery. What about censorship software? Can anybody come up with a hypothetical situation where it benefits the oh-so-slippery "common good?"
For all y'all who want to make a gun comparison, here's mine: it would be like David Duke going to Smith and Wesson and saying "I need to put down some darkies and your garden-variety black market assault rifle just won't cut it. Can you make me something more powerful?"
The seller in this case--as in the software case--knows the tool is going to be used badly.
The gun manufacturer has a veil of plausable deniability: they "don't know" where their weapons are going or how they're going to be used. Once you start selling directly to the oppressors, or start selling something with only oppressive applications, you're collaborating.
I think I speak for all of/. when I say this: I will never give up my God-given right to burn copies of all the albums I download off bittorrent, as clearly defined in the "fair use" clause of the Constitution, page 2 line 8. Furthermore I will not be co-erced by invasive advertising into giving up my hard-earned money to anybody but the package store and nakkidnerds.com.
...or rather the folks I live with do, so technically I have every right to watch HBO or tivo it for later viewing. (I actually used BeyondTV, before it was BeyondTV. Highly recommend it.) Downloading the episodes makes more sense to me than setting up a recording--less fuss, better quality than the.wmas I used to save and watch.
If I didn't have HBO, I'd download the programs anyway.
I'm going to buy Bully the day it comes out, and pick up Manhunt(er?) next time I'm at the store. I'm giving serious thought to picking up an AO copy of San Andreas just for posterity and to boost their stats.
For every jerk out there protesting, somebody ought to pick up an extra Rockstar game and show those fools what gamers are made of. We have expendable income! We're jaded and materialistic! We want the old ultraviolence and we want it now!
Slashdot Mirror
...but it ought to be said: anonymous charity doesn't set an example, and greater overall good is achieved by encouraging others to contribute. Do you really think humility is more important than helping more children? Is helping people wrong if you benefit as well?
... who I suppose are doing all their charitable work on the down-low (or on the wrong end of a community service sentence).
Now I'm not intimately familiar with Gabe and Tycho's financial situations, but this I do know: they're comfortable enough to throw down $10,000 to embarrass Jack Thompson. That may have been all their givin'-away money for the year, but let's assume it isn't, and in fact, they have $100,000 squirreled away to donate anonymously. Good deal for those kids, huh?
Except during their first year, Child's Play pulled over $110,000 and it was hardly organized at that point. I'm having trouble coming up with a concrete total for their second year, but anybody who follows the strip/newsposts can confirm they did a hell of a lot better than the first run, and they generated a lot more money than they could have donated on their own. Kobe Bryant might be able to personally compete with their totals, but comic strip artists don't make quite as much money as so-called sports heroes
but Vulture's Eye/Claw? I'm familiar with a number of spin-offs (prefer vanilla 3.4.3 so far), but not that one.
Actually, I'm not totally dumb: I went to google and here is a link for anybody else who's curious.
Yeah, I guess I should have known. The one video that did transfer looks beautiful, though!
...if it, you know, worked better. iTunes under XP won't export videos to the iPod, just hangs ... I guess it works for a lot of people, but there's a number of people complaining in the support forums. Fortunately I only care about one video, Wave Twisters ...
Not offtopic, funny... whether or not it's intentional, really.
...but at least it will have a great score.
Give me episodes of get Smart and I'll sign up.
That game was fun, but it was full of Serious Control Issues. Besides the fun speeds problem you mention, it paid attention to minor traffic violations. The speed limits really got in the way. You'd have to drive across the map and spend half of it tapping the throttle every couple seconds to keep under a 15mph limit.
Might be worth noting that I played it all the way through, too, though. I liked it a lot, overall.
I had a 1200 baud modem. I'm more old-school. ;)
I could have sworn I hit preview.
Is it their bread and butter to make their own lives as difficult as possible? In a way, it is. They hardly have to advertise their games, because some Bible-thumpin' bloke who knows what's best for everybody will get the word out for them. The trouble they get from these people is probably greatly outweighed by the benefit of the extra press. (They say any press is good press.) Besides, it's their trademark or brand recognition or whatever. The same way you can look at animation and say "gratuitous musical numbers? big eyes? not japanese? must be Disney!" you can look at Bully and say "Rockstar's at it again." They push the "moral majority's" buttons and sell to the people who enjoy seeing those buttons pushed.
Personality goes a long way, but that'd better be some charming mother-lovin' contaminated water.
He might be a foreigner.
...the RIAA has finally managed to lock up all malicious computer users. It's about time!
...it shows an "update" icon, which updates when clicked. How much easier could it be without hijacking your system to do it for you?
Totally. Shoplifting from Radio Shack as a kid started me on the slippery slope towards total nerdosity, and while my ethics have improved, I still find myself a little giddy in the midst of all those wires and components.
Not needed to do it... just to enhance it.
In Redmond, the windows are all frosted so you can't see inside, and closed but unlocked.
There are good and bad applications for a gun: you can rob people, you can defend people from robbery. What about censorship software? Can anybody come up with a hypothetical situation where it benefits the oh-so-slippery "common good?"
For all y'all who want to make a gun comparison, here's mine: it would be like David Duke going to Smith and Wesson and saying "I need to put down some darkies and your garden-variety black market assault rifle just won't cut it. Can you make me something more powerful?"
The seller in this case--as in the software case--knows the tool is going to be used badly.
The gun manufacturer has a veil of plausable deniability: they "don't know" where their weapons are going or how they're going to be used. Once you start selling directly to the oppressors, or start selling something with only oppressive applications, you're collaborating.
I think I speak for all of /. when I say this: I will never give up my God-given right to burn copies of all the albums I download off bittorrent, as clearly defined in the "fair use" clause of the Constitution, page 2 line 8. Furthermore I will not be co-erced by invasive advertising into giving up my hard-earned money to anybody but the package store and nakkidnerds.com.
Everybody knows you have to kill the head coder; otherwise you're only dealing with symptoms.
...or rather the folks I live with do, so technically I have every right to watch HBO or tivo it for later viewing. (I actually used BeyondTV, before it was BeyondTV. Highly recommend it.) Downloading the episodes makes more sense to me than setting up a recording--less fuss, better quality than the .wmas I used to save and watch.
If I didn't have HBO, I'd download the programs anyway.
We're dealing with a very clever cybersquatter. Not just your ordinary cybersquatter. He's getting all psychological on the poor guy.
The camera stick also does the "special controls," which control dancing, hot coffee, etc. I still find it easier to use the keyboard for that though.
I'm going to buy Bully the day it comes out, and pick up Manhunt(er?) next time I'm at the store. I'm giving serious thought to picking up an AO copy of San Andreas just for posterity and to boost their stats.
For every jerk out there protesting, somebody ought to pick up an extra Rockstar game and show those fools what gamers are made of. We have expendable income! We're jaded and materialistic! We want the old ultraviolence and we want it now!