TFA is not about cheating for profit, per se. It is about abusive behavior in MMOs for whatever reason.
To sum up:
There are lots of reasons people don't play by the rules in MMOs. Here's some examples of what people did in the past. Oh, there are a few major categories -- Duping, Pathfinding, Powerleveling, Griefing, Scripting/AFK, Hacking. And sometimes, some of these activities may even be condoned by a game.
Me too, on both counts. Especially since the expansion is a stand-alone. But, the nice thing about GW is that grinding is not as necessary... so I won't feel forced to stay up to 2 AM on a weeknight just to get something meaningless accomplished.
You can pay for Guildwars in just a couple months by canceling your WoW subscription. No subscription fees for GW.
No reason for regret, except you've then 'lost' all the time you spent grinding in WoW -- but, as I see it, that time's lost already (as I am personally painfully aware).
Where do you think the unit of measurement came from? I visited my brother at MIT in '88 or '89, when the bridge (and the Smootlines) had been rebuilt... I thought it was the best thing about MIT (I learned differently later). on the origin of the Smoot.
"The conflict arises because "consumers" want something for nothing and producers want more money than is reasonable for their products, beyond the mere expense of producing them."
Why should producers sell goods for equal or less than the cost of making them? If that were the case, they'd all stop producing and we'd be left with no content at all.
I understand what you're saying, but the problem is not that producers want to make money -- the conflict arises from the fact that consumers have a nearly free alternative supply, thus destroying the ability of the content producers to make money.
Conflicts about pricing, like the one you describe, are normally resolved through the market. Will everyone be happy with the result? No, but resolution exists. What's happened with the music industry is that market forces can no longer determine pricing, since black market supply is infinite (thus nearly free-as-in-beer). So the conflict arises from the fact that there is no profit for traditional producers, and therefore no incentive to remain in business -- unless they figure out a way to restrict the black market supply. Hence, DRM.
The end as I see it? A long, slow death for the RIAA companies as their business model falls apart, while they struggle to legislate a return of their profit-laden golden years. I strongly feel that it is immoral to download copyrighted material without paying a licensed distributor, unless it falls under fair use (like backup copies, or formats for my different players). But I'm fully aware that most people (or at least, most people on slashdot) don't feel the same way, and this will continue to destroy the traditional market for music.
In the end, we'll see less choice of top-notch studio-produced music, especially for music that can't support itself via live performance. However, we'll be able to get whatever's out there for free.
Sure I'm whipped. But one's gotta have pussy in order to be whipped -- so I don't mind so much:)
Seriously though, it's much more peaceful for me in my home since I've put all the wiring in the walls, all the electronics in cabinets (mostly built-ins I made), etc. My projects are in the basement, where the wife is not allowed (that just means she doesn't want to go down there at all).
How do you keep the HTPC cool if it's enclosed in an insulated wall? I vented mine with a grille near my ceiling, but even so, the flow rate is less than I'd like (and I'd prefer not to have a fan up there as well as on my case).
Since when was the impeachment discussion about anything other than the legal definition of it? Wasn't it about impeaching Bush? What other context COULD you have meant, when you're specifically talking about establishment of guilt?
Cases? That's the innovation this year?
on
The Year of the HTPC
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"This fervor for home theater PCs was evident all over the show, but it mainly manifested itself in computer cases."
You're kidding me, right? That's like people buying cars based on how cool looks like, or people buying gaming rigs based upon how their l33t ca53 pwns... oh wait. Never mind.
Seriously, though, I want my home theater PC to be invisible. A remote control and an IR receiver on the wall next to the screen. My wife heartily agrees (I think she's the one who convinced me) -- any electronics need to be in the cabinet or in the wall.
Please don't call Google a search engine. That's not what they are. They are an advertising placement company. At some point, they may also become more of an information broker.
The search engine is just their primary means of delivering ad content.
Did you read the entirety of my post? You know, the whole part about the difference between leader and commander of the armed forces?
"YOU are in charge of your REPRESENTATIVES.
Your LEADER in in charge of YOU.
No, a LEADER is not in charge. A leader leads. Please show me a normal definition of leader where it includes the right of command. A leader may also command, but that is extraneous to them being a leader.
I'll give you a lame analogy to compare:
A captain of a sports team is a leader of the players. But, that captain does not typically in charge of the other players.
A leader is often responsible to the people s/he leads, particularly when the leader is leader only by consensus.
"The usage is fine, even if you're not familiar with it."
No, the usage is not fine when you're talking about this specific action. Impeachment by the Congress defined very clearly, you can't substitute any old meaning in there when you're talking about a specific legal action.
"Certainly, I foresee a reduction in the amount of publications but for the most part, the price, ease and legacy of paper media is far too appealing. "
Exactly. There will, for a very very long time, always be a portion of the population who prefer print media. However, that market is shrinking.
In addition, the nature of publishing is changing. Magazines that depend upon subscribers for a large majority of their revenue are having trouble staying afloat -- people don't want to pay a lot for content they can get online. There are exceptions, of course, but even National Geographic is feeling the pinch. Magazines whose revenues are primarily from advertising are not experiencing as much of a problem, since their subscription prices are much lower.
I'm not sure there's a distinction in practice as much in theory for leaders vs. representatives.
Those who are elected to represent will be those that are already leaders. This has been true since the inception of the US.
Even in theory, the idea is that those elected to represent are those who can best convey the electorate's concerns/ideals/etc, which means that they are leaders of some form.
Also, I'm not sure if you're equating leader with commander. We don't elect the POTUS to lead the armed forces, we elect him/her to Command the forces, which is very different.
I understood your point -- that people have jumped to conclusions in re: legality of the wiretaps. The reason it seemed pretty clear that you misunderstood what impeachment is:
"I'm in favor of whatever the law deems appropriate. If that's impeachment, then fine, I don't want a criminal for a President."
Your dependent clause is that you don't want a criminal for a President. You're equating impeachment with criminality, which are not nearly the same thing.
If there is a serious question of legality, then I think impeachment is necessary -- whether or not the POTUS is a criminal.
Slashdot Mirror
"Sorry to nitpick, but that's actually $99 million."
It's $100 million for extremely large values of $99.
I didn't got to MIT, just visited a few times when I was in grade school/high school. Don't remember much except the Coop and Smoots.
TFA is not about cheating for profit, per se. It is about abusive behavior in MMOs for whatever reason.
To sum up:
There are lots of reasons people don't play by the rules in MMOs. Here's some examples of what people did in the past. Oh, there are a few major categories -- Duping, Pathfinding, Powerleveling, Griefing, Scripting/AFK, Hacking. And sometimes, some of these activities may even be condoned by a game.
"Additionally, DJs do not need to pay the liscence if they are playing from CD or vinyl."
That's because there is a surcharge on blank media to cover this, should they be playing from a copied CD.
Me too, on both counts. Especially since the expansion is a stand-alone. But, the nice thing about GW is that grinding is not as necessary... so I won't feel forced to stay up to 2 AM on a weeknight just to get something meaningless accomplished.
You can pay for Guildwars in just a couple months by canceling your WoW subscription. No subscription fees for GW.
No reason for regret, except you've then 'lost' all the time you spent grinding in WoW -- but, as I see it, that time's lost already (as I am personally painfully aware).
Where do you think the unit of measurement came from? I visited my brother at MIT in '88 or '89, when the bridge (and the Smootlines) had been rebuilt... I thought it was the best thing about MIT (I learned differently later). on the origin of the Smoot.
"The conflict arises because "consumers" want something for nothing and producers want more money than is reasonable for their products, beyond the mere expense of producing them."
Why should producers sell goods for equal or less than the cost of making them? If that were the case, they'd all stop producing and we'd be left with no content at all.
I understand what you're saying, but the problem is not that producers want to make money -- the conflict arises from the fact that consumers have a nearly free alternative supply, thus destroying the ability of the content producers to make money.
Conflicts about pricing, like the one you describe, are normally resolved through the market. Will everyone be happy with the result? No, but resolution exists. What's happened with the music industry is that market forces can no longer determine pricing, since black market supply is infinite (thus nearly free-as-in-beer). So the conflict arises from the fact that there is no profit for traditional producers, and therefore no incentive to remain in business -- unless they figure out a way to restrict the black market supply. Hence, DRM.
The end as I see it? A long, slow death for the RIAA companies as their business model falls apart, while they struggle to legislate a return of their profit-laden golden years. I strongly feel that it is immoral to download copyrighted material without paying a licensed distributor, unless it falls under fair use (like backup copies, or formats for my different players). But I'm fully aware that most people (or at least, most people on slashdot) don't feel the same way, and this will continue to destroy the traditional market for music.
In the end, we'll see less choice of top-notch studio-produced music, especially for music that can't support itself via live performance. However, we'll be able to get whatever's out there for free.
That building in the background is the funny part. That's not a prop, unbelievably.
SFW GIS "The Gherkin".
Actual building in London.
Awesome. Now it all becomes clear.
GIS (safesearch on) "the gherkin"
Dang, that's a great ad.
"I am aware the power supplies use Transformers? Why are these used?"
Because Morgan meets T-I. Decepticons and all that.
Ahh, "Sold to America," got it, then.
" I really couldn't see how the ad on the BBC webpage was that hilarious"
FTA: "Doctor Who returns to BBC ONE in the Spring, and comes to the SCI FI Channel in the US from March. " (emphasis mine)
From March. Get it now? Me neither, I think that's normal usage in Britain. Unless they meant March = Mars. In which case it's still not hi-larious.
Then I thought the phallus behind the girl was the joke. Or the phallus in front of the girl. Or just phalluses in general.
Sure I'm whipped. But one's gotta have pussy in order to be whipped -- so I don't mind so much :)
Seriously though, it's much more peaceful for me in my home since I've put all the wiring in the walls, all the electronics in cabinets (mostly built-ins I made), etc. My projects are in the basement, where the wife is not allowed (that just means she doesn't want to go down there at all).
How do you keep the HTPC cool if it's enclosed in an insulated wall? I vented mine with a grille near my ceiling, but even so, the flow rate is less than I'd like (and I'd prefer not to have a fan up there as well as on my case).
Thanks :)
Since when was the impeachment discussion about anything other than the legal definition of it? Wasn't it about impeaching Bush? What other context COULD you have meant, when you're specifically talking about establishment of guilt?
"This fervor for home theater PCs was evident all over the show, but it mainly manifested itself in computer cases."
You're kidding me, right? That's like people buying cars based on how cool looks like, or people buying gaming rigs based upon how their l33t ca53 pwns... oh wait. Never mind.
Seriously, though, I want my home theater PC to be invisible. A remote control and an IR receiver on the wall next to the screen. My wife heartily agrees (I think she's the one who convinced me) -- any electronics need to be in the cabinet or in the wall.
Please don't call Google a search engine. That's not what they are. They are an advertising placement company. At some point, they may also become more of an information broker.
The search engine is just their primary means of delivering ad content.
Did you read the entirety of my post? You know, the whole part about the difference between leader and commander of the armed forces?
"YOU are in charge of your REPRESENTATIVES.
Your LEADER in in charge of YOU.
No, a LEADER is not in charge. A leader leads. Please show me a normal definition of leader where it includes the right of command. A leader may also command, but that is extraneous to them being a leader.
I'll give you a lame analogy to compare:
A captain of a sports team is a leader of the players. But, that captain does not typically in charge of the other players.
A leader is often responsible to the people s/he leads, particularly when the leader is leader only by consensus.
"The usage is fine, even if you're not familiar with it."
No, the usage is not fine when you're talking about this specific action. Impeachment by the Congress defined very clearly, you can't substitute any old meaning in there when you're talking about a specific legal action.
"Certainly, I foresee a reduction in the amount of publications but for the most part, the price, ease and legacy of paper media is far too appealing. "
Exactly. There will, for a very very long time, always be a portion of the population who prefer print media. However, that market is shrinking.
In addition, the nature of publishing is changing. Magazines that depend upon subscribers for a large majority of their revenue are having trouble staying afloat -- people don't want to pay a lot for content they can get online. There are exceptions, of course, but even National Geographic is feeling the pinch. Magazines whose revenues are primarily from advertising are not experiencing as much of a problem, since their subscription prices are much lower.
Disclaimer: I work in publishing.
I'm not sure there's a distinction in practice as much in theory for leaders vs. representatives.
Those who are elected to represent will be those that are already leaders. This has been true since the inception of the US.
Even in theory, the idea is that those elected to represent are those who can best convey the electorate's concerns/ideals/etc, which means that they are leaders of some form.
Also, I'm not sure if you're equating leader with commander. We don't elect the POTUS to lead the armed forces, we elect him/her to Command the forces, which is very different.
I agree, as in my OP on the thread...
But the criteria suggested by Dada21 preclude poor people from having kids.
I understood your point -- that people have jumped to conclusions in re: legality of the wiretaps. The reason it seemed pretty clear that you misunderstood what impeachment is:
"I'm in favor of whatever the law deems appropriate. If that's impeachment, then fine, I don't want a criminal for a President."
Your dependent clause is that you don't want a criminal for a President. You're equating impeachment with criminality, which are not nearly the same thing.
If there is a serious question of legality, then I think impeachment is necessary -- whether or not the POTUS is a criminal.