Not only that, but all (3) of the demo videos look like they take place at the high-school track or in the developer's front yard.
In addition, this thing will have to fly pretty high to not be heard by the targets, meaning it'll be all over radar.
Now suppose a musician, a producer, a team of sound engineers, cover artists, a couple talent scouts, and the management to put them all together each contribute a little bit towards a great new album they expect you to pay for, but then you go and download it for free with LimeWire. How is that not theft, too?
Well, now, I'm not involved in the recording industry, but I'm assuming that these individuals do not wait for their albums to be bought before they get paid... The engineers and musicians and everyone else involved get paid upfront/during the production, either by advances or regular weekly/biweekly/monthly paychecks, right? They're already compensated. Album sales profits go back to the distributors and the record company, and if any is left over, back to the artists.
It depends on your business model, really. If you're using album sales to make profits, as a record company, then yeah you could construe this as theft. If you're producing albums and distributing them for free to get people into your concerts and get the bands endorsement deals and whatnot that you can take a cut of later, it's sound business practice.
Personally I'm tired of corporations suing people when they're business model all of the sudden, due to technology or societal factors, becomes obsolete. You can't force people to go back to the old way of doing things so you can make more money. You can sue for a while, but it gets expensive. You lose money on record sales dropping off, you change the way you make money.
Can I ask, unrelatedly, about your feelings toward the term "identity theft"?
Not directed to me, but I'm answering anyway:) I abhor it. Because you're not copying the identity to a completely new and separate one. You now have two people using the same identity, one of which is doing bad things to it. You're damaging something I still have in my possession and you will get kicked in the junk.
My knee-jerk reaction was that once I've paid the $50 for a game, that's it. I've already made my contribution to the publisher's revenue stream. I am not a recurring revenue resource, and I resent being treated as one. I decided based solely on the inclusion of Massive streaming ad support not to purchase SWAT 4, even though SWAT 3 is one of my all-time favorite games.
Here-here. I noticed the ads in Splinter Cell Chaos Theory, but figured they were built-in (i think the single-player version they are; they appear to all be Sci-Fi and TLC channel ads), and was a little incensed.
It's one thing to make a relatively unobtrusive ad in your game to offset costs for the consumer, for instance making a $75 video game available for $50 because of ad revenue, but my jaded nature leads me to believe that Ubisoft is selling a $50 game for $50 and keeping the add revenue for themselves.
What really gets me is that I noticed new traffic from my machine on the firewall logs pulling from ads.madserver.net, even when I wasn't playing. First, I thought "spyware," but in a matter of 30 seconds I linked madserver.net to Massive's website and got the full story. I didn't see it documented anywhere in anything that came with the game, and for that I'm a little peeved.
Yes, apparently the majority of us Americans have problems with the human body and reproductive functions. To paraphrase something funny I heard on TV somewhere, "...teaching children that the cycle of life is a beautiful thing, and that YOUR GENITALS ARE IN NO WAY INVOLVED WITH IT!"
What else could you expect from a country settled by people who left their old country because church wasn't strict enough?[1][2]
[1] I'm American, and enjoy it. Things are slowly loosening up (you can show pregnant women on TV now!)
[2] Yes, I know that's not EXACTLY why they left, but it makes my point.
Yes. Why do you need them? Either because your TCP stack has a bug, which given how simple they are means you would have been able to get a better one if you had any sense, or because you're running unnecessary services, which means either you're an idiot who turned on a bunch of unnecessary services, or you bought an OS that ships with a bunch of unnecessary services on, in which case you're an idiot for buying it.
I read this as, "if you don't know what you're doing, you shouldn't be on the internet, and when that is the case, firewall and NAT technology is unnecessary." Feel free to correct me if I misunderstand, but:
1. That's not the case. Everybody and their grandmother is on the internet. That means that if ISPs didn't NAT their customers, we'd have run out of IP addresses (IPv4 at least) years ago.
2. Your network stack is only part of the concern. Any applications you're running must be flawlessly written, as well.
3. You state that things SHOULD work one way, and that NAT/firewall users are idiots for coping with how things DO work? I don't follow that logic.
Part of my thinks this is ignorance, and part thinks it's trolling.
Slashdot Mirror
Not only that, but all (3) of the demo videos look like they take place at the high-school track or in the developer's front yard. In addition, this thing will have to fly pretty high to not be heard by the targets, meaning it'll be all over radar.
Mod parent up. I couldn't have said it better myself!
That is probably the gayest thing I've ever seen. And I've seen two dudes fucking, too.
1. A ton of people on Slashdot decide to stop adopting new and innovative technology,
OR
2. Podcasting is neither new, nor innovative, and possibly retarded.
Well, now, I'm not involved in the recording industry, but I'm assuming that these individuals do not wait for their albums to be bought before they get paid... The engineers and musicians and everyone else involved get paid upfront/during the production, either by advances or regular weekly/biweekly/monthly paychecks, right? They're already compensated. Album sales profits go back to the distributors and the record company, and if any is left over, back to the artists.
It depends on your business model, really. If you're using album sales to make profits, as a record company, then yeah you could construe this as theft. If you're producing albums and distributing them for free to get people into your concerts and get the bands endorsement deals and whatnot that you can take a cut of later, it's sound business practice.
Personally I'm tired of corporations suing people when they're business model all of the sudden, due to technology or societal factors, becomes obsolete. You can't force people to go back to the old way of doing things so you can make more money. You can sue for a while, but it gets expensive. You lose money on record sales dropping off, you change the way you make money.
Can I ask, unrelatedly, about your feelings toward the term "identity theft"?
Not directed to me, but I'm answering anyway :) I abhor it. Because you're not copying the identity to a completely new and separate one. You now have two people using the same identity, one of which is doing bad things to it. You're damaging something I still have in my possession and you will get kicked in the junk.
Here-here. I noticed the ads in Splinter Cell Chaos Theory, but figured they were built-in (i think the single-player version they are; they appear to all be Sci-Fi and TLC channel ads), and was a little incensed.
It's one thing to make a relatively unobtrusive ad in your game to offset costs for the consumer, for instance making a $75 video game available for $50 because of ad revenue, but my jaded nature leads me to believe that Ubisoft is selling a $50 game for $50 and keeping the add revenue for themselves.
What really gets me is that I noticed new traffic from my machine on the firewall logs pulling from ads.madserver.net, even when I wasn't playing. First, I thought "spyware," but in a matter of 30 seconds I linked madserver.net to Massive's website and got the full story. I didn't see it documented anywhere in anything that came with the game, and for that I'm a little peeved.
What else could you expect from a country settled by people who left their old country because church wasn't strict enough?[1][2]
[1] I'm American, and enjoy it. Things are slowly loosening up (you can show pregnant women on TV now!)
[2] Yes, I know that's not EXACTLY why they left, but it makes my point.
I read this as, "if you don't know what you're doing, you shouldn't be on the internet, and when that is the case, firewall and NAT technology is unnecessary." Feel free to correct me if I misunderstand, but:
1. That's not the case. Everybody and their grandmother is on the internet. That means that if ISPs didn't NAT their customers, we'd have run out of IP addresses (IPv4 at least) years ago.
2. Your network stack is only part of the concern. Any applications you're running must be flawlessly written, as well.
3. You state that things SHOULD work one way, and that NAT/firewall users are idiots for coping with how things DO work? I don't follow that logic.
Part of my thinks this is ignorance, and part thinks it's trolling.
Am I reading that as intended? The author of the post thinks NAT and Firewalls are unnecessary???
I hope I just missed a sarcasm tag up there...