A missile, I'd imagine, is a lot harder to shoot out of the air than a jet. The missile is smaller, faster, and has a very limited timespan in which you have to destroy it. If we wind up with lasers that can wipe out inbound missiles, it seems logical that there wouldn't be much of a dogfight. Whoever fired first would win the day.
I'd like to expand a bit on what the previous poster commented on. I've enjoyed World of Warcraft a great deal all the way to level 60. Unlike many of the players who lament the need to find groups to complete most of the in-game content past level 30, I really enjoy finding other people to form up with in order to meet the challenges presented by all of the games zones and instances. Working with other people lets you use your class to its fullest effect, something I really enjoy.
However, much of the endgame content seems deeply flawed. Areas like the Molten Core, which require 40 people to complete, work unlike any other challenge in the game. Nearly every class is forced to use the same abilities over and over again, as opposed to taking advantage of the diverse palette of skills available to them. The entire instance, for many classes, requires the use of no more than three buttons to complete.
The problem, to me, seems to be rooted in the old ideal of large groups of players fighting single, epic enemies. In order to keep a team of 40 players from overpowering such an enemy with control skills, they're rendered completely immune to them. It seems that in these situations, though, nearly every class loses much of the original flavor that let people enjoy the game in the first place. What has the design team learned from some of the previous endgame content they have written, and what kind of experiences do we have to look forward to in future patches?
Imagine if this were converted to a real-world scenario. How comfortable would you feel if a brick-and-mortar retailer decided to install cameras throughout their store to track how you browsed their merchendise. They could keep video logs of you from every time you came into the store, so the next time you came in they might be able to offer tips on new items you might be interested in looking at.
However, eventually someone would decide that offering browsing tips might not be enough. Maybe they'll log your name and address, and have salespeople rush up (especially if you're in an affluent economic group, or target demographic) to usher you in whatever direction might most likely result in a sale. They could know your name before even seeing your face.
I'm personally not comfortable with that prospect unless I trust the company I'm dealing with. It's important for users to be able to chose whether their information is provided to a business. There's no way to know whether it will be used benignly or malevolently without first getting a feel for the company you're dealing with.
Not to mention the fact that if biometric devices started to show up in anything that could play media, we'd inevitably wind up having to pay extra due to the added hardware. This is on top of having additional componants that may, inevatably, break and keep the rest of the device from working. Thumbprint scanner wore out? Time to buy a new MP3 player.
The problem I see with most DRM technology is this: As it becomes more and more effective at insuring media is only used as intented, it will also inconvenience a greater number of users. Every check you add creates another chance for something to go wrong, effectively denying someone access that they should rightfully have. Every check you don't do leaves a chance for a loophole to be opened up.
Hmm, ok.
Problem 1. The thief doesn't wipe your system once they've aquired it.
Solution #1: Have a large archive of well-labeled, painstakingly organized pornography the thief won't be so eager to dispose of.
Problem #2. The thief will need to stay in the same place for a good long time, connected to a network, in order for the IP information the software provides to be remotely useful.
Solution #2: See solution 1.
Slashdot Mirror
What if this paper turns out to be wrong!
What could it mean?! Ahhhhhhhh!
A missile, I'd imagine, is a lot harder to shoot out of the air than a jet. The missile is smaller, faster, and has a very limited timespan in which you have to destroy it. If we wind up with lasers that can wipe out inbound missiles, it seems logical that there wouldn't be much of a dogfight. Whoever fired first would win the day.
I'd like to expand a bit on what the previous poster commented on. I've enjoyed World of Warcraft a great deal all the way to level 60. Unlike many of the players who lament the need to find groups to complete most of the in-game content past level 30, I really enjoy finding other people to form up with in order to meet the challenges presented by all of the games zones and instances. Working with other people lets you use your class to its fullest effect, something I really enjoy.
However, much of the endgame content seems deeply flawed. Areas like the Molten Core, which require 40 people to complete, work unlike any other challenge in the game. Nearly every class is forced to use the same abilities over and over again, as opposed to taking advantage of the diverse palette of skills available to them. The entire instance, for many classes, requires the use of no more than three buttons to complete.
The problem, to me, seems to be rooted in the old ideal of large groups of players fighting single, epic enemies. In order to keep a team of 40 players from overpowering such an enemy with control skills, they're rendered completely immune to them. It seems that in these situations, though, nearly every class loses much of the original flavor that let people enjoy the game in the first place. What has the design team learned from some of the previous endgame content they have written, and what kind of experiences do we have to look forward to in future patches?
Imagine if this were converted to a real-world scenario. How comfortable would you feel if a brick-and-mortar retailer decided to install cameras throughout their store to track how you browsed their merchendise. They could keep video logs of you from every time you came into the store, so the next time you came in they might be able to offer tips on new items you might be interested in looking at.
However, eventually someone would decide that offering browsing tips might not be enough. Maybe they'll log your name and address, and have salespeople rush up (especially if you're in an affluent economic group, or target demographic) to usher you in whatever direction might most likely result in a sale. They could know your name before even seeing your face.
I'm personally not comfortable with that prospect unless I trust the company I'm dealing with. It's important for users to be able to chose whether their information is provided to a business. There's no way to know whether it will be used benignly or malevolently without first getting a feel for the company you're dealing with.
Not to mention the fact that if biometric devices started to show up in anything that could play media, we'd inevitably wind up having to pay extra due to the added hardware. This is on top of having additional componants that may, inevatably, break and keep the rest of the device from working. Thumbprint scanner wore out? Time to buy a new MP3 player.
The problem I see with most DRM technology is this: As it becomes more and more effective at insuring media is only used as intented, it will also inconvenience a greater number of users. Every check you add creates another chance for something to go wrong, effectively denying someone access that they should rightfully have. Every check you don't do leaves a chance for a loophole to be opened up.
Hmm, ok. Problem 1. The thief doesn't wipe your system once they've aquired it. Solution #1: Have a large archive of well-labeled, painstakingly organized pornography the thief won't be so eager to dispose of. Problem #2. The thief will need to stay in the same place for a good long time, connected to a network, in order for the IP information the software provides to be remotely useful. Solution #2: See solution 1.