If the reviews are based on a pirated copy of the game, and the released versions game play is different then Atari has every right in the world to not only sue these guys, but put them out of business.
That's bullshit. It's Atari's and the developers fault for allowing such a leak like that to happen in the first place. If they can't keep tighter wraps on their content, why should the people who are previewing it get in trouble?
"Receiving stolen goods" comes to mind - especially because if true, the fact that the game was not released there could be no doubt that the game was not available yet. And before we get off on the tangent of "stolen" and "goods" remember that IP is the lifeblood of Atari and any other software company.
(Note: I realize the facts aren't all in... just answering parent;)
"Obviously, it is manipulating, but search engines are not public forums and unless you act to use them for your own benefit, your opponent's information is going to get out there," Bowers said.'" Because clearly, the last thing you want to do is let your opponent's perspective out there. This is brought to you by the 'informed populace makes for poor voters' theory.
It was dying down due to Apple not manufacturing any more 2G iPhones and not having 3G iPhones ready to sell yet.
We'll talk after the official release of the 3G iPhone: Cheaper, more countries, and faster. Yep; but I think raw numbers won't show significant increase in market share. Time'll tell.
60k will get me 20 acres in Tennessee, at least as of a couple months ago. Not if you live in Williamson county.... True; but anyplace with a high growth rate suffers spikes in housing prices. I can't recall which county it was in, but a quick search turned up 30 acres for 250k; doesn't match my earlier example, but still indicates that 90k/yr would do quite well in some places.
The iPhone is quickly rising, so it may, in a few years, become the #1 smartphone, with heavy reliance on Safari Mobile, OS X Mobile, and of course, iTunes and QuickTime. Is it really rising that fast? Or is it leveling off now that the initial hype has died down?
$89K/year won't get you a house even with today's market. 60k will get me 20 acres in Tennessee, at least as of a couple months ago. If you're talking on the coasts or near certain cities, you're right. But with telecommuting increasingly an option, there's no reason you could not live extremely well on 89k/year.
It's a well-established fact that women have much weaker upper bodies. Hollywood has done a great job of propogating the myth of the ass kicking woman who can take on a bunch of athletic men in combat, but the reality is that even if most athletic women went up against a normal, decently in shape man, they would get badly hurt in one-on-one fighting. If they went in a head-to-head contest of strength, correct. Combat when engaged by a trained individual has little to do with with physical strength.
I would think anything appearing on the toilet paper is a noticeable amount - you can't believe that the toilet paper catches all of it, and none of it might get pushed forward? Sure, we can clean that which we can see - but until we actually shower and use soap, we ain't clean. My personal preference is to have that invisible bit o' mess near my tailbone, as opposed to my perineum.
(side note: this is an utterly ridiculous conversation...)
I'd mod you off-topic if I had points. You whining about the other dude's comments makes you look like a giant pussy. And then there's the fact that you're actually off-topic. Actually s/he changed the topic, and I responded to the changed topic. I admit to complaining about the attitude displayed, but in the context of an honest question: Why do people take it as a personal insult when [they perceive that] someone makes a factual error?
I work with a woman whose name is Ruby Perle. The sad part is that the inherent pun there didn't dawn on me until just this second. I must be slipping...
I understand the reasoning for it, but that doesn't make it any less irritating as a practice. The fact is that anybody who is reasonably security conscious will - at minimum - disable image rendering and javascript in their email client. So when an entire email consists of external images and terribly formatted links, the sender pretty much shoots him/herself in the foot.
Then your problem is not with HTML email, it's with HTML email that links to 18 different images. If you want to get technical about it, it's with vendors who embed full web browsers into their email clients, thinking that it's best to give an 'integrated' solution, actually. And with the morons who think it's a good idea default non-local image rendering and javascript to be turned on.
It only takes a single image to do this tracking. Yep, I did already know that-- but thanks for trying to make it look like I didn't;)
And there are plenty of normal commercial HTML mailings with not a single image. But I wasn't talking about those...
Rich text can actually be useful, you know. Did I say that it couldn't?
The fact that pretty much the entire web opts to use rich text rather than plain text should tip you off to that. I don't understand why people like you take an offhand comment and view it as a personal attack on your belief system or something; at least that's what's indicated by the attitude in your reply.
Well - the overhead isn't big in terms of size - but when you have 18 different images linked to from offsite, it becomes a whole different issue. (And that's just for normal 'catalog'/advert emails that get sent out, not counting this lame tracking silliness.)
For sanitary reasons, the female of the species should always wipe front to back. (It also seems awkward for the male to do it any other way, but it's not something that's 'required')
Slashdot Mirror
Think positively! We should get a "+1 Dumbass", so that we can make a shining example of the dumbasses of the [slashdot] world.
If the reviews are based on a pirated copy of the game, and the released versions game play is different then Atari has every right in the world to not only sue these guys, but put them out of business.
That's bullshit. It's Atari's and the developers fault for allowing such a leak like that to happen in the first place. If they can't keep tighter wraps on their content, why should the people who are previewing it get in trouble?
"Receiving stolen goods" comes to mind - especially because if true, the fact that the game was not released there could be no doubt that the game was not available yet. And before we get off on the tangent of "stolen" and "goods" remember that IP is the lifeblood of Atari and any other software company. (Note: I realize the facts aren't all in... just answering parentWhoosh. Or Karma-whoring. Not sure which.
Hi, I'm Angela. I'd love to hear all about this! You can call me at 1-900-All-Greek - and I'm ready to talk 24/7!
Pedantic alert. There is no such thing as 12 PM (or AM for that matter).
Actually, there is. Though I daresay that the US gov't printing office has a really strange idea of how it should work...Maybe the baseline is already faster on XP, thus the same increase yields a lower percent?
I would think anything appearing on the toilet paper is a noticeable amount - you can't believe that the toilet paper catches all of it, and none of it might get pushed forward? Sure, we can clean that which we can see - but until we actually shower and use soap, we ain't clean. My personal preference is to have that invisible bit o' mess near my tailbone, as opposed to my perineum.
(side note: this is an utterly ridiculous conversation...)
I work with a woman whose name is Ruby Perle. The sad part is that the inherent pun there didn't dawn on me until just this second. I must be slipping...
I tend to use both. "Take a left at the third light, it's about a half mile up the road..."
I got it - I was joking dude - I figured the neutronium reference woulda given that away ;)
I understand the reasoning for it, but that doesn't make it any less irritating as a practice. The fact is that anybody who is reasonably security conscious will - at minimum - disable image rendering and javascript in their email client. So when an entire email consists of external images and terribly formatted links, the sender pretty much shoots him/herself in the foot.
So you like scooping crap [literally] towards your balls? Hey, whatever does it for you man...
"Offtopic" - I disagree. I was perfectly ontopic to the post I replied to.
Silly AC. Still using cleartext...
Well - the overhead isn't big in terms of size - but when you have 18 different images linked to from offsite, it becomes a whole different issue. (And that's just for normal 'catalog'/advert emails that get sent out, not counting this lame tracking silliness.)
For sanitary reasons, the female of the species should always wipe front to back. (It also seems awkward for the male to do it any other way, but it's not something that's 'required')
Holy carp, those are hilarious. A part of me wants to beleive that they're just playing along...