excerpt: "...or also on the establishment selling the game and/or the game's publisher."
Are you fsck'ing kidding me? What control does the publisher have over the counter sale? And therefore, what responsibility do they carry for the "proper" distribution of the game?
The publisher publishes the game. That's where their responsibility ends.
The distributor distributes the game. Ditto.
The reseller is the ONE responsible for maintaining control over the counter sales. End of story.
Understandable, n'est ce pas? Why the hell can't our *lawmakers* get it, then?
Making unrelated parties responsible for perceived violations [of *someone else's* _moral_ _code_, mind you,] is tantamount to a witch-hunt, and if allowed to flourish, will bring about the end of innovation and experimentation.
Idiots.
P.S. Another parallel to this is the attempt of NJ legislature to make gas station attendants liable for drunk drivers - if the 17-year-old kid working the pump sells gas to a drunk driver, and then the drunk kills someone, the kid is responsible... for up to 10 years in jail. Nice, huh? Thank God it's only an attempt [as of yet], and not an actual law.
Same principle, though - let's screw over someone who has nothing to do with the offense... just because we can. {flips through dictionary} oh yeah, here it is - "Tyranny"!
Most of the base technology that MS has been touting since its glory days of DOS/Win3.x was copied from Apple, or the Xerox PARC. [For those unfamiliar with PARC, I highly recommend the book "Dealers Of Lightning"... or just google "Xerox PARC history".]
MS's claim that they're responsible for ANY major innovations in the computer industry is on par with Al Gore's comment that he "invented the Internet". How can a company whose base technology was stolen from someone else, and enhanced with innovations originated elsewhere, claim any innovation of their own?
Below are a few examples of the baseline concepts that completely changed the computing world, and led to the proliferation of personal PC's, the Internet, and quite a few other things. And NONE of them were pioneered by MicroSoft.
1.) A suite of applications that shares data and is designer with multiple users in mind.
2.) A packet-based, self-monitoring networking protocol? i.e. "let's work out a stable connection over an unstable medium".
3.) Image rasterization (conversion of displayable image to printable).
4.) A programming language whose specs fit on a SINGLE piece of paper, and from which dozens of other languages spawned.
5.) Seamless scrolling, adjustable by-screen, by-line, and by-pixel.
6.) In-application adjustment of application parameters, as well as command scripting.
Just six examples out of hundreds, of the concepts that were invented by others, but co-opted by MS. And now, they claim innovation? I call "bullshit"! Almost everything that is promoted by MS today is based on technology that was invented in the 1970's.
There's a significant difference between "enhancements", and "invention". My advice to Microsoft's mouthpieces would be, look up the definitions of these terms, and don't make yourself look like a fool in front of a worldwide audience./rant
Slashdot Mirror
excerpt: "...or also on the establishment selling the game and/or the game's publisher."
Are you fsck'ing kidding me? What control does the publisher have over the counter sale? And therefore, what responsibility do they carry for the "proper" distribution of the game?
The publisher publishes the game. That's where their responsibility ends.
The distributor distributes the game. Ditto.
The reseller is the ONE responsible for maintaining control over the counter sales. End of story.
Understandable, n'est ce pas? Why the hell can't our *lawmakers* get it, then?
Making unrelated parties responsible for perceived violations [of *someone else's* _moral_ _code_, mind you,] is tantamount to a witch-hunt, and if allowed to flourish, will bring about the end of innovation and experimentation.
Idiots.
P.S. Another parallel to this is the attempt of NJ legislature to make gas station attendants liable for drunk drivers - if the 17-year-old kid working the pump sells gas to a drunk driver, and then the drunk kills someone, the kid is responsible... for up to 10 years in jail. Nice, huh? Thank God it's only an attempt [as of yet], and not an actual law.
Same principle, though - let's screw over someone who has nothing to do with the offense... just because we can. {flips through dictionary} oh yeah, here it is - "Tyranny"!
Most of the base technology that MS has been touting since its glory days of DOS/Win3.x was copied from Apple, or the Xerox PARC. [For those unfamiliar with PARC, I highly recommend the book "Dealers Of Lightning"... or just google "Xerox PARC history".]
MS's claim that they're responsible for ANY major innovations in the computer industry is on par with Al Gore's comment that he "invented the Internet". How can a company whose base technology was stolen from someone else, and enhanced with innovations originated elsewhere, claim any innovation of their own?
Below are a few examples of the baseline concepts that completely changed the computing world, and led to the proliferation of personal PC's, the Internet, and quite a few other things. And NONE of them were pioneered by MicroSoft.
1.) A suite of applications that shares data and is designer with multiple users in mind.
2.) A packet-based, self-monitoring networking protocol? i.e. "let's work out a stable connection over an unstable medium".
3.) Image rasterization (conversion of displayable image to printable).
4.) A programming language whose specs fit on a SINGLE piece of paper, and from which dozens of other languages spawned.
5.) Seamless scrolling, adjustable by-screen, by-line, and by-pixel.
6.) In-application adjustment of application parameters, as well as command scripting.
Just six examples out of hundreds, of the concepts that were invented by others, but co-opted by MS. And now, they claim innovation? I call "bullshit"! Almost everything that is promoted by MS today is based on technology that was invented in the 1970's.
There's a significant difference between "enhancements", and "invention". My advice to Microsoft's mouthpieces would be, look up the definitions of these terms, and don't make yourself look like a fool in front of a worldwide audience.