Of course I'm assuming he isn't lying here. If you simply assume everyone's lying, there'd be no point in ever responding.
As for 'they should be the one to search'... Of course they should. But then, most people that can type without using contractions like 'ur' know that, and do. The problem is that if you only have a need, and no idea how to solve that need, what do you search for? Quite often the 'obvious' solution has a non-obvious name. He assumed that 'secure ftp' would be what he wanted. It wasn't what he wanted, though, and they insulted him for it. It would have been my first guess, too.
In my experience, when people complain about the uncivil responses they've gotten, they really did get them, deserved or not. If he's an ass, there's no need for them to be asses, too. That's what moderators are for. People that get no response generally complain about that, instead.
That's only 'insightful' if the list really -had- answered the question already. From his story, I'm going to assume they hadn't, didn't have the answer, and simply wanted to appear that they knew what they were talking about. If the answer was really that simple, it would have been easier to give him a link or just tell him how, rather than repeatedly insult him. Insulting him as well is optional.
No, he doesn't have the right to expect an answer from them, but he -can- expect a civil response, or no response at all if they can't be civil. I don't know what list it was, and I didn't really pay attention to the question other than that he wanted a secure FTP setup. It doesn't really matter, though, as being civil should be the standard, not the exception. All too many lists and forums yell first and help later.
If I'm reading this right, the problem is that the patch gets applied out of sequence if you 'repair' from the original CD.
Would the same issue not happen if you just installed from the CD from scratch? What prevents it from installing out of order when you do it that way?
Seems pretty serious either way, and it has me wishing I'd turned off the automatic update service on my only Windows PC. It's too late now, but you can bet it won't get internet access until after that's disabled when I format that machine next.
Go ahead, but don't bitch when nobody follows you. The rest of us find the prices acceptable and will continue to pay them. That's how the free market works.
I was tempted to find your post to be sarcastic, but that would mean you hadn't bothered to actually read more than a few words of mine... So I had to choose ignorant and sarcastic, or just plain stupid. I chose the latter.
No, but I don't really see that it matters. At the time Black Box was cancelled, Orange Box was scheduled for $60. Now it's $50. (For PC, which is the only place Black Box was going to exist anyhow.)
The fact that you can't buy just Ep2 does show that either Valve has given up on episodic content, or they really have no bloody idea what it means. Since this article is about them begging customers and competitors for information on what they're doing wrong, I'm going to guess it's the latter.
I don't like episodic content. I thought I would, and then Half Life and Sam & Max proved me wrong. Luckily, Sam & Max is distributed with GameTap and I didn't waste any extra money on it. It was fun, but the constant waiting and monthly disappointment was stressful. The monthly disappointment was that each episode was too much the same as the last (though I see what they were doing there) and while there was a little plot, it was nothing like the original Sam & Max game in terms of depth.
It's only an insult if you let it be. You -knew- that the price would come down if you waited. If you wait long enough, the price comes to down almost nothing. In this case, it came down to exactly nothing, if you purchase the Orange Box. (Orange Box is $50, the price of a new game, and includes 3 new games, even if one is just an episode.)
You paid to play it when it came out, and all the time up until Orange Box is released. If you feel like you were cheated, DON'T BUY NEW GAMES. This will happen every single time. The price ALWAYS comes down eventually. You will, of course, miss the best years of the product's life, especially online. That's up to you.
So buy it or don't, but don't claim you've been cheated. No, the truth is, the people that waited have a small bonus.
I assumed the engine was what they meant by 'family'. Anyone that takes even half a look at it would see how little it resembles Baldur's Gate.
I'll admit I didn't play all the way through PST (my attention wandered after being in that big city for so bloody long) but it's as much as CRPG as the Baldur's Gate games. Thinking maybe I didn't really know what CRPG meant, I looked it up. http://www.angelfire.com/hero/tjekanefir/crpg.htm
Yup, that's what I thought. BG and PST are both on that list, as well.
Actually, if the site really says that, it's a lie. You only get a license to play the music. A non-transferable license. You have to agree to it before it'll let you download. From the TOU (Terms of Use):
License. Upon your payment of our fees for Digital Content, we grant you a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the Digital Content for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use, subject to and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. You may copy, store, transfer and burn the Digital Content only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use.
Restrictions. You represent, warrant and agree that you will use the Service only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use and not for any redistribution of the Digital Content or other use restricted in this Section 2.2. You agree not to infringe the rights of the Digital Content's copyright owners and to comply with all applicable laws in your use of the Digital Content. Except as set forth in Section 2.1 above, you agree that you will not redistribute, transmit, assign, sell, broadcast, rent, share, lend, modify, adapt, edit, sub-license or otherwise transfer or use the Digital Content. You are not granted any synchronization, public performance, promotional use, commercial sale, resale, reproduction or distribution rights for the Digital Content. You acknowledge that the Digital Content embodies the intellectual property of a third party and is protected by law.
I just bought a track... It took my credit info that was stored (my fault, I suppose) and charged it without asking even once. (I have never turned on that 1-click crap.) I (wrongly) assumed it'd go in my cart and then I could purchase it. Luckily, I intended to follow through the whole process.
The download was quick, and I'm playing it on Amarok right now, no problems.
There's been a few songs lately I thought 'I'd buy that, if it were easy and reasonable.' Hm, guess it is, now. I'll probably pick up a few more soon as well.
Yeah, my first thought was 'Oh noes, they told Congress!' Seriously, what a stupid thing to say. Congress would only care if someone was trying to get a new law passed. They do nothing with old laws. The nearest thing I could think was the someone might have said 'See, even Google doesn't respect Copyright laws!'... Still utterly useless.
Might as well ask why he has to pay the same $20 in the first place. We -used- to have usage-based fees on our internet access, but the overwhelming majority of the market demanded unlimited access for a set cost. Now you'd like to go back to usage-based cost.
Your example is poor, anyhow, since City Jake doesn't have $20/month access, he has $50/month because he prefers the speed. His livelihood is based on the net (or he couldn't afford to spend 12 hours a day on it) and if he used a slower line, he'd spend more time than he has to. So now we've got Farmer Joe for $20/month and City Jake for $50/month, and appropriate taxes on each. Sounds pretty fair to me, considering their usage of the service.
And 17% higher than 'current fees' is not 'high fees'. It's a little more, but not enough that most people will care. Some will choose a lower speed line, some will choose to drop internet altogether... But the majority will change nothing.
As for the mall... What does that have to do with anything? How is walking to the mall a substitute for the internet? Sure, you can talk to people there, but that's like saying you'll just play games on your cellphone because a Nintendo DS costs too much. I'm sure -someone- has said it, but the overwhelming majority think that person is more than a little off.
This got modded funny, but I'm not sure it shouldn't be +5 free-as-a-bird. Or something.
While my job isn't -quite- this free, I -do- have the freedom to do whatever I please. I do have projects, and I have soft deadlines that I never meet any more, but since I keep the whole system running smoothly, and my mess-around time is usually spend optimizing or finding future problems and preventing them, they're happy to have me miss deadlines. (Employees before I worked here never looked forward and prevented problems. They always reacted to problems and fixed them then. Everything runs a lot smoother now.)
And I like doing it.
A bit more salary is always nice, but I have extra money as it is (probably should start investing that, instead of spending it on silly things) and more money would be icing, not cake.
Why would you make that assumption from a single person's decision? He obviously felt he would like being a lawyer better for whatever reason. You don't know the reason, and don't have any clue what it could be.
People change jobs and careers all the time and to paint everyone with the same brush because of 1 person's decision is lunacy.
Only for open source apps that are NOT on Windows. If you were working on Windows, you couldn't use the open source Qt. This is a new development with Qt4.
I don't consider 'non-commercial' licenses to be 'free' anyhow. You have to purchase a commercial license to use Qt commercially, when most GPL'd software can be used commercially if you abide byt he GPL.
I didn't say there aren't other ways. I didn't say some people wouldn't prefer other ways. I said that I prefer the current way. I'm glad you and the parent were smart enough to get out of a situation you didn't like. I think most IT folk are smart enough for that. Anyone who stays and hates it either just says they hate it, or they they're fools.
I was told that in 'crunch time', I'd be expected to work overtime. The truth is, I work overtime when there's something that needs doing when customers aren't active (Saturday) and very little else. I rarely spend more than a few hours on it, and it doesn't happen often. The only other 'overtime'-ish activity is that I answer my email from home. I used to be anal about it, but now I answer when I'm near my computer, and don't worry about it otherwise. They'll call if there's an emergency, and very little can't wait for a couple hours, or until tomorrow.
It boils down to this: I expect people in the IT industry to have a bit of sense and take care of themselves. I don't think we NEED laws to help us get paid what we're worth. We're just not that stupid or common.
Thank you! Someone who gets it. TANSTAAFL. When the company hires you as salaried, that time you're 'giving' them is factored into the pay. If they had to pay hourly beyond it, you wouldn't get as much in the first place.
The company I work for thinks I put in a lot more overtime than I do because I'm so productive. I do put in -some-, but not nearly as much as they think. The deal works out great for both sides. If this law goes through, I'll get a huge paycut (or fired, and someone else hired) and no overtime as well. I'll just lose money no matter how it goes.
Of course, I'll have more free time... But not a lot more.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course I'm assuming he isn't lying here. If you simply assume everyone's lying, there'd be no point in ever responding.
As for 'they should be the one to search'... Of course they should. But then, most people that can type without using contractions like 'ur' know that, and do. The problem is that if you only have a need, and no idea how to solve that need, what do you search for? Quite often the 'obvious' solution has a non-obvious name. He assumed that 'secure ftp' would be what he wanted. It wasn't what he wanted, though, and they insulted him for it. It would have been my first guess, too.
In my experience, when people complain about the uncivil responses they've gotten, they really did get them, deserved or not. If he's an ass, there's no need for them to be asses, too. That's what moderators are for. People that get no response generally complain about that, instead.
That's only 'insightful' if the list really -had- answered the question already. From his story, I'm going to assume they hadn't, didn't have the answer, and simply wanted to appear that they knew what they were talking about. If the answer was really that simple, it would have been easier to give him a link or just tell him how, rather than repeatedly insult him. Insulting him as well is optional.
No, he doesn't have the right to expect an answer from them, but he -can- expect a civil response, or no response at all if they can't be civil. I don't know what list it was, and I didn't really pay attention to the question other than that he wanted a secure FTP setup. It doesn't really matter, though, as being civil should be the standard, not the exception. All too many lists and forums yell first and help later.
If I'm reading this right, the problem is that the patch gets applied out of sequence if you 'repair' from the original CD.
Would the same issue not happen if you just installed from the CD from scratch? What prevents it from installing out of order when you do it that way?
Seems pretty serious either way, and it has me wishing I'd turned off the automatic update service on my only Windows PC. It's too late now, but you can bet it won't get internet access until after that's disabled when I format that machine next.
I think you asked that backwards. Let me fix it:
Are there algorithms that are computable by standard computers but are not also unbreakable using quantum computers?
There ya go.
Why do you think they're magic and will be able to just run encrypted stuff through them and it's broken with no effort?
Go ahead, but don't bitch when nobody follows you. The rest of us find the prices acceptable and will continue to pay them. That's how the free market works.
I was tempted to find your post to be sarcastic, but that would mean you hadn't bothered to actually read more than a few words of mine... So I had to choose ignorant and sarcastic, or just plain stupid. I chose the latter.
No, but I don't really see that it matters. At the time Black Box was cancelled, Orange Box was scheduled for $60. Now it's $50. (For PC, which is the only place Black Box was going to exist anyhow.)
The fact that you can't buy just Ep2 does show that either Valve has given up on episodic content, or they really have no bloody idea what it means. Since this article is about them begging customers and competitors for information on what they're doing wrong, I'm going to guess it's the latter.
I don't like episodic content. I thought I would, and then Half Life and Sam & Max proved me wrong. Luckily, Sam & Max is distributed with GameTap and I didn't waste any extra money on it. It was fun, but the constant waiting and monthly disappointment was stressful. The monthly disappointment was that each episode was too much the same as the last (though I see what they were doing there) and while there was a little plot, it was nothing like the original Sam & Max game in terms of depth.
It's only an insult if you let it be. You -knew- that the price would come down if you waited. If you wait long enough, the price comes to down almost nothing. In this case, it came down to exactly nothing, if you purchase the Orange Box. (Orange Box is $50, the price of a new game, and includes 3 new games, even if one is just an episode.)
You paid to play it when it came out, and all the time up until Orange Box is released. If you feel like you were cheated, DON'T BUY NEW GAMES. This will happen every single time. The price ALWAYS comes down eventually. You will, of course, miss the best years of the product's life, especially online. That's up to you.
So buy it or don't, but don't claim you've been cheated. No, the truth is, the people that waited have a small bonus.
I assumed the engine was what they meant by 'family'. Anyone that takes even half a look at it would see how little it resembles Baldur's Gate.
I'll admit I didn't play all the way through PST (my attention wandered after being in that big city for so bloody long) but it's as much as CRPG as the Baldur's Gate games. Thinking maybe I didn't really know what CRPG meant, I looked it up. http://www.angelfire.com/hero/tjekanefir/crpg.htm
Yup, that's what I thought. BG and PST are both on that list, as well.
That didn't exist for my first one. I saw it as I was playing around later, though. They obviously got a lot of complaints.
Actually, if the site really says that, it's a lie. You only get a license to play the music. A non-transferable license. You have to agree to it before it'll let you download. From the TOU (Terms of Use):
License. Upon your payment of our fees for Digital Content, we grant you a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the Digital Content for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use, subject to and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. You may copy, store, transfer and burn the Digital Content only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use.
Restrictions. You represent, warrant and agree that you will use the Service only for your personal, non-commercial, entertainment use and not for any redistribution of the Digital Content or other use restricted in this Section 2.2. You agree not to infringe the rights of the Digital Content's copyright owners and to comply with all applicable laws in your use of the Digital Content. Except as set forth in Section 2.1 above, you agree that you will not redistribute, transmit, assign, sell, broadcast, rent, share, lend, modify, adapt, edit, sub-license or otherwise transfer or use the Digital Content. You are not granted any synchronization, public performance, promotional use, commercial sale, resale, reproduction or distribution rights for the Digital Content. You acknowledge that the Digital Content embodies the intellectual property of a third party and is protected by law.
I just bought a track... It took my credit info that was stored (my fault, I suppose) and charged it without asking even once. (I have never turned on that 1-click crap.) I (wrongly) assumed it'd go in my cart and then I could purchase it. Luckily, I intended to follow through the whole process.
The download was quick, and I'm playing it on Amarok right now, no problems.
There's been a few songs lately I thought 'I'd buy that, if it were easy and reasonable.' Hm, guess it is, now. I'll probably pick up a few more soon as well.
Yeah, my first thought was 'Oh noes, they told Congress!' Seriously, what a stupid thing to say. Congress would only care if someone was trying to get a new law passed. They do nothing with old laws. The nearest thing I could think was the someone might have said 'See, even Google doesn't respect Copyright laws!' ... Still utterly useless.
Ah, my bad. The page only partially loaded the first time. There's more words there, but still no real information.
Didn't we just decide that stea^W copyright infringement was legal in Canada since they pay all those taxes on everything that might be used for it?
Maybe it's still illegal to provide, if not infringe...
I dunno, maybe if the article had more words than the summary, I'd have some clue.
Might as well ask why he has to pay the same $20 in the first place. We -used- to have usage-based fees on our internet access, but the overwhelming majority of the market demanded unlimited access for a set cost. Now you'd like to go back to usage-based cost.
Your example is poor, anyhow, since City Jake doesn't have $20/month access, he has $50/month because he prefers the speed. His livelihood is based on the net (or he couldn't afford to spend 12 hours a day on it) and if he used a slower line, he'd spend more time than he has to. So now we've got Farmer Joe for $20/month and City Jake for $50/month, and appropriate taxes on each. Sounds pretty fair to me, considering their usage of the service.
And 17% higher than 'current fees' is not 'high fees'. It's a little more, but not enough that most people will care. Some will choose a lower speed line, some will choose to drop internet altogether... But the majority will change nothing.
As for the mall... What does that have to do with anything? How is walking to the mall a substitute for the internet? Sure, you can talk to people there, but that's like saying you'll just play games on your cellphone because a Nintendo DS costs too much. I'm sure -someone- has said it, but the overwhelming majority think that person is more than a little off.
This got modded funny, but I'm not sure it shouldn't be +5 free-as-a-bird. Or something.
While my job isn't -quite- this free, I -do- have the freedom to do whatever I please. I do have projects, and I have soft deadlines that I never meet any more, but since I keep the whole system running smoothly, and my mess-around time is usually spend optimizing or finding future problems and preventing them, they're happy to have me miss deadlines. (Employees before I worked here never looked forward and prevented problems. They always reacted to problems and fixed them then. Everything runs a lot smoother now.)
And I like doing it.
A bit more salary is always nice, but I have extra money as it is (probably should start investing that, instead of spending it on silly things) and more money would be icing, not cake.
Why would you make that assumption from a single person's decision? He obviously felt he would like being a lawyer better for whatever reason. You don't know the reason, and don't have any clue what it could be.
People change jobs and careers all the time and to paint everyone with the same brush because of 1 person's decision is lunacy.
Only for open source apps that are NOT on Windows. If you were working on Windows, you couldn't use the open source Qt. This is a new development with Qt4.
I don't consider 'non-commercial' licenses to be 'free' anyhow. You have to purchase a commercial license to use Qt commercially, when most GPL'd software can be used commercially if you abide byt he GPL.
You also apparently didn't bother to research the bug at all. It only affects Office 2007 on real Windows, not mobile.
I didn't say there aren't other ways. I didn't say some people wouldn't prefer other ways. I said that I prefer the current way. I'm glad you and the parent were smart enough to get out of a situation you didn't like. I think most IT folk are smart enough for that. Anyone who stays and hates it either just says they hate it, or they they're fools.
I was told that in 'crunch time', I'd be expected to work overtime. The truth is, I work overtime when there's something that needs doing when customers aren't active (Saturday) and very little else. I rarely spend more than a few hours on it, and it doesn't happen often. The only other 'overtime'-ish activity is that I answer my email from home. I used to be anal about it, but now I answer when I'm near my computer, and don't worry about it otherwise. They'll call if there's an emergency, and very little can't wait for a couple hours, or until tomorrow.
It boils down to this: I expect people in the IT industry to have a bit of sense and take care of themselves. I don't think we NEED laws to help us get paid what we're worth. We're just not that stupid or common.
Thank you! Someone who gets it. TANSTAAFL. When the company hires you as salaried, that time you're 'giving' them is factored into the pay. If they had to pay hourly beyond it, you wouldn't get as much in the first place.
The company I work for thinks I put in a lot more overtime than I do because I'm so productive. I do put in -some-, but not nearly as much as they think. The deal works out great for both sides. If this law goes through, I'll get a huge paycut (or fired, and someone else hired) and no overtime as well. I'll just lose money no matter how it goes.
Of course, I'll have more free time... But not a lot more.
Tell that to the judge that ruled it was, not me.
More importantly, I've not seen anyone say they -don't- see the bug. (I don't have Excel 2007, so I can't check.)
You sir, get my first major laugh of the day. Especially since I was thinking the very same thing.
Did you even read what he wrote? He talks about HARDWARE upgrades, not SOFTWARE. There's a pretty big difference.