But by apealing to the masses they're [EA] a very dangerous company to upset
Surely this article shows that EA are only reluctanly supporting the DS, really trying to support the PSP and yet the DS is still winning the portable race hands down. So perhaps EA are just mad that they have been exposed as not quite so important to the success of a platform as they think they should be?
Good point, but even though everyone is defering blame (living in the 21st century), someone still had to make the concious decision to keep the case going, in the first place.
I can't help thinking that once again the shareholders are to blame for the motivation to perform these acts. Another example why I can see no benefit to public companies, that sacred stock price is the motivation behind most corporate horror. They just have to keep pushing the price up. The record companies are making massive money but that just isn't enough for the shareholders.
Makes you wonder how CEOs can justify their salary if they are not able to make decisions.
That's what amazes me all the time I hear of terrible acts, particularly corporate ones and you think to yourself "someone must have actually decided to do this", even worse a group of 'respected' people must have agreed on this. Perhaps it is just my middle-class upbringing but I always struggle to believe that actually at some point a director just says "I know, lets extract millions from the pension fund" or like today "The guy died but his death shouldn't stop us, he should have life insurance". And yet somehow the outrage only seems to be restricted to certain areas like/. I know there is a war going on but I have just looked at the BBC website and cant see the story yet. Just like the Sony Rookit scandal, I cant help thinking that the opposition to the RIAA/MPAA has to start using more effective propaganda campaigns to get public awareness.
Go ahead and sue dead kids, that'll get the public on your side.
They are not suing dead kids, they are suing the alive kids of the deceased, but it really isn't that different I guess. Although the second part of the comment is exactly what I was thinking, at the moment the anti-piracy brigade has a fair amount of public ambivilence which is fine for the RIAA, as long as people dont care they can throw their weight around. The RIAA dont even need support to practice in this manner, just a lack of real awareness and comdemnation. If they continue like this, large sections of the public (many of whom dont buy CD's) will become aware of the RIAA and form a very negative view. Could this be the beginning of more desperate acts from an apparently up to now irresistable force? How many more parents will just settle out of court as soon as the writ (I think it's called) from the RIAA turns up in the post. "Dont even try to fight us, we can still get your kids after you die".
And I dont reckon that was a troll, but perhaps I just bit.
Point taken, I guess the industry will itself be to blame if they dont remaster film onto new formats and that prevents a take up of the new format. For DVD they just had to get the film onto disc and people brought it, but for HD they are now going to have to give a reason (better quality) for people to replace their DVD version. Lawrence of Arabia, should look better on HD if remastered, shouldn't it?
Television standards have nothing to do with the quality of a film recording. I think you will find that old movies while predating HD are filmed on film (35mm I think) I believe film from decades ago is of a higher quality than even 1080, they can certainly improve if shown on HD rather than SD, all it takes is a remastering. Dont forget most films predate DVD but they still look better on DVD than VHS.
Having said that, I do agree that there isn't enough HD content worth upgrading for (especially for the UK, where PAL is generally good enough for most programs). Unless the BBC decides to add to their first HD natural history documentary Planet Earthhttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0795176/, with perhaps The Blue Planethttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0296310/, which they could as they mostly used film for that, and I would pay *big* money to watch The Blue Planet in HD.
Didn't anyone else realise that to prevent an organisation bullying the defenceless, one must group together. Just like a Workers Union (in their original form), the only way to defend yourself is safety in numbers. Lets not forget that the RIAA is essentially a union for the already powerful music companies, they become more powerful by uniting. By uniting the elements opposed to them the RIAA loses some of its advantage, even more so by breaking the back of one of it's most pointy sticks, the dodgy litigation techniques, so far no one has had the knowledge or money to attack this but lets hope this is the beginning of an effective counter-attack.
You are aware of the first meaning, basically to make fun of others - "Dave was at the pub taking the piss out of Steve all night" (sometimes known as "Taking the Michael", pre-watershed) this can be insulting or just banter. A satirical impressionist could be described as 'taking the piss' out of politicians, Spinal Tap was taking the piss out of Rockers.
But the second meaning is used to describe someone who is taking liberties and abusing social conventions, in a sense making a mockery of the good grace shown by another person or organisation. For instance a person who is told to make themselves at home when they are housesitting and then proceeds to clear out the entire drinks cabinet, someone might observe "he was told to help himself but he took the piss", I guess that in this sense the housesitter is taking the piss out the owners, hence the term. But the use of the first meaning of the phrase implies that everyone knows someone is making fun at someone elses expense, but the housesitter could just be an asshole so we use the second meaning to say that he was just taking the piss in general.
So to answer your question about airline passenegers "taking the piss with hand luggage" I was meaning that people take too much in the cabin causing the problems the grandparent was outlining. The passengers are essentially making fun of the principal that hand luggage is for valuables and things needed during the flight, not to be a way to save time at baggage pickup or to avoid the baggage weight limit.
As I may not have made this perfectly clear. The example I can think of would be the guy in the 'Airport' episode of Seinfeld http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0697647/ who sits next to Elaine with three cases on his lap, preventing Elaine from getting out of her seat, just to avoid baggage pickup. He is the one taking the piss.
Hope this clears up the confusion, if it didn't then I have just spent half an hour pissing in the wind.
Why the hell does anyone need more than their book & a passport anyway?
How does anyone survive on a plane without a book? I am not kidding even paperback books are not allowed.
But to answer your question - Well for a start, the last time I flew my luggage was lost but I was smart enought to carry everything that was valuable with me in hand luggage, nothing over the top, I just had one small backpack. But If I had lost my contact lense solution, camera, mobile phone, car keys (electronic, they are not allowed either), travel info and a couple of other things, then I would have not enjoyed my holiday one bit. As it was I could buy new clothes and stuff and was able to have a great holiday.
But I must admit I do agree that some people take the piss with hand luggage.
Thanks for the further information. It just seems fair to prevent someone from being punished for being in the right. Can I just ask, this only applies to cases that relate to the Copyright Act? So people can still be sued and have to pay their own fees to prove, they haven't done anything wrong and yet have to pay massive legal fees, if the case is not about copyright?
Bye the way, we do attack and make many jokes at lawyers, but I at least do understand that lawyers are supposed to be there to defend the rights of people and I am grateful that you are one who still does.
Look, if I was on my way to a crap stressful job where I have to be well dressed and presentable and I was tired and in a crowded underground station and some twat soaks me in water playing at being a pretend assassin. That person might well be in real danger. I might be controlled enough to just shout and swear, but the hundreds of other people around me who are in the same situation might not be.
This sounds like a really fun game to play, but we are trying to run a society here, doing this on an underground station is just antisocial (and in some areas of London, sucidal). This is barely different to someone smoking in that same crowded underground area, to the smoker "thats just a ridiculous rule, where's my freedom", while everyone else is *forced* to breath in his/her smoke.
Like many people, I just want to get to work, or to where ever I am going without some asshole pissing me off. Play your game, but dont force everyone else to play as well.
Yeah, because people in London simply aren't prepared for an unexpected shower of water every day Ha-ha, nice. But even the British dont expect to be soaked underground.
That is interesting. I am suprised that the US doesn't have this device to reimburse the fees of the winning defendant, that seems like legal bullying "come on, defend yourself, at your cost", surely that means that an organisation has nothing to lose by suing anyone/everyone, especially as TFA did point out that less is needed to prosecute in a civil case.
I read TFA and still didn't understand parts of it, despite that it is well written.
However, I would be grateful to know how this compares with the RIAA's attempts in other nations, especially here in the UK. TFA did allude to Canada and The Netherlands but only a mention. Some of the tactics outlined did seem to be only possible in the US (in particular the limitations of state laws)
I dont know why I didn't play it, (I seem to remember reading a review and being put off, perhaps 'bugs', perhaps other games drawing my focus). But I may well get it now, it should be in a bargain bin somewhere. I remember not getting XIII after playing the demo, it didn't work that well.
Re:Whatever happened to the Cell?
on
IBM Opts for AMD
·
· Score: 1
So to clarify, the Cell servers are likely to be used for some 'power processing applications' (graphic rendering?) but the Opterons for file, database and client application servers. Surely the Cell will still take some of the market away from the other two, even if a limited part of the market?
That analogy doesn't make sense, brussel sprouts don't change, companies and software do change (or at least can). Just look at IBM, they used to be the most hated company in geekdom, now they aren't even close. In the same way a company can make a big mistake and become untrusted, a company can recover from 'bad times'. I must point out that I hate Realplayer but because of the BBC using Real for radio and TV broadcasts, I still use it. It isn't as bad as it once was and I hope that it can improve to the point when I dont wish the beeb used a different delivery method and I do think that turn-around is possible.
The moral of the story: Never is a very long time.
Whatever happened to the Cell?
on
IBM Opts for AMD
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I thought IBM were chucking the new Uber-chip the Cell into blades and this was going to revolutionise the world [/hype], did it not work? Or haven't they actually put these on sale yet? I would have though that this would at least muddy the waters a bit with the whole Intel vs AMD war on IBM servers.
As I am also a big fan of the Balders Gate series, perhaps a lack of real RPG games is the issue? The SW:KOTOR games were enjoyable, but short and I really didn't want to replay. (They also showed that you could write much better stories in the SW worlds than EpI-III, by using completely different eras than EpIV-VI) Yes, I really dont see why everything has to be FPP, I always remembered people saying that BG2 didn't look that great, but I thought the graphics looked fine. I guess the industry has decided to try to make games more atmospheric by displaying the world through 'the eye of the protagonist' but that only really works for shooters IMHO, Role-play and other games (such as tomb raider) benefit from showing the world around the player, especially when you are controlling five people at once (BG2). The other benefit of FPP to the industry is that you dont have to build a game engine you just buy it from someone who has and thus save on development costs.
But just out of interest, do driving games cause you the same problems?
he personally felt that in a time when fewer and fewer games appeal to him
So I am not the only one to think this then. I go into a games shop or look at gamespot and see nothing I really want to play, perhaps HL2:Ep1 but I am not bothered enough to buy it. Oblivion and Call Of Duty 2 both appeal to me, but my PC wont play those games and I am just not going to update. Give me something original that doesn't drink my wallet for graphics cards, lets hope the Wii provides that answer, the controller may be a gimick but hopefuly it may stimulate some fresh gaming experiences.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't help thinking that once again the shareholders are to blame for the motivation to perform these acts. Another example why I can see no benefit to public companies, that sacred stock price is the motivation behind most corporate horror. They just have to keep pushing the price up. The record companies are making massive money but that just isn't enough for the shareholders.
Makes you wonder how CEOs can justify their salary if they are not able to make decisions.
And yet somehow the outrage only seems to be restricted to certain areas like
Although the second part of the comment is exactly what I was thinking, at the moment the anti-piracy brigade has a fair amount of public ambivilence which is fine for the RIAA, as long as people dont care they can throw their weight around. The RIAA dont even need support to practice in this manner, just a lack of real awareness and comdemnation.
If they continue like this, large sections of the public (many of whom dont buy CD's) will become aware of the RIAA and form a very negative view.
Could this be the beginning of more desperate acts from an apparently up to now irresistable force?
How many more parents will just settle out of court as soon as the writ (I think it's called) from the RIAA turns up in the post. "Dont even try to fight us, we can still get your kids after you die".
And I dont reckon that was a troll, but perhaps I just bit.
Yeah, and you tell that to kids these days and they just wont believe you.
Point taken,
I guess the industry will itself be to blame if they dont remaster film onto new formats and that prevents a take up of the new format. For DVD they just had to get the film onto disc and people brought it, but for HD they are now going to have to give a reason (better quality) for people to replace their DVD version.
Lawrence of Arabia, should look better on HD if remastered, shouldn't it?
Having said that, I do agree that there isn't enough HD content worth upgrading for (especially for the UK, where PAL is generally good enough for most programs). Unless the BBC decides to add to their first HD natural history documentary Planet Earth http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0795176/, with perhaps The Blue Planet http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0296310/, which they could as they mostly used film for that, and I would pay *big* money to watch The Blue Planet in HD.
Didn't anyone else realise that to prevent an organisation bullying the defenceless, one must group together. Just like a Workers Union (in their original form), the only way to defend yourself is safety in numbers. Lets not forget that the RIAA is essentially a union for the already powerful music companies, they become more powerful by uniting.
By uniting the elements opposed to them the RIAA loses some of its advantage, even more so by breaking the back of one of it's most pointy sticks, the dodgy litigation techniques, so far no one has had the knowledge or money to attack this but lets hope this is the beginning of an effective counter-attack.
Who was stupid enough to moderate the parent offtopic?
Krell is commenting on the subject and organisation in the story.
If you dont find it funny it doesn't mean you have to mod it down.
The British use of the word 'piss' has many uses. As does the phrase "take the piss". But as it is not outlined in the offical British slang dictionary The Profanisaurus http://www.viz.co.uk/?domain=viz&page=%2Fprofanisa urus%2Fprofan_front_index.php%3Ffb%3D1, I shall attempt to explain myself.
You are aware of the first meaning, basically to make fun of others - "Dave was at the pub taking the piss out of Steve all night" (sometimes known as "Taking the Michael", pre-watershed) this can be insulting or just banter. A satirical impressionist could be described as 'taking the piss' out of politicians, Spinal Tap was taking the piss out of Rockers.
But the second meaning is used to describe someone who is taking liberties and abusing social conventions, in a sense making a mockery of the good grace shown by another person or organisation. For instance a person who is told to make themselves at home when they are housesitting and then proceeds to clear out the entire drinks cabinet, someone might observe "he was told to help himself but he took the piss", I guess that in this sense the housesitter is taking the piss out the owners, hence the term. But the use of the first meaning of the phrase implies that everyone knows someone is making fun at someone elses expense, but the housesitter could just be an asshole so we use the second meaning to say that he was just taking the piss in general.
So to answer your question about airline passenegers "taking the piss with hand luggage" I was meaning that people take too much in the cabin causing the problems the grandparent was outlining. The passengers are essentially making fun of the principal that hand luggage is for valuables and things needed during the flight, not to be a way to save time at baggage pickup or to avoid the baggage weight limit.
As I may not have made this perfectly clear. The example I can think of would be the guy in the 'Airport' episode of Seinfeld http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0697647/ who sits next to Elaine with three cases on his lap, preventing Elaine from getting out of her seat, just to avoid baggage pickup. He is the one taking the piss.
Hope this clears up the confusion, if it didn't then I have just spent half an hour pissing in the wind.
I am not kidding even paperback books are not allowed.
But to answer your question -
Well for a start, the last time I flew my luggage was lost but I was smart enought to carry everything that was valuable with me in hand luggage, nothing over the top, I just had one small backpack. But If I had lost my contact lense solution, camera, mobile phone, car keys (electronic, they are not allowed either), travel info and a couple of other things, then I would have not enjoyed my holiday one bit. As it was I could buy new clothes and stuff and was able to have a great holiday.
But I must admit I do agree that some people take the piss with hand luggage.
Thanks for the further information. It just seems fair to prevent someone from being punished for being in the right.
Can I just ask, this only applies to cases that relate to the Copyright Act? So people can still be sued and have to pay their own fees to prove, they haven't done anything wrong and yet have to pay massive legal fees, if the case is not about copyright?
Bye the way, we do attack and make many jokes at lawyers, but I at least do understand that lawyers are supposed to be there to defend the rights of people and I am grateful that you are one who still does.
Look, if I was on my way to a crap stressful job where I have to be well dressed and presentable and I was tired and in a crowded underground station and some twat soaks me in water playing at being a pretend assassin.
That person might well be in real danger. I might be controlled enough to just shout and swear, but the hundreds of other people around me who are in the same situation might not be.
This sounds like a really fun game to play, but we are trying to run a society here, doing this on an underground station is just antisocial (and in some areas of London, sucidal). This is barely different to someone smoking in that same crowded underground area, to the smoker "thats just a ridiculous rule, where's my freedom", while everyone else is *forced* to breath in his/her smoke.
Like many people, I just want to get to work, or to where ever I am going without some asshole pissing me off. Play your game, but dont force everyone else to play as well.
Yeah, because people in London simply aren't prepared for an unexpected shower of water every day
Ha-ha, nice.
But even the British dont expect to be soaked underground.
That is interesting. I am suprised that the US doesn't have this device to reimburse the fees of the winning defendant, that seems like legal bullying "come on, defend yourself, at your cost", surely that means that an organisation has nothing to lose by suing anyone/everyone, especially as TFA did point out that less is needed to prosecute in a civil case.
That really stinks.
I read TFA and still didn't understand parts of it, despite that it is well written.
However, I would be grateful to know how this compares with the RIAA's attempts in other nations, especially here in the UK. TFA did allude to Canada and The Netherlands but only a mention. Some of the tactics outlined did seem to be only possible in the US (in particular the limitations of state laws)
We may be more keen to try diplomacy, but I am not entirely sure we 'get results' any more than the US in its attempts.
I dont know why I didn't play it, (I seem to remember reading a review and being put off, perhaps 'bugs', perhaps other games drawing my focus).
But I may well get it now, it should be in a bargain bin somewhere.
I remember not getting XIII after playing the demo, it didn't work that well.
So to clarify, the Cell servers are likely to be used for some 'power processing applications' (graphic rendering?) but the Opterons for file, database and client application servers.
Surely the Cell will still take some of the market away from the other two, even if a limited part of the market?
That analogy doesn't make sense, brussel sprouts don't change, companies and software do change (or at least can). Just look at IBM, they used to be the most hated company in geekdom, now they aren't even close. In the same way a company can make a big mistake and become untrusted, a company can recover from 'bad times'.
I must point out that I hate Realplayer but because of the BBC using Real for radio and TV broadcasts, I still use it. It isn't as bad as it once was and I hope that it can improve to the point when I dont wish the beeb used a different delivery method and I do think that turn-around is possible.
The moral of the story: Never is a very long time.
I thought IBM were chucking the new Uber-chip the Cell into blades and this was going to revolutionise the world [/hype], did it not work? Or haven't they actually put these on sale yet?
I would have though that this would at least muddy the waters a bit with the whole Intel vs AMD war on IBM servers.
As I am also a big fan of the Balders Gate series, perhaps a lack of real RPG games is the issue? The SW:KOTOR games were enjoyable, but short and I really didn't want to replay. (They also showed that you could write much better stories in the SW worlds than EpI-III, by using completely different eras than EpIV-VI)
Yes, I really dont see why everything has to be FPP, I always remembered people saying that BG2 didn't look that great, but I thought the graphics looked fine.
I guess the industry has decided to try to make games more atmospheric by displaying the world through 'the eye of the protagonist' but that only really works for shooters IMHO, Role-play and other games (such as tomb raider) benefit from showing the world around the player, especially when you are controlling five people at once (BG2). The other benefit of FPP to the industry is that you dont have to build a game engine you just buy it from someone who has and thus save on development costs.
But just out of interest, do driving games cause you the same problems?
I go into a games shop or look at gamespot and see nothing I really want to play, perhaps HL2:Ep1 but I am not bothered enough to buy it. Oblivion and Call Of Duty 2 both appeal to me, but my PC wont play those games and I am just not going to update. Give me something original that doesn't drink my wallet for graphics cards, lets hope the Wii provides that answer, the controller may be a gimick but hopefuly it may stimulate some fresh gaming experiences.
Yes I was aware of this, but didn't want to go too in depth. Thanks for pointing that out more concisely than I could have.