I always get a kick out of the subjective nature of audio and video quality tricking people into hearing things they aren't.
I really applies equally well to many other things, and to anyone that wasn't a complete boob, the complete nonsensical nature should be obvious.
"I swapped my Ethernet cable and now my email is so much clearer!"
"I got a more powerful wireless router and now websites aren't filled with static!"
If it were going to use hot of not as any basis they would need to detect if the girl was blond and subtract 2 if she was and detect if there's at least a hint of cleavage in the photo and subtract 1 to 3 depending on exposure level. Otherwise the hot or not rankings are so skewed they are useless.
An open wifi network and someone leaving the door open to their house are NOT the same thing. Just because the front door is open doesn't mean they are inviting people to come take their big screen. The wifi network is being broadcast to you, and no one is out anything if you play nice with it.
A closer analogy would be if your neighbor hooked up their cable to your tv and then got upset when you watched it.
This would make a lot of sense, especially since half the point of steam is that you can sign in from different locations and get/play the games you've paid for. (Maybe I shouldn't say "half the point," but it's a cool feature.) There would be some issues to workout, because you can play in "offline" mode, but it seems to me they could fix that by an automatic or user prompted "hot sync".
I guess I'm just not naive enough to think this doesn't go on on almost every eBay auction.
I stand by my statement. Of course it would be annoying, but perhaps if not for the shill bids it would have gotten that high anyway. Maybe a real bidder came in to bid $180 for the item, saw the shill sent it to $190, and went to another auction. The bottom line is don't bid what you don't want to pay and it's a non issue. If you bid less than $200 and the shill bidders try to "set the market" at $200 win their own items, are out some money, and are less likely to do it again.
Obviously in a perfect world this wouldn't happen. There's nothing that can be done about it though, so I'm arguing that you can protect yourself, and ultimately only have yourself to blame, if this happens to you when you bid "by proxy" rather than incrementally.
If you bid $200 you're saying "If this sells for $200 I'm ok with that." There is no earthly reason you can bid $200 then complain when you have to pay near that amount. A seller's contract is to sell the item for whatever it goes for. The bidder's is to pay up to what they bid....but there's no law saying you have to keep, or ever, bid on anything.
I agree that your analogy is accurate, but I don't think I made an analogy in the first place.
Let's stick with the radio and set up another hypothetical situation.
You bid $200, fake bidders send the price to $195, real bidder bids $196. Now what? The market price was set by a "real person" but they price may have never got that high without the fakes, although who's to say it wouldn't have?
The problem with shill bids is that there's no similar recourse for the buyer.
Sure there is, don't bid $200 for the radio in the first place. Bid $5, keep an eye on it, and each time you bid decide "Am I still getting a deal?".
If you're opening bid is $200 and it just so happens to be going for $5 at the moment it doesn't really matter. You've decided it's still worth it to pay up to $200, regardless of how it approaches that number.
See that's was my exact thought while unlocking the multiplayer (and dont get me started on needing to unlock multiplayer on games you buy expressly to have as party games) I knew that it wouldn't be as much fun the next time, and I would always win.
Thanks for the input.
I have Wario Ware and I'm very worried about the replay value. It seems to me that 90% of what makes the game fun is not actually knowing what you're supposed to do and having a very short time to figure it out.
How is it as a party game past the first few times? Is it a laugh riot until the player that has just seen the most games wins everytime? Has someone played multiplay on this a lot?
I have Elebits too but multiplayer makes me sick when someone else has the controls.:)
That's a judgment call like anything else on that Wiki article. Is this a valid fact? Even if it is does it belong here? Is this a legit source? Should all be normal questions. It's pretty easy to tell what's spam. The people doing this are going to be the kind of people that link to a page with 100 google ads.
I don't agree with "Since we have some spammers we should assume everyone is spamming."
It's not going to solve the problem of spamming anyway. They want the direct hits as much as the 'SEO' aspect.
Slashdot serves as a jumping off point to other sites. Wikipedia is built by content from the cited sources, they should do their part to "elevate" those sources.
If someone puts a spam link in there it should be delt with like any other "vandalism". What is stopping anyone from replacing the entire contents of a popular article with, "Shop at My Store!"?
That sucks, though I was kind of wondering if there are places other than Menards where programmmers have no access to the internet, period, ever, for any reason.
I was fired from my last job when they found out I was looking for another job. They showed up at my unemployment hearing with a contract I signed that had in it a clause saying I couldn't send personal email, and a ream of paper with all my personal emails on it. (I should point out that we had no internet access so "personal emails" were emails sent to other coworkers)
Anyway the judge blew them off because a) that wasn't why I was fired and b) he made the point to tell them that a contract is only good if you enforce it. It doesn't matter that it states I can't send personal email if they never mentioned it to me, or everyone else doing it while it's happening.
ps Are there other computer programmers out there who don't have internet access at work?
I agree the Microsoft bashing goes to far. If you want a secure computer turn it off, otherwise stuff can and will happen. If 90% of the world used Macs then Apple would be the ones releasing security patches daily. People can download millions of windows programs to do god knows what written by God knows who, then complain about Windows when it F's their computer.
It is nice that there is backward compatibility. That said there's got to be some give and take. It's a plus in the column of Windows that you can use old hardware and software, but that comes at a price. How much of Window's "instibility" comes from the fact that you can toss a video card from 1934 in your computer to run your DOS beta.11 program and it works.
I for one am happy to see the system requirement for Vista, because it means that for ONCE Windows isn't catering to the lowest common denominator. I hate Macs, but there is something to be said for dropping support for a failed attempt at something.
Even though it's somewhat impracicle I don't think it's that unreasonable to expect programmers to conform to Vista, rather than vise-versa.
Slashdot Mirror
I always get a kick out of the subjective nature of audio and video quality tricking people into hearing things they aren't. I really applies equally well to many other things, and to anyone that wasn't a complete boob, the complete nonsensical nature should be obvious. "I swapped my Ethernet cable and now my email is so much clearer!" "I got a more powerful wireless router and now websites aren't filled with static!"
I couldn't agree more. I want those late static bindings now, dagnabbit.
If it were going to use hot of not as any basis they would need to detect if the girl was blond and subtract 2 if she was and detect if there's at least a hint of cleavage in the photo and subtract 1 to 3 depending on exposure level. Otherwise the hot or not rankings are so skewed they are useless.
An open wifi network and someone leaving the door open to their house are NOT the same thing. Just because the front door is open doesn't mean they are inviting people to come take their big screen. The wifi network is being broadcast to you, and no one is out anything if you play nice with it. A closer analogy would be if your neighbor hooked up their cable to your tv and then got upset when you watched it.
This would make a lot of sense, especially since half the point of steam is that you can sign in from different locations and get/play the games you've paid for. (Maybe I shouldn't say "half the point," but it's a cool feature.) There would be some issues to workout, because you can play in "offline" mode, but it seems to me they could fix that by an automatic or user prompted "hot sync".
If you bid $200 you're saying "If this sells for $200 I'm ok with that." There is no earthly reason you can bid $200 then complain when you have to pay near that amount. A seller's contract is to sell the item for whatever it goes for. The bidder's is to pay up to what they bid....but there's no law saying you have to keep, or ever, bid on anything.
I agree that your analogy is accurate, but I don't think I made an analogy in the first place.
Let's stick with the radio and set up another hypothetical situation.
You bid $200, fake bidders send the price to $195, real bidder bids $196. Now what? The market price was set by a "real person" but they price may have never got that high without the fakes, although who's to say it wouldn't have?
See that's was my exact thought while unlocking the multiplayer (and dont get me started on needing to unlock multiplayer on games you buy expressly to have as party games) I knew that it wouldn't be as much fun the next time, and I would always win. Thanks for the input.
I have Wario Ware and I'm very worried about the replay value. It seems to me that 90% of what makes the game fun is not actually knowing what you're supposed to do and having a very short time to figure it out. How is it as a party game past the first few times? Is it a laugh riot until the player that has just seen the most games wins everytime? Has someone played multiplay on this a lot? I have Elebits too but multiplayer makes me sick when someone else has the controls. :)
That's a judgment call like anything else on that Wiki article. Is this a valid fact? Even if it is does it belong here? Is this a legit source? Should all be normal questions. It's pretty easy to tell what's spam. The people doing this are going to be the kind of people that link to a page with 100 google ads. I don't agree with "Since we have some spammers we should assume everyone is spamming." It's not going to solve the problem of spamming anyway. They want the direct hits as much as the 'SEO' aspect.
Slashdot serves as a jumping off point to other sites. Wikipedia is built by content from the cited sources, they should do their part to "elevate" those sources.
If someone puts a spam link in there it should be delt with like any other "vandalism". What is stopping anyone from replacing the entire contents of a popular article with, "Shop at My Store!"?
That sucks, though I was kind of wondering if there are places other than Menards where programmmers have no access to the internet, period, ever, for any reason.
I was fired from my last job when they found out I was looking for another job. They showed up at my unemployment hearing with a contract I signed that had in it a clause saying I couldn't send personal email, and a ream of paper with all my personal emails on it. (I should point out that we had no internet access so "personal emails" were emails sent to other coworkers) Anyway the judge blew them off because a) that wasn't why I was fired and b) he made the point to tell them that a contract is only good if you enforce it. It doesn't matter that it states I can't send personal email if they never mentioned it to me, or everyone else doing it while it's happening. ps Are there other computer programmers out there who don't have internet access at work?
I agree the Microsoft bashing goes to far. If you want a secure computer turn it off, otherwise stuff can and will happen. If 90% of the world used Macs then Apple would be the ones releasing security patches daily. People can download millions of windows programs to do god knows what written by God knows who, then complain about Windows when it F's their computer. It is nice that there is backward compatibility. That said there's got to be some give and take. It's a plus in the column of Windows that you can use old hardware and software, but that comes at a price. How much of Window's "instibility" comes from the fact that you can toss a video card from 1934 in your computer to run your DOS beta .11 program and it works.
I for one am happy to see the system requirement for Vista, because it means that for ONCE Windows isn't catering to the lowest common denominator. I hate Macs, but there is something to be said for dropping support for a failed attempt at something.
Even though it's somewhat impracicle I don't think it's that unreasonable to expect programmers to conform to Vista, rather than vise-versa.