I'm getting to the point where I won't buy anything with DRM in it at all. So far I refuse to buy games that contain significant DRM. And Steam games only when they're ridiculously cheap, typically under $3 or so, with the knowledge that I may live to regret it. And even then it's usually with knowledge that I can use the game files without reactivating them.
1,000 is probably on the low side ultimately, but with 100b synapses, you'd be averaging about 100m per structure. That's thoroughly unscientific, but you'd expect to have a fairly substantial number per structure. Otherwise minor damage to anything anywhere in the brain would be catastrophic.
I refuse to sign up for sites like that. I played around with OpenID for a bit, but stopped pretty quickly. A single point of failure is really not a good thing.
This is why we have the fifth amendment in the US, I haven't been following it lately, but it was considered a violation of the fifth amendment protections to compel disclosure of an encryption key from the suspect.
No, he's trolling alright, it's pretty much agreed upon by all but a conservative minority of American that access to health care is a right. The US was literally the only developed nation in the world to take access health care to be anything other than a right.
With the internet, it's gotten to the point where more and more vital services are moving online. So, we've basically got a choice to make, do we continue the status quo and keep government services offline or do we recategorize the internet as a right and allow the services to move online.
I'm guessing that people will still get caught by it, how long ago was it that the Batman Arkham Asylum glide "bug" was discovered? I bet there are still people asking about it.
Just because somebody sees through the lies you're telling doesn't make them pro-piracy. It just means that they're in touch with reality. Any pirate that's likely to pay for a game will do so whether or not their is any DRM. Claiming otherwise is just disingenuous.
And if they weren't going to pay for the game anyways, it makes precisely zero difference whether or not they pirated the game as the developer isn't making any money either way.
The precise limit to any harm is on the basis of idiotic publishers like EA and Ubisoft that assume that they can force pirates to pay for software regardless of what it does to paying customers. And retailers like GOG who then have a harder time convincing said idiotic publishers to allow them to sell the games.
More than that, just because the door is opened to character evidence doesn't necessarily going to mean that the jury is going to find it compelling. A case where I sat on a jury for the defense attorney was really on one of the witnesses about a contempt charge for skipping a deposition. It wasn't something that I got the feeling any of the other jurors felt was particularly compelling. Especially given the conduct of the particular attorney that was beating that dead horse.
He had a habit of tricking witnesses into saying things which the witnesses clearly didn't believe or which somebody of more education would have known better than to say.
What's going on is that we typically pay our sales and use tax to the business which then remits it to the appropriate state. For online orders we're supposed to pay the tax, but there's little knowledge of how to actually do it, few states, if any, advertise the necessity and there's little to no enforcement.
So, technically it's a preexisting tax, but nobody actually pays it because there's no enforcement. OTOH, businesses that don't collect and remit the tax do end up on the wrong side of an enforcement action.
The difference is Amazon and the rest would have to start collecting and remitting the taxes that are due, that would effectively mean that the goods are now being taxed. Previously, they were "taxed" but nobody actually paid it and it was rarely if ever enforced.
No, but the states have the right to impose the tax, and that's basically what's going on. All the Federal Government is doing here is compelling the online retailers to collect and remit the taxes which the states levy on those goods by way of sales taxes and use taxes.
As it is the states are in a situation where they don't want to be the first and drive businesses out of their state, but they need the revenue to fund services that the voters wanted.
The states would still have the right to eliminate their sales and use taxes as they see fit. The only tricky bit is deciding where exactly the sale took place.
You have to draw the line somewhere, going from 24 to 48 fps doubles the number of pixels that are present in uncompressed footage, going from there up to 120 or higher doesn't necessarily make much sense, you hit the point of diminishing returns pretty quickly.
There's only 4 options at the moment, and if the AT&T acquisition of T-mobile goes through we'll only have 3 options. Sure there are others, but Boost is owned by Sprint, and any other parties wanting to be cell phone carriers would have to contract with one of those 4.
Same ultimately goes for people that are wanting internet service at home, there's an extremely limited number of options. The markets don't function well when there aren't any choices to make.
You do realize that it really depends a great deal on how the 3D is accomplished, right? Apart from the cost and logistics of it, a system where you're eyes are seeing different images simultaneously would be indistinguishable from the real thing. You're eyes don't have any way of knowing whether they're seeing the same object or two similar images.
With proper regulation it could be a more efficient use of money than having a landline and internet. The problem is that there's no competition at all in the American telecommunication industry, and I'm really curious as to what exactly they're referring to when they claim it's competitive.
Yes, but that's not really an appropriate way of making the decision. Seattle has been incredibly important to the history of aviation, and yet what we get is a hand me down trainer. Not to mention that the northwest is more or less completely unrepresented. Not to mention the many astronauts that we've produced.
It's pretty screwed up given that NYC got one, and we didn't. And people wonder why we on the West Coast feel so resentful of the East Coasters. It's this sort of spoiled entitlement crap that really gets old. At least we here in Seattle have a meaningful connection to aviation.
Probably for the same reason that people hated FO3, it wasn't a Fallout game. The same reason that I hate the "new and imporoved" Lara Croft, it's not the same character as before.
It doesn't mean that it's wrong to do it, just that people form expectations even before they start playing, and if those expectations don't set them up for the game, you can ruin a perfectly good experience.
That's been the case previously, Linux gamers are willing to pay more than Mac or Windows users. There's likely multiple reasons, but part of it is making the platform attractive and part of it is the reduced options for native gaming.
That's a bad argument. Indie games with or without DRM face an up hill battle just be seen. Now, if you start looking at major publisher releases, then we might settle it. Besides Mr. Gog seems to be doing fine selling mainly on being DRM free.
That was my thought, as outraged as I am about the way Wikileaks has been handled, and that's quite a bit, it's a much less serious problem than what countries like China engage in.
Indeed, you can make just about any business more productive by terminating the entire HR department. The tricky thing is keeping the department from being reinstated.
I'd blame the voters for that. They don't want to have a gas tax high enough to pay to maintain the infrastructure and they don't want to use funds from other budgets to pay for it either. The politicians are more than happy to oblige and then blame somebody else when it inevitably goes wrong.
You don't think that perhaps he should have considered that before he claimed credit for that initial exploit? I can understand getting scared, but what sort of dumb ass posts the encryption key under his own name and then goes on various shows talking about it?
He more or less sank his own case, but at the same point, what sort of an idiot thinks that they can get away with that sort of crap when you're up against a corporation that thinks rootkitting a few million people is a reasoned response to piracy?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm getting to the point where I won't buy anything with DRM in it at all. So far I refuse to buy games that contain significant DRM. And Steam games only when they're ridiculously cheap, typically under $3 or so, with the knowledge that I may live to regret it. And even then it's usually with knowledge that I can use the game files without reactivating them.
1,000 is probably on the low side ultimately, but with 100b synapses, you'd be averaging about 100m per structure. That's thoroughly unscientific, but you'd expect to have a fairly substantial number per structure. Otherwise minor damage to anything anywhere in the brain would be catastrophic.
Personally, I like my hash salted. But that's just me.
I refuse to sign up for sites like that. I played around with OpenID for a bit, but stopped pretty quickly. A single point of failure is really not a good thing.
XKCD
This is why we have the fifth amendment in the US, I haven't been following it lately, but it was considered a violation of the fifth amendment protections to compel disclosure of an encryption key from the suspect.
No, he's trolling alright, it's pretty much agreed upon by all but a conservative minority of American that access to health care is a right. The US was literally the only developed nation in the world to take access health care to be anything other than a right.
With the internet, it's gotten to the point where more and more vital services are moving online. So, we've basically got a choice to make, do we continue the status quo and keep government services offline or do we recategorize the internet as a right and allow the services to move online.
I'm guessing that people will still get caught by it, how long ago was it that the Batman Arkham Asylum glide "bug" was discovered? I bet there are still people asking about it.
Just because somebody sees through the lies you're telling doesn't make them pro-piracy. It just means that they're in touch with reality. Any pirate that's likely to pay for a game will do so whether or not their is any DRM. Claiming otherwise is just disingenuous.
And if they weren't going to pay for the game anyways, it makes precisely zero difference whether or not they pirated the game as the developer isn't making any money either way.
The precise limit to any harm is on the basis of idiotic publishers like EA and Ubisoft that assume that they can force pirates to pay for software regardless of what it does to paying customers. And retailers like GOG who then have a harder time convincing said idiotic publishers to allow them to sell the games.
More than that, just because the door is opened to character evidence doesn't necessarily going to mean that the jury is going to find it compelling. A case where I sat on a jury for the defense attorney was really on one of the witnesses about a contempt charge for skipping a deposition. It wasn't something that I got the feeling any of the other jurors felt was particularly compelling. Especially given the conduct of the particular attorney that was beating that dead horse.
He had a habit of tricking witnesses into saying things which the witnesses clearly didn't believe or which somebody of more education would have known better than to say.
What's going on is that we typically pay our sales and use tax to the business which then remits it to the appropriate state. For online orders we're supposed to pay the tax, but there's little knowledge of how to actually do it, few states, if any, advertise the necessity and there's little to no enforcement.
So, technically it's a preexisting tax, but nobody actually pays it because there's no enforcement. OTOH, businesses that don't collect and remit the tax do end up on the wrong side of an enforcement action.
The difference is Amazon and the rest would have to start collecting and remitting the taxes that are due, that would effectively mean that the goods are now being taxed. Previously, they were "taxed" but nobody actually paid it and it was rarely if ever enforced.
No, but the states have the right to impose the tax, and that's basically what's going on. All the Federal Government is doing here is compelling the online retailers to collect and remit the taxes which the states levy on those goods by way of sales taxes and use taxes.
As it is the states are in a situation where they don't want to be the first and drive businesses out of their state, but they need the revenue to fund services that the voters wanted.
The states would still have the right to eliminate their sales and use taxes as they see fit. The only tricky bit is deciding where exactly the sale took place.
You have to draw the line somewhere, going from 24 to 48 fps doubles the number of pixels that are present in uncompressed footage, going from there up to 120 or higher doesn't necessarily make much sense, you hit the point of diminishing returns pretty quickly.
There's only 4 options at the moment, and if the AT&T acquisition of T-mobile goes through we'll only have 3 options. Sure there are others, but Boost is owned by Sprint, and any other parties wanting to be cell phone carriers would have to contract with one of those 4.
Same ultimately goes for people that are wanting internet service at home, there's an extremely limited number of options. The markets don't function well when there aren't any choices to make.
You do realize that it really depends a great deal on how the 3D is accomplished, right? Apart from the cost and logistics of it, a system where you're eyes are seeing different images simultaneously would be indistinguishable from the real thing. You're eyes don't have any way of knowing whether they're seeing the same object or two similar images.
With proper regulation it could be a more efficient use of money than having a landline and internet. The problem is that there's no competition at all in the American telecommunication industry, and I'm really curious as to what exactly they're referring to when they claim it's competitive.
Yes, but that's not really an appropriate way of making the decision. Seattle has been incredibly important to the history of aviation, and yet what we get is a hand me down trainer. Not to mention that the northwest is more or less completely unrepresented. Not to mention the many astronauts that we've produced.
It's pretty screwed up given that NYC got one, and we didn't. And people wonder why we on the West Coast feel so resentful of the East Coasters. It's this sort of spoiled entitlement crap that really gets old. At least we here in Seattle have a meaningful connection to aviation.
Probably for the same reason that people hated FO3, it wasn't a Fallout game. The same reason that I hate the "new and imporoved" Lara Croft, it's not the same character as before.
It doesn't mean that it's wrong to do it, just that people form expectations even before they start playing, and if those expectations don't set them up for the game, you can ruin a perfectly good experience.
That's been the case previously, Linux gamers are willing to pay more than Mac or Windows users. There's likely multiple reasons, but part of it is making the platform attractive and part of it is the reduced options for native gaming.
That's a bad argument. Indie games with or without DRM face an up hill battle just be seen. Now, if you start looking at major publisher releases, then we might settle it. Besides Mr. Gog seems to be doing fine selling mainly on being DRM free.
That was my thought, as outraged as I am about the way Wikileaks has been handled, and that's quite a bit, it's a much less serious problem than what countries like China engage in.
Indeed, you can make just about any business more productive by terminating the entire HR department. The tricky thing is keeping the department from being reinstated.
I'd blame the voters for that. They don't want to have a gas tax high enough to pay to maintain the infrastructure and they don't want to use funds from other budgets to pay for it either. The politicians are more than happy to oblige and then blame somebody else when it inevitably goes wrong.
The settlement isn't that confidential. Geohot Sony settlement details leak
You don't think that perhaps he should have considered that before he claimed credit for that initial exploit? I can understand getting scared, but what sort of dumb ass posts the encryption key under his own name and then goes on various shows talking about it?
He more or less sank his own case, but at the same point, what sort of an idiot thinks that they can get away with that sort of crap when you're up against a corporation that thinks rootkitting a few million people is a reasoned response to piracy?