Wow... Some pretty cool stuff..... It always amazes me what kind of stuff we have. And how old it is. This stuff was developed in the '80s!! Imagine what they can do now! They could read your newspaper over your shoulder from a sattelite, in the '70s. Imagine what they can do now.....
Back on-topic, I don't see this stuff becoming useful for non-military purposes though. The article briefly glanced over what see as the biggest problem: underwater sea life. If you're rocketing at Mach 2 underwater, you're going to hit some fish. They're fast, but damn, not that fast. At the very least, a fish hitting the bubble will destroy the bubble, probably the ship as well (Tuna salad sandwich anyone?) How do they propose to get the sea life out of the way??
Look at Britney, N*Sync, Backstree Boys, etc. A free market would have never allowed these performers to sell, let
alone be sensations.
Not that I like pop-crap groups like those listed, but I fail to see your reasoning. There's a void that teenagers create. They need role models and people to look up to. Whether it's good or bad, these boy-girl bands fill this void. They want someone to droll over, and so they spend their money on the Backhole Boys. Teenagers have different rules when it comes to their shopping habits. The music industry is not just for your taste in music.
the problem is that ALL the CD's are one price.
I don't see this either. If I go into Tower Records, I see a variety of new CDs for anywhere from $15.99 to $18.99. That's a %15-18 percent price difference. If I go into Best Buy, I see the same thing, except the price range is $10.99 to $12.99. Exactly how are these prices the same?
12 bucks for a new big-label CD..... I always buy my new stuff there.... It's still way too high for something that's made so cheaply, but hey....
For older stuff I'll pay 5 or 6 bucks per at BMG online. That's a good deal......
Yeah they're greedy bastards and they'll get what the deserve, but until that time just go to Best Buy.
Who who really gives a damn? I usually buy books that have been recommended through word-of-mouth, anyway, who cares what Amazon's computer cooks up for you? Hell, I really don't care about the cookies on my computer - if someone steals my credit card number then it'll show up on the statement and I can get my money back. So what if Maxim ads always always pop up on yahoo sites for me? So I clicked on one, once.
What if they get your social security number?? Do you realize the damage they could do to your credit if they get that #?? And you don't just get your money back if someone uses your credit card. You are still liable under the law for up to $50. And you have to fill out a crap load of paperwork and deal with the CC companies. That's a pain in the ass.
The whole point of people arguing about this stuff is that it has to stop somewhere. If we let the corporations continue with no one to check them, they'll have a complete database filled with your life. Do you really want that? I'm willing to give up some convenience to keep my name off of people's lists.
Of course, a lot of people will say it's already too late.....
I still maintain that this is more a control gaining tactic than a protection of rights.
It's about both. The RIAA believes that what Napster is doing is illegal. They are infringing on the RIAA's clients. That's what this case is about. However, if the RIAA can win this case, they'll have precedent to start shutting down other servies. Then, they'll have control, just like they've always had before Napster and the others came along. This case is about illegal distribution, but ultimately, you are right, it's about control of distribution.
If the RIAA was fully committed in protecting artists interests, they would be prosecuting the end parties themselves.
That is silly, here's why:
a) The RIAA knows this would be a stupid and fruitless thing to do. This has been proven time and again. Going after Joe Bloe Anonymous downloader is pointless.
b) Why go after the little fish when killing the big fish would have the same effect??
Of course, this goes under the false assumption (which the RIAA supposedly subscribes to) that by shutting down Napster, all online distribution of music will suddenly stop. As much as I think the RIAA is a bunch of greedy pigs, you have to give them a little bit of techsavyness. They realize that they can't shut down the IRC or the ftp sites, so they go after whatever they can go after, and that's Napster. It's the last desperate grasp of a dying, bloated beast.
Since when? Character is important to a lot of consumers, but if that were true for all consumers, why would we have so many cheaply made electronics?? Consumers don't care if their VCR's manufacturer has character. Is it cheap? Does it work? That's what it comes down to.
I mean, most of us will openly admit that Napster is unethical, and we'll also openly insist that the RIAA is unethical.
They're greedy pigs, but they're not unethical. They're just doing what people in America have been doing for a long time, makin money.
Maybe I missed something, but if you can prove that the RIAA killed someone, bribed someone to get their way, etc, etc, then you're correct.
Selfish? Nah. Arrogant? Absolutely. We've worked hard to earn the right to be.
I disagree with this. Of course I don't know your situation, so I can only comment in general. You say you've earned the right to be arrogant, why? Just because your hobby has become your career? I'm assuming that you were like most tech people and played with computers, hardware, etc when you were young, if not I apologize. Anyway, most of your life you've been playing with computers and learned how they worked. You did it because you liked doing it. No one forced you to learn how to install Linux, you did it on your own free time. There is no "become a techie" high school course. You're lucky because what you like to do just happens to be an extremely sought after skill. That's luck. That's not earning anything. It doesn't mean you shouldn't enjoy what you have, but it doesn't justify being arrogant.
we should probably look at.....
on
Selfish Society
·
· Score: 1
the medical profession for some clues. Doctors have been for a while now in the same position that tech people are now coming in to.
They are a kind of elite. Not everyone can be a doctor. And even if you have the smarts to be one, you can't become one if you don't have some kind of finicial background (yes, there are exceptions). Remember Baldwin's line from Malice?? "You ask me if I have a God complex? I AM God!" I know some techie people who feel that way sometimes.
My point is that doctors always have been and always will be an elite group. They are given a kind of noble status, because of all that hard work they put in to become a doctor. Also with what they have to go to. You want long hours? Try being an emergency room doctor.
Are tech people reaching that same status? I realize that there are differences. If a doctor fails, people die. There's even a split among doctors. Emergency room doctors work their asses of saving people's lives. Yet a family doctor comes in at 8am, treats people until 4pm and then goes home. He doesn't really work THAT hard. It's just that he knows a whole lot of stuff and trained hard to become that way. It's the same with techie people. They did have to work hard to know what they know, but then again they liked what they did. No one forced them to spend hours taking apart a computer, they did it themselves because they liked it. I find it hard to have empathy for those people who posted here earlier about reading all those books and learning all they know as being hard work they should be rewarded for. You wanted to do it! No one forced you to learn how to install Linux.
I'm sorry if it doesn't seem like I have a definative point. I'm just writing off the top of my head.
Re:Katz writes about things without having 2 clues
on
Selfish Society
·
· Score: 1
Work hard, my ass. I've worked far harder than most people around me to get where I am, and it's still nowhere near as hard as regular folks have to work to get even half as much. Get real.
I think about this subject alot. What exactly is hard work for a programmer? Spending long hours in front of the computer can numb their minds, but is it hard work? W. Virginia Coal miners spent long hours AND worked their asses off. Blue collar people work long hours in the hot sun. That is hard physical labor. Programmers spend hours thinking up solutions to problems, but is it really hard work? We're in an air condtioned cube sitting in a comfy chair. Just because we exercise our brains, is that really hard work? I don't know...
We expect laborers to just do their work. We expect janitors to clean, gardeners to water and mow. If they don't do their job, we fire them. We don't even think about it, they're just supposed to do their job. What would happen if we had that same attitude towards IT people? Just do your job, install that OS, give out those IPs. They would complain and bitch about "not being respected" (I know I probably would). Why? Because they can, because they're in demand.
The difference is that there is a lot of training that goes into being a tech. It doesn't take any training to dig a ditch. Because of that training that IT workers have, do they deserve a special attitude and respect? Again, I don't have the answers.
Sorry for the rambling, I'm just kind of writing what comes to my head.....
This guy just rambles and rambles. He makes broad generalizations, he doesn't follow up his points with examples or facts, and he doesn't make sense. Sorry, I'm sure this has been said before, but I just wanted to say it.
In fact, prosperity and the acquisition of technology have become this society's hallmark; it doesn't really have any other principles.
Very broad generalization. I know a lot of "young techs" who have a lot of principles. They're hard working and work because they love the work they do. They just happen to get a crap load of money for it.
Since this particularly gifted society..
What makes this society so much more "gifted" than any other?? I know how to program, but I don't know crap about fixing a car. Or perhaps he was comparing this society to ones of the past. In which case the argument still doesn't hold. He's implying that we've evolved somewhat into a higher form of intellect. Humans haven't changed, we're just riding a high. Is it this high that is the "gift" he's talking about??
The are others, but I think you get my point. Is this Katz's opinion? Or is he just rehashing about what's going on in that book.?
Maybe I just don't get Katz, but it seems the more he rambles, the more I just tune him out. He could have some very good things to say, if only he didn't sensationalize everything and overdramatize things.
Try setting up a hotmail account, and never use it. Log in a few weeks later and stare in disbelief.
I did exactly that... I was curious as to how much spam I would get for not touching a new hotmail account. So I just created one and sent a test email to my Yahoo! account. When I checked my Yahoo account, it dumped the email into my Spam Folder.... hehehehe...
Even Baldur's Gate, fantastic as it was, did not feel exactly the same as sitting with friends, delving into a dungeon. This is not to say that it's a "bad" thing that it isn't exactly the same; just that a lot of people are going to be expecting the same feelings they'd get from playing the game, and won't, and will be disappointed or even angry.
I don't think it's possible for the movie to be anywhere near what it's like to play a game. What made AD&D so fun was social interaction, watching your own character grow and develop, having something to do one (or more) nights a week, etc.
How can you replicate that in a movie??? You can't!! Most people think D&D is dorky and stupid (not my opinion, just thinking of Joe Q Public) so they're going to avoid a movie with D&D in the title. The D&D fans are going to rush in, watch it, and be disappointed because it didn't give them the same feeling. You're watching someone else's character unfold, not your own.
All they're doing in this movie is just making a fantasy movie. They CAN'T bring D&D to the screen. For this movie to be succesful (Hollywood definition) there has to be lots of exciting action, lots of one-liners, girls with two square inches of leather armor, etc. That is NOT D&D, except maybe for the girls with skimpy leather costumes.
This movie might be good as a fantasy flick, but I would bring popcorn and sodas into the theatre, not d10s and character sheets.
They could take some pointers from Ultima Underworld from Origin. I know it's a fantasy game with combat, but it is 3d and there were a lot of good puzzles in that game. It goes well beyond your usual find-a-key-to-a-door puzzles.
A quick search of my local news server turns up about 40 MP3 newsgroups covering most of the interesting genres. Why don't the napster users just move over there? There are lots of news grabbers that strip binaries out of a new stream, it's not centralized so there's no one to shut down, you can post anonymously fairly easily, and the only down side is the occasional live goat porn or make money fast file
Umm.. because I don't want to wade through gigs of mp3s looking for something. Newsgroups only give what someone posts, and it's only available for the three days the posts are kept on the server. I don't have the time or patience to sort through all that crap.
Imagine going into a record store looking for an REM cd and being told, "I'm sorry! We only have these 80 cds on sale today. Tomorrow we'll have some different ones!"
It's good to see that a Microsoft owned news service can still cover security bugs in Microsoft products.
Hmm.. I wonder.....
"The only defense against the vulnerability is installing the Microsoft patch, which will be available shortly on the Microsoft.com security Web site.
How about not using Outlook? I also love the "Microsoft profits top Street forecasts" link in the middle, when in fact MSFT stock has plummeted today (5.25 points as of this time).
I had hoped that NBC would retain its journalistic integrity, even when partnering with Satan, but it looks like they're under the control of Billy Boy. Sigh, one less news source to trust.
Someone else said this, but I REALLY love the "you can fix this now by installing IE 5.5!!!". Really makes you wonder, and I'm not a conspiracy freak.......
I wonder if MS has spent the time since June (when the article said they found out about it) fixing the bug, or if they've spent it all figuring out how to exploit it and get people to dl IE5.5
That brings up another question. The article specifically says that people can protect themselves "immdediately" by downloading IE5.5. So did MS know all along about this bug? What could be possibly be in IE5.5 that would fix an Outlook bug? Exactly how long did they know about this? And for the conspiracy people, did MS create this bug to exploit at a future date? How much of this is a geniune "Damn, let's fix this bug!".....
Let's forward all of this to the Justice Dept. I think they really should have the members of/. on their advising panel.
a department store, cannot pick out a specific individuals and claim they are trespassing while allowing the rest of the public free access
I'm sorry, but they can do just that. A store CAN exclude people from coming in and writing down prices. Best Buy (for example) has kicked people out of the store for writing down prices on, say, VCRs. The people who do this are usually under-cover employees from Circuit City, Radio Shack, etc who want to compare prices. Best Buy is well within their rights (legally) to ask these individuals to leave. This actually happens a lot at stores like these.
This is very similar to robots browsing around for prices on web sites. I'm not going to argue weither metabrowsing is good or bad, I'm just saying the eBay has a valid argument on telling these robots to buzz off, as well as exclude certain traffic from entering the site.
And who, may I ask, determines ``what is good for us,'' if not us, the people? Surely you don't mean to suggest that we should turn over our lawmaking to the likes of the RIAA, because, I humbly submit, they are hardly an unbiased party when it comes to copyright law.
I would never suggest such a thing, that's scary just to think about. I never said that people don't know what's good for them, or that a certain group should tell people what is good for them. All I said was that people sometimes don't do what they KNOW is good for them. People speed and use cell phones while driving even though they know it's dangerous. (I'm just as guilty as the next person, I like driving fast.) Which is why laws must take into consideration more than just the "will of the people". Lawmakers should step back and take input from all sides and all views, which was my point to begin with.
Your argument cuts both ways. Just as people who copy music do not take into (snip) that they like.
I agree with everything you said. The compromise worked, but only because there was no other way. And it will be a glorious morning when the RIAA wakes up and figures out that they can't force people what to do with the music they buy. And I don't have any idea on the last proposition you mentioned. How to have people be compensated while letting people copy at will? You tell me, I just post here.......
Of course, it may turn out that the new compromise, whatever it turns out to be makes it possible to make money as a musician, but not possible to make money as a middle man standing between musicians and their fans. There are some established interests that aren't going to like that very much, but in the end it is the will of the public that matters. If record companies end up going the way of gaslight manufacturers and horse-buggy builders, well, that's progress for you.
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing those established interests be taken down a few rungs. I do feel, however, that they serve a purpose. Another message I read on this story said that the Big 5 do pay a lot for promotion, touring, etc, and also weeding out noise. I think that touring is critical for artists to spread their works live (which is what it's all about for a lot of singers). Perhaps the Big 5 would be reduced to just a manager role, such as taking care of touring, promotion, etc. Distribution would be left to some form of electronic medium. I don't know, I'm probably just repeating what's already been said. The future is still very foggy.
copyright enforcement turns to laws and the tools of law enforcement. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but we have to ask ourselves, if a law is widely violated by a majority of the citizens, then is that law really an expression of the will of the people (the ultimate force from which the law's authority is derived)? And if not, then should we really be enforcing legal penalties on those who violate this law that does not derive from the will of the people
Sometimes the people don't do what they know is good for them. That is another driving force for laws. Think of speeding. I contend that most people in this country speed at least 5mph over. Should we stop writing tickets because obviously the will of the people is go as fast as we want? Another example is seat belts. When that started taking effect, people bitched and complained. "You can't make me do something I don't want to do!!". The law was enforced, people got ticketed, death rates in accidents went down, and everyone went, "hey, that's not so bad."
The will of the people doesn't always take into account the rights of other people. Let's assume that people trading mp3s over napster are taking sales away from indie artists (big assumption, I know). The traders want to continue trading free music, that's their "will", even though it is hurting someone else. Do we abolish copyright laws? Of course not.
The people's will only has a part to play in law-making. To make a "good" law, one must step back and see things from all angles, including saftey of the people (hence seat belt laws), and other things.
that is, unless I happen to like pop music. I don't like it, but until recently I didn't have a choice - that's all there was.
While I agree that there is a lot of recycled pop crap out there, I think you're being blind by making a statement such as "that's all there was".
There is plenty of original music out there: rap, classical, some rock and alot of others. I think you're just being blinded by the overflow of Britney, Backhole Boys, et. al. See past the glaring crap and there's a lot of good new stuff coming out. How do you find out the good new stuff? Well, there's where Napster and friends come in..... but that's another discussion for another post.:-)
Also, MP3s suck? What bitrate are you listening to? Have you ever heard a 160bit+ mp3 recording made from a digital source? Can you tell the difference? I contend that one cannot tell the difference. MP3s are good, but remember they're only as good as the source they were compressed from and the bit rate they were compressed at.
This is off-topic, so don't flame me. But why do you feel it should be free? You pay for the paper version of the Times, the on-line version has the same articles, yet somehow it has to be free since it's online? I don't follow your logic. You don't want to give personal information? I can appreciate that..... It's just that last half which I'm confused about. I've been on the web for a while, so I understand the motto of a free internet, but does that really apply to things like this?
Feel free to take this to email if you'd like, if you don't feel like posting off-topic.
Re:Obselence -- Something to fear?
on
Too Old To Code?
·
· Score: 1
I have a question pertaining to this. You say that C is phasing out. What aspect of C do you mean. C as used in embedded software? As just an executable-on-windows software? Do you think C++ will replace C on embedded platforms? Is it already?
Actualy, no, I don't remember the "French Purity Laws". Can someone give me a quick rundown? This sounds interesting. Does it have something to do with keeping the French launguage pure and unpolluted? That's my first guess....
Slashdot Mirror
Back on-topic, I don't see this stuff becoming useful for non-military purposes though. The article briefly glanced over what see as the biggest problem: underwater sea life. If you're rocketing at Mach 2 underwater, you're going to hit some fish. They're fast, but damn, not that fast. At the very least, a fish hitting the bubble will destroy the bubble, probably the ship as well (Tuna salad sandwich anyone?) How do they propose to get the sea life out of the way??
Not that I like pop-crap groups like those listed, but I fail to see your reasoning. There's a void that teenagers create. They need role models and people to look up to. Whether it's good or bad, these boy-girl bands fill this void. They want someone to droll over, and so they spend their money on the Backhole Boys. Teenagers have different rules when it comes to their shopping habits. The music industry is not just for your taste in music.
the problem is that ALL the CD's are one price.
I don't see this either. If I go into Tower Records, I see a variety of new CDs for anywhere from $15.99 to $18.99. That's a %15-18 percent price difference. If I go into Best Buy, I see the same thing, except the price range is $10.99 to $12.99. Exactly how are these prices the same?
I say damn... you aren't on Napster, aren't you? What kind of connection do you have? :-)
12 bucks for a new big-label CD..... I always buy my new stuff there.... It's still way too high for something that's made so cheaply, but hey.... For older stuff I'll pay 5 or 6 bucks per at BMG online. That's a good deal...... Yeah they're greedy bastards and they'll get what the deserve, but until that time just go to Best Buy.
What if they get your social security number?? Do you realize the damage they could do to your credit if they get that #?? And you don't just get your money back if someone uses your credit card. You are still liable under the law for up to $50. And you have to fill out a crap load of paperwork and deal with the CC companies. That's a pain in the ass.
The whole point of people arguing about this stuff is that it has to stop somewhere. If we let the corporations continue with no one to check them, they'll have a complete database filled with your life. Do you really want that? I'm willing to give up some convenience to keep my name off of people's lists.
Of course, a lot of people will say it's already too late.....
It's about both. The RIAA believes that what Napster is doing is illegal. They are infringing on the RIAA's clients. That's what this case is about. However, if the RIAA can win this case, they'll have precedent to start shutting down other servies. Then, they'll have control, just like they've always had before Napster and the others came along. This case is about illegal distribution, but ultimately, you are right, it's about control of distribution.
If the RIAA was fully committed in protecting artists interests, they would be prosecuting the end parties themselves.
That is silly, here's why:
a) The RIAA knows this would be a stupid and fruitless thing to do. This has been proven time and again. Going after Joe Bloe Anonymous downloader is pointless.
b) Why go after the little fish when killing the big fish would have the same effect??
Of course, this goes under the false assumption (which the RIAA supposedly subscribes to) that by shutting down Napster, all online distribution of music will suddenly stop. As much as I think the RIAA is a bunch of greedy pigs, you have to give them a little bit of techsavyness. They realize that they can't shut down the IRC or the ftp sites, so they go after whatever they can go after, and that's Napster. It's the last desperate grasp of a dying, bloated beast.
Since when? Character is important to a lot of consumers, but if that were true for all consumers, why would we have so many cheaply made electronics?? Consumers don't care if their VCR's manufacturer has character. Is it cheap? Does it work? That's what it comes down to.
I mean, most of us will openly admit that Napster is unethical, and we'll also openly insist that the RIAA is unethical.
They're greedy pigs, but they're not unethical. They're just doing what people in America have been doing for a long time, makin money.
Maybe I missed something, but if you can prove that the RIAA killed someone, bribed someone to get their way, etc, etc, then you're correct.
I disagree with this. Of course I don't know your situation, so I can only comment in general. You say you've earned the right to be arrogant, why? Just because your hobby has become your career? I'm assuming that you were like most tech people and played with computers, hardware, etc when you were young, if not I apologize. Anyway, most of your life you've been playing with computers and learned how they worked. You did it because you liked doing it. No one forced you to learn how to install Linux, you did it on your own free time. There is no "become a techie" high school course. You're lucky because what you like to do just happens to be an extremely sought after skill. That's luck. That's not earning anything. It doesn't mean you shouldn't enjoy what you have, but it doesn't justify being arrogant.
They are a kind of elite. Not everyone can be a doctor. And even if you have the smarts to be one, you can't become one if you don't have some kind of finicial background (yes, there are exceptions). Remember Baldwin's line from Malice?? "You ask me if I have a God complex? I AM God!" I know some techie people who feel that way sometimes.
My point is that doctors always have been and always will be an elite group. They are given a kind of noble status, because of all that hard work they put in to become a doctor. Also with what they have to go to. You want long hours? Try being an emergency room doctor.
Are tech people reaching that same status? I realize that there are differences. If a doctor fails, people die. There's even a split among doctors. Emergency room doctors work their asses of saving people's lives. Yet a family doctor comes in at 8am, treats people until 4pm and then goes home. He doesn't really work THAT hard. It's just that he knows a whole lot of stuff and trained hard to become that way. It's the same with techie people. They did have to work hard to know what they know, but then again they liked what they did. No one forced them to spend hours taking apart a computer, they did it themselves because they liked it. I find it hard to have empathy for those people who posted here earlier about reading all those books and learning all they know as being hard work they should be rewarded for. You wanted to do it! No one forced you to learn how to install Linux.
I'm sorry if it doesn't seem like I have a definative point. I'm just writing off the top of my head.
I think about this subject alot. What exactly is hard work for a programmer? Spending long hours in front of the computer can numb their minds, but is it hard work? W. Virginia Coal miners spent long hours AND worked their asses off. Blue collar people work long hours in the hot sun. That is hard physical labor. Programmers spend hours thinking up solutions to problems, but is it really hard work? We're in an air condtioned cube sitting in a comfy chair. Just because we exercise our brains, is that really hard work? I don't know...
We expect laborers to just do their work. We expect janitors to clean, gardeners to water and mow. If they don't do their job, we fire them. We don't even think about it, they're just supposed to do their job. What would happen if we had that same attitude towards IT people? Just do your job, install that OS, give out those IPs. They would complain and bitch about "not being respected" (I know I probably would). Why? Because they can, because they're in demand.
The difference is that there is a lot of training that goes into being a tech. It doesn't take any training to dig a ditch. Because of that training that IT workers have, do they deserve a special attitude and respect? Again, I don't have the answers.
Sorry for the rambling, I'm just kind of writing what comes to my head.....
In fact, prosperity and the acquisition of technology have become this society's hallmark; it doesn't really have any other principles.
Very broad generalization. I know a lot of "young techs" who have a lot of principles. They're hard working and work because they love the work they do. They just happen to get a crap load of money for it.
Since this particularly gifted society..
What makes this society so much more "gifted" than any other?? I know how to program, but I don't know crap about fixing a car. Or perhaps he was comparing this society to ones of the past. In which case the argument still doesn't hold. He's implying that we've evolved somewhat into a higher form of intellect. Humans haven't changed, we're just riding a high. Is it this high that is the "gift" he's talking about??
The are others, but I think you get my point. Is this Katz's opinion? Or is he just rehashing about what's going on in that book.?
Maybe I just don't get Katz, but it seems the more he rambles, the more I just tune him out. He could have some very good things to say, if only he didn't sensationalize everything and overdramatize things.
Try setting up a hotmail account, and never use it. Log in a few weeks later and stare in disbelief.
I did exactly that... I was curious as to how much spam I would get for not touching a new hotmail account. So I just created one and sent a test email to my Yahoo! account. When I checked my Yahoo account, it dumped the email into my Spam Folder.... hehehehe...
Funny? Definately! Troll? Maybe..... but definately not interesting.....
I don't think it's possible for the movie to be anywhere near what it's like to play a game. What made AD&D so fun was social interaction, watching your own character grow and develop, having something to do one (or more) nights a week, etc.
How can you replicate that in a movie??? You can't!! Most people think D&D is dorky and stupid (not my opinion, just thinking of Joe Q Public) so they're going to avoid a movie with D&D in the title. The D&D fans are going to rush in, watch it, and be disappointed because it didn't give them the same feeling. You're watching someone else's character unfold, not your own.
All they're doing in this movie is just making a fantasy movie. They CAN'T bring D&D to the screen. For this movie to be succesful (Hollywood definition) there has to be lots of exciting action, lots of one-liners, girls with two square inches of leather armor, etc. That is NOT D&D, except maybe for the girls with skimpy leather costumes.
This movie might be good as a fantasy flick, but I would bring popcorn and sodas into the theatre, not d10s and character sheets.
It's still one of my all-time favorites.
Umm.. because I don't want to wade through gigs of mp3s looking for something. Newsgroups only give what someone posts, and it's only available for the three days the posts are kept on the server. I don't have the time or patience to sort through all that crap.
Imagine going into a record store looking for an REM cd and being told, "I'm sorry! We only have these 80 cds on sale today. Tomorrow we'll have some different ones!"
No thanks...........
(nod) Thank you. :-)
Hmm.. I wonder.....
"The only defense against the vulnerability is installing the Microsoft patch, which will be available shortly on the Microsoft.com security Web site.
How about not using Outlook? I also love the "Microsoft profits top Street forecasts" link in the middle, when in fact MSFT stock has plummeted today (5.25 points as of this time).
I had hoped that NBC would retain its journalistic integrity, even when partnering with Satan, but it looks like they're under the control of Billy Boy. Sigh, one less news source to trust.
Someone else said this, but I REALLY love the "you can fix this now by installing IE 5.5!!!". Really makes you wonder, and I'm not a conspiracy freak.......
I wonder if MS has spent the time since June (when the article said they found out about it) fixing the bug, or if they've spent it all figuring out how to exploit it and get people to dl IE5.5
That brings up another question. The article specifically says that people can protect themselves "immdediately" by downloading IE5.5. So did MS know all along about this bug? What could be possibly be in IE5.5 that would fix an Outlook bug? Exactly how long did they know about this? And for the conspiracy people, did MS create this bug to exploit at a future date? How much of this is a geniune "Damn, let's fix this bug!".....
Let's forward all of this to the Justice Dept. I think they really should have the members of /. on their advising panel.
I'm sorry, but they can do just that. A store CAN exclude people from coming in and writing down prices. Best Buy (for example) has kicked people out of the store for writing down prices on, say, VCRs. The people who do this are usually under-cover employees from Circuit City, Radio Shack, etc who want to compare prices. Best Buy is well within their rights (legally) to ask these individuals to leave. This actually happens a lot at stores like these.
This is very similar to robots browsing around for prices on web sites. I'm not going to argue weither metabrowsing is good or bad, I'm just saying the eBay has a valid argument on telling these robots to buzz off, as well as exclude certain traffic from entering the site.
I would never suggest such a thing, that's scary just to think about. I never said that people don't know what's good for them, or that a certain group should tell people what is good for them. All I said was that people sometimes don't do what they KNOW is good for them. People speed and use cell phones while driving even though they know it's dangerous. (I'm just as guilty as the next person, I like driving fast.) Which is why laws must take into consideration more than just the "will of the people". Lawmakers should step back and take input from all sides and all views, which was my point to begin with.
Your argument cuts both ways. Just as people who copy music do not take into (snip) that they like.
I agree with everything you said. The compromise worked, but only because there was no other way. And it will be a glorious morning when the RIAA wakes up and figures out that they can't force people what to do with the music they buy. And I don't have any idea on the last proposition you mentioned. How to have people be compensated while letting people copy at will? You tell me, I just post here.......
Of course, it may turn out that the new compromise, whatever it turns out to be makes it possible to make money as a musician, but not possible to make money as a middle man standing between musicians and their fans. There are some established interests that aren't going to like that very much, but in the end it is the will of the public that matters. If record companies end up going the way of gaslight manufacturers and horse-buggy builders, well, that's progress for you.
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing those established interests be taken down a few rungs. I do feel, however, that they serve a purpose. Another message I read on this story said that the Big 5 do pay a lot for promotion, touring, etc, and also weeding out noise. I think that touring is critical for artists to spread their works live (which is what it's all about for a lot of singers). Perhaps the Big 5 would be reduced to just a manager role, such as taking care of touring, promotion, etc. Distribution would be left to some form of electronic medium. I don't know, I'm probably just repeating what's already been said. The future is still very foggy.
Sometimes the people don't do what they know is good for them. That is another driving force for laws. Think of speeding. I contend that most people in this country speed at least 5mph over. Should we stop writing tickets because obviously the will of the people is go as fast as we want? Another example is seat belts. When that started taking effect, people bitched and complained. "You can't make me do something I don't want to do!!". The law was enforced, people got ticketed, death rates in accidents went down, and everyone went, "hey, that's not so bad."
The will of the people doesn't always take into account the rights of other people. Let's assume that people trading mp3s over napster are taking sales away from indie artists (big assumption, I know). The traders want to continue trading free music, that's their "will", even though it is hurting someone else. Do we abolish copyright laws? Of course not.
The people's will only has a part to play in law-making. To make a "good" law, one must step back and see things from all angles, including saftey of the people (hence seat belt laws), and other things.
While I agree that there is a lot of recycled pop crap out there, I think you're being blind by making a statement such as "that's all there was".
There is plenty of original music out there: rap, classical, some rock and alot of others. I think you're just being blinded by the overflow of Britney, Backhole Boys, et. al. See past the glaring crap and there's a lot of good new stuff coming out. How do you find out the good new stuff? Well, there's where Napster and friends come in..... but that's another discussion for another post. :-)
Also, MP3s suck? What bitrate are you listening to? Have you ever heard a 160bit+ mp3 recording made from a digital source? Can you tell the difference? I contend that one cannot tell the difference. MP3s are good, but remember they're only as good as the source they were compressed from and the bit rate they were compressed at.
This is off-topic, so don't flame me. But why do you feel it should be free? You pay for the paper version of the Times, the on-line version has the same articles, yet somehow it has to be free since it's online? I don't follow your logic. You don't want to give personal information? I can appreciate that..... It's just that last half which I'm confused about. I've been on the web for a while, so I understand the motto of a free internet, but does that really apply to things like this?
Feel free to take this to email if you'd like, if you don't feel like posting off-topic.
I have a question pertaining to this. You say that C is phasing out. What aspect of C do you mean. C as used in embedded software? As just an executable-on-windows software? Do you think C++ will replace C on embedded platforms? Is it already?
Actualy, no, I don't remember the "French Purity Laws". Can someone give me a quick rundown? This sounds interesting. Does it have something to do with keeping the French launguage pure and unpolluted? That's my first guess....