Heavily advertising a TV show then not allowing people to watch it by legal means is very likely to increase the rate of piracy.
Where are they heavily advertising it where there is no legal means to watch it? I doubt HBO is advertising Game of Thrones somewhere they have no presence. That would be pointless.
I'm not denying that there are places with people whom would like to watch it but do actually have no means to do so (no HBO), however that is different from the argument you made. I seriously doubt HBO is advertising it to them and then depriving them of the ability to watch. It's more reasonable that they heard about it second hand and got interested of their own accord.
Not wanting to get basic cable and HBO is not them denying someone the legal means to watch the show just because they only care about Game of Thrones. Sure it's an exorbitant price for such an individual, but they're not the intended market anyway. They can pirate it all they want, but they don't get to use the "well I had no way to legally get it" card. There was a way, it was just out of your price range for the entertainment so you decided to take it regardless.
I've committed my fair share of piracy over the years, downloading TV shows and video games that I could never afford. I've since moved out of it and personally feel better for it. I don't look down on pirates because I used to be one, but at the same time I never tried to hide behind moralities and defend my actions as anything more than wanting something I couldn't have under my own terms.
You don't seem to understand the kind of "work" that Anonymous actually does. Burning down someones house? Racking up a $5 million debt in Dubai? What parallel world do you live in where that kind of thing actually happens as a result of Anonymous raids? In this one, we deal primarily with generally embarassing leaked documents and DDoS attacks. I also call into question your perceived choice of targets in another post... The JSTOR janitor having their life ruined by them? You think enough people hold the janitor personally responsible to dish out vigilante justice on him? I think you've boarded the crazy train a little too long.
You're worse than that Fox news report a few years back, showing the exploding van as a "demonstration" of their "domestic terrorism."
Google's "garden" isn't exactly "walled". It's more like a chest-high hedge with broad openings on every side. You know, what with being able to install software not explicitly approved by Google or listed in their marketplace and all -- a system that we should hope makes a comeback in other places.
Of course, only to the brain dead, not purchasing or using DRM-laden material is obviously "taking whatever I get served" and "letting them get away with it."
You are so disconnected from reality that it's mind numbing. But keep convincing yourself that you are the solution. If you chant it enough, it must become true.
Yup. If they won't give you something exactly the way you want it, you'll just take it anyway without giving them a dime. Of course the real way to send them a message would be not to buy or pirate it at all. All they see when they see you pirate the game is another justification to keep up the status quo. Thanks for contributing to the problem, asshat.
But lets be honest with ourselves here... You probably wouldn't have paid for it had it been DRM free anyway.
No kidding. But their heads are too far up their asses at this point to understand that this direction they're going is not popular.
Honestly, if we're not going to ever get Aero back (which is fine), they could at last have the decency to give us the classic look back instead of this monotone nonsense that just blends into everything.
I loathe the day none of this ever gets better and I end up one of those holdouts like people who were still clutching to XP when Windows 7 was released.
but patients will demand antibiotics for anything and everything until they are blue in the face, many don't accept that the "wonder drug" class of antibiotics won't actually do anything for them.
Well that's their problem? If doctors are going to be that wishywashy about dishing out antibiotics just to appease the ridiculous notions of their patients claiming to have more medical experience than their doctors, then they might as well just start giving out narcotic pain killers to everyone who stubs their toe as well.
To add further to the end of that post, if you do opt for the online activation model, make it apparent to the end user that if the activation server is ever taken down, that you will release an unlocked/simple serial version so they will not lose their investment even if you no longer wish to support the activation servers.
As recently as 2010, he was still arguing that Flash was superior to HTML5, which eventually surpassed it to become the virtual industry standard for Web-based rich content.
What? Surpassed? When? HTML5 has a long way to go before it properly uproots Flash. We've been hearing that Flash is dead for years and years now, and yet aside from the mobile space (which admittedly has grown considerably), Flash is still pretty much on top in the PC space. I wait in earnest for HTML5 to be the flash killing beast it is portrayed as, but that time has not come yet... There is still much work to be done.
Slashdot Mirror
Heavily advertising a TV show then not allowing people to watch it by legal means is very likely to increase the rate of piracy.
Where are they heavily advertising it where there is no legal means to watch it? I doubt HBO is advertising Game of Thrones somewhere they have no presence. That would be pointless.
I'm not denying that there are places with people whom would like to watch it but do actually have no means to do so (no HBO), however that is different from the argument you made. I seriously doubt HBO is advertising it to them and then depriving them of the ability to watch. It's more reasonable that they heard about it second hand and got interested of their own accord.
Not wanting to get basic cable and HBO is not them denying someone the legal means to watch the show just because they only care about Game of Thrones. Sure it's an exorbitant price for such an individual, but they're not the intended market anyway. They can pirate it all they want, but they don't get to use the "well I had no way to legally get it" card. There was a way, it was just out of your price range for the entertainment so you decided to take it regardless.
I've committed my fair share of piracy over the years, downloading TV shows and video games that I could never afford. I've since moved out of it and personally feel better for it. I don't look down on pirates because I used to be one, but at the same time I never tried to hide behind moralities and defend my actions as anything more than wanting something I couldn't have under my own terms.
Yikes. You actually didn't get his point at all.
Does it bother you?
You don't seem to understand the kind of "work" that Anonymous actually does. Burning down someones house? Racking up a $5 million debt in Dubai? What parallel world do you live in where that kind of thing actually happens as a result of Anonymous raids? In this one, we deal primarily with generally embarassing leaked documents and DDoS attacks. I also call into question your perceived choice of targets in another post... The JSTOR janitor having their life ruined by them? You think enough people hold the janitor personally responsible to dish out vigilante justice on him? I think you've boarded the crazy train a little too long.
You're worse than that Fox news report a few years back, showing the exploding van as a "demonstration" of their "domestic terrorism."
Google's "garden" isn't exactly "walled". It's more like a chest-high hedge with broad openings on every side. You know, what with being able to install software not explicitly approved by Google or listed in their marketplace and all -- a system that we should hope makes a comeback in other places.
In fact, find a dr. Sues book
What is that, a book on the benefits of malpractice insurance?
Of course, only to the brain dead, not purchasing or using DRM-laden material is obviously "taking whatever I get served" and "letting them get away with it."
You are so disconnected from reality that it's mind numbing. But keep convincing yourself that you are the solution. If you chant it enough, it must become true.
I am truly terrified of this.
Sure, if you want to be disqualified and made a laughingstock for not understanding simple rules.
Your level of stupidity is truly groundbreaking.
Yup. If they won't give you something exactly the way you want it, you'll just take it anyway without giving them a dime. Of course the real way to send them a message would be not to buy or pirate it at all. All they see when they see you pirate the game is another justification to keep up the status quo. Thanks for contributing to the problem, asshat.
But lets be honest with ourselves here... You probably wouldn't have paid for it had it been DRM free anyway.
Real Insightful, /.
I remember those yoyos. They were awesome.
It was, but it's not anymore. Digg fell so far that they sold the brand name. Now it's some other thing altogether.
No kidding. But their heads are too far up their asses at this point to understand that this direction they're going is not popular.
Honestly, if we're not going to ever get Aero back (which is fine), they could at last have the decency to give us the classic look back instead of this monotone nonsense that just blends into everything.
I loathe the day none of this ever gets better and I end up one of those holdouts like people who were still clutching to XP when Windows 7 was released.
Ah, slackware... I've been out of the Linux scene for many years now but I always hold a special place in my heart for it being my first distro.
No. It doesn't, really.
I really wonder why slashdot has not embraced Unicode characters yet. Seems almost embarrassing for a tech site in this day and age.
No kidding. I sat there going "What elaborate set?" trying to figure out what, specifically, they apparently wasted $60,000 building.
I would not call them honest dicks. They're just dicks. They might just be lesser dicks in this instance.
but patients will demand antibiotics for anything and everything until they are blue in the face, many don't accept that the "wonder drug" class of antibiotics won't actually do anything for them.
Well that's their problem? If doctors are going to be that wishywashy about dishing out antibiotics just to appease the ridiculous notions of their patients claiming to have more medical experience than their doctors, then they might as well just start giving out narcotic pain killers to everyone who stubs their toe as well.
Ouch. I haven't seen a sonic-woosh in years.
Not anymore.
To add further to the end of that post, if you do opt for the online activation model, make it apparent to the end user that if the activation server is ever taken down, that you will release an unlocked/simple serial version so they will not lose their investment even if you no longer wish to support the activation servers.
This is the answer I would place my bets on.
As recently as 2010, he was still arguing that Flash was superior to HTML5, which eventually surpassed it to become the virtual industry standard for Web-based rich content.
What? Surpassed? When? HTML5 has a long way to go before it properly uproots Flash. We've been hearing that Flash is dead for years and years now, and yet aside from the mobile space (which admittedly has grown considerably), Flash is still pretty much on top in the PC space. I wait in earnest for HTML5 to be the flash killing beast it is portrayed as, but that time has not come yet... There is still much work to be done.