Does this retroactively make the once ubiquitous VCR (or DVRs) illegal? Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Canada already have a tax on blank media in an effort to combat piracy (or something similar)?
What about television news shows? If the equivalent of the concept of fair use doesn't exist, are they no longer permitted to report on issues for which they didn't do the original information gathering? What if it's a cited work?
I admit, I only read the summary for this one, but based on the summary, it appears to be one of the first (if only) accurate Slashdot article titles ever. This truly is the worst copyright law ever conceived. For that matter, it sounds like it would take a truly stupendous lapse in the mental faculties of any politician involved in order to come to the point where one thinks that this would be a good idea.
Well, at least there's another reminder that American politicians aren't the only stupid ones...not that such is really encouraging.
Nothing except an unplugged box with the hard drive removed will ever be 100% secure.
Surely you don't believe that. It all depends upon the degree of unplugged-ness that the box is in (as well as how far removed the hard drive is). While I would agree that this is a step in the right direction, I would strongly suggest additional measures - like placing the box and hard drive in separate Faraday cages...60 meters underground...on opposite sides of the planet (preferably different planets). It's misrepresentations of security like this that get people in trouble.
"I unplugged my computer, so I'm safe."
"I dropped by hard drive in liquid nitrogen, shattered it, then melted it down and made it into a sculpture of Gandhi, so my computer can't be hacked."
You're absolutely right. I'll be more careful next time. Some achievements (like inventing the Superball) bring with them the right to "enhance" one's resume.
Of course you don't! Telling your mother a "your mom" joke would involve insulting your grandmother. That's a surefire way to get yourself uninvited from family reunions (which, depending upon your family, may or may not be a good thing).
Most men would get offended, especially when someone mentions their mother in a discussion involving the continuum of "sexiest-ness" (all the more when those terms are being applied to men).
But not to worry, I'm bigger than that (a statement which applies to most geeks by virtue of a sedentary lifestyle, but to me just because I'm special...at least, that's what my mom always told me).
What does the relative attractiveness of the males have to do with the woman? Personally, I'd be much more interested in where the woman falls on your scale (despite your scale being somewhat limited in scope to "not sexiest - sexiest").
Maybe Leah just feels bad because the sexiest man has something against her. Perhaps if she just set her expectations a little lower, and settle for Frank, who, while not the sexiest, could perhaps be persuaded away from indifference by her whiles (they often come with the classification "the woman", especially if they both are intelligent and are higher on the "not sexiest - sexiest" continuum).
Probably one of the safest places for a "famous" person to place their personal email address - in a statistical physics paper. At the bottom of the first page. Although, it may very well be dead by now.
I've noticed this more and more as of late, and hadn't really considered what the rationale behind it was. However, I do wonder: what impact does it have for credit card fraud and related crimes? As it stands, no one near where I live checks the signature block on my card (except rarely). Now, they won't even have to.
The other concern I have is that the onus is being shifted more and more onto me to identify when I may be at risk. While I admit, I should be aware if I misplace my card and should get the card immediately canceled, it certainly doesn't help matters when the card can be used without even handing it to the cashier (and they just click through the prompt that tells them to verify the signature).
I suppose its the same as any of the trade-offs we make in this society - I like the convenience, when it benefits me, but you can bet I'll be complaining should that ever come back to bite me.
I was involved in theatre at the time, which meant I had some access to various areas of the school after hours. One night, I put my name on an open mail slot. The secretarial staff just put a copy of administrative announcements in each mail slot, so when I would check the mail box, I would have lists of currently ineligible students, etc.
My error wasn't so much that I checked it during lunch, but that during a class period I was talking with some friends, and spoke too loudly. The teacher called the principal, and it went downhill from there.
I got in much less trouble when I brought in a broadsword (at the request of a teacher, he needed a prop). I brought it in well before school, but some teachers saw this kid walking down the hall with a broadsword over his shoulder.
I'm glad that not all high school administrators are like this one.
When I was in high school, I can clearly recall doing some stupid things, including waltzing into the teacher's lounge during lunch in order to grab a copy of whatever paperwork they put in the teacher's mailbox I made for myself. After getting caught, I made the mistake of asserting that it wasn't my fault that the school had lax security policies. This was shortly following the Columbine incident.
Now, with the hysteria occurring during that time, they could very well have expelled me and caused who knows what kind of trouble for myself and my parents. But they brought in the police liaison, gave me a good scare, and essentially realized that I was just a kid who made a stupid decision. I didn't even get a detention.
I understand that this situation is different, in that the kid didn't actually do anything wrong, but even still, having administrators who can step back and look objectively at the situation, even when there is some stupidity involved, is a must, especially when dealing with children.
In every article we've seen on this, there is always the discussion of the government's position of "no one can read it if it's closed". What happened to that? I don't recall my passport arriving opened inside the pouch.
This implies, at least to me, that there is no security whatsoever protecting it from being read, closed or open. Are we to believe that this is seriously the best that they could come up with?
While I agree completely, my point was that it could be disabled. As such, it may yell at you that some important application is in the Upper Echelons of Evil (per MS), but it wouldn't do anything about it without your consent.
Granted, most users wouldn't know this and as such would be oblivious to the ability to change the settings, but the fact remains that it is possible to do.
While I'm not in favor of Microsoft deciding what is and is not bad for me or anyone else, we also have yet to see how strict their criteria are for determining what software is undesirable. Firefox, for example, may only be mildly undesirable, whereas a Linux ISO may get immediately deleted, with a friendly MS message indicating "This file contains executables that are potentially harmful to your Windows Vista installation."
There appears to be a lot of hubbub about Windows Defender automatically deleting things at will. However, the article is clear that it only deletes things it considers really bad "...by default."
While I'm not on Microsoft's side, that little phrase does temper the idea that everything has been taken away from the user. That implies that the "feature" can be disabled. I'd prefer if the entire thing could be removed, but the fact that many of these features can be disabled is a bit of a bonus.
I understand that the next step is to include features like this that cannot be disabled, but at this point, I'm more interested in the idea of Microsoft randomly requiring revalidation or reactivation. How many people have had false negatives for validation? How often will Vista decide to reduce my functionality because it did a random check in the background and determined that Vista was somehow not Genuine(TM)?
From what I read in the article (and I could be wrong, I admit), it sounds like people are simply controlling the amount of personal information that goes to the third party. So, I want to buy something, and only the pertinent information goes to the vendor.
How is this different from things that have been tried in the past? Furthermore, how is this different from the various other situations we hear about occurring at financial institutions and the like, where a database is inadvertently printed or placed outside a firewall (or whatever)?
What makes this better than me simply typing my credit card number into the secure web site of an online store (or have I missed the intended purpose)?
I totally agree, which is why I don't intend to criticize many of the titles on the whole. But then again, if the characters were older or fit the situation better, I suppose I'd find other things to complain about.
For example, Vaan (in XII) probably doesn't work as a 45 year old drunken homeless man, fighting off enemies with his "Pint of Alcohol (Atk - 5)" or his "Double of Tequila (Atk - 15)". His new technique..."Drunken Rage".
This would, of course, mean that Penelo would have to be a hooker...I don't want to contemplate which weapons would be appropriate in an FF game for a hooker.
One of the things that I've always failed to understand about RPG's, and which may simply be the skillful application of suspension of disbelief, is the idea that these characters can possibly be taken seriously.
A 17 year old street-kid, who (as the game begins) is training himself on rats, quickly progresses to the wanton slaughter of the undead, not to mention elite Imperial guardsmen (in whichever order common sense would indicate with regards to their difficulty).
Many of the FF titles I've played have centered around remarkably young characters...who are capable of causing death and destruction. In some cases, they do so using rather improbable weapons (by which I do not mean sci-fi things like gunblades...I refer to things like blitzballs in FFX).
While I applaud the improvement of the plot in this FF over some of the previous iterations, I still find some of the things that are just taken for granted to be highly unlikely, such as the foregone conclusion that someone with extensive experience as a pirate (or as a soldier) would join with a young urchin, regardless of how many times their paths cross.
Further, I have never understood why the experience level of ones comrades does not accurately represent their life. If my character has lived on the street all his life, and someone who has been a professional soldier joins my party, he starts at the same level as I do (excepting that I can steal...since I'm a pickpocket).
I say all this not to be overly critical. I understand that some things must simply be accepted for the sake of the gameplay mechanics. However, with a little more attention to the detail in the story, I think that the game could go from something that is already very good to something superb.
While its all well and good to suggest that, most people wouldn't know to do that. Most people don't frequent Slashdot, and most people ignore the little slip of paper that came with the game.
My point was more related to the fallout associated with a situation wherein a minor is exposed to what the game *thinks* he wants to see, simply because some other user is surfing porn.
Slashdot Mirror
What about television news shows? If the equivalent of the concept of fair use doesn't exist, are they no longer permitted to report on issues for which they didn't do the original information gathering? What if it's a cited work?
I admit, I only read the summary for this one, but based on the summary, it appears to be one of the first (if only) accurate Slashdot article titles ever. This truly is the worst copyright law ever conceived. For that matter, it sounds like it would take a truly stupendous lapse in the mental faculties of any politician involved in order to come to the point where one thinks that this would be a good idea.
Well, at least there's another reminder that American politicians aren't the only stupid ones...not that such is really encouraging.
Surely you don't believe that. It all depends upon the degree of unplugged-ness that the box is in (as well as how far removed the hard drive is). While I would agree that this is a step in the right direction, I would strongly suggest additional measures - like placing the box and hard drive in separate Faraday cages...60 meters underground...on opposite sides of the planet (preferably different planets). It's misrepresentations of security like this that get people in trouble.
"I unplugged my computer, so I'm safe."
"I dropped by hard drive in liquid nitrogen, shattered it, then melted it down and made it into a sculpture of Gandhi, so my computer can't be hacked."
Bah!
You're absolutely right. I'll be more careful next time. Some achievements (like inventing the Superball) bring with them the right to "enhance" one's resume.
We all know that the internet was invented by the same politician who is single-handedly saving us from global warming.
However, I will cede that the inventor of the automobile has not recently been in the news, and so its entirely feasible that you are he.
Of course you don't! Telling your mother a "your mom" joke would involve insulting your grandmother. That's a surefire way to get yourself uninvited from family reunions (which, depending upon your family, may or may not be a good thing).
But not to worry, I'm bigger than that (a statement which applies to most geeks by virtue of a sedentary lifestyle, but to me just because I'm special...at least, that's what my mom always told me).
Maybe Leah just feels bad because the sexiest man has something against her. Perhaps if she just set her expectations a little lower, and settle for Frank, who, while not the sexiest, could perhaps be persuaded away from indifference by her whiles (they often come with the classification "the woman", especially if they both are intelligent and are higher on the "not sexiest - sexiest" continuum).
In other news, superlatives are the best!
Probably one of the safest places for a "famous" person to place their personal email address - in a statistical physics paper. At the bottom of the first page. Although, it may very well be dead by now.
The other concern I have is that the onus is being shifted more and more onto me to identify when I may be at risk. While I admit, I should be aware if I misplace my card and should get the card immediately canceled, it certainly doesn't help matters when the card can be used without even handing it to the cashier (and they just click through the prompt that tells them to verify the signature).
I suppose its the same as any of the trade-offs we make in this society - I like the convenience, when it benefits me, but you can bet I'll be complaining should that ever come back to bite me.
I was involved in theatre at the time, which meant I had some access to various areas of the school after hours. One night, I put my name on an open mail slot. The secretarial staff just put a copy of administrative announcements in each mail slot, so when I would check the mail box, I would have lists of currently ineligible students, etc.
My error wasn't so much that I checked it during lunch, but that during a class period I was talking with some friends, and spoke too loudly. The teacher called the principal, and it went downhill from there.
I got in much less trouble when I brought in a broadsword (at the request of a teacher, he needed a prop). I brought it in well before school, but some teachers saw this kid walking down the hall with a broadsword over his shoulder.
When I was in high school, I can clearly recall doing some stupid things, including waltzing into the teacher's lounge during lunch in order to grab a copy of whatever paperwork they put in the teacher's mailbox I made for myself. After getting caught, I made the mistake of asserting that it wasn't my fault that the school had lax security policies. This was shortly following the Columbine incident.
Now, with the hysteria occurring during that time, they could very well have expelled me and caused who knows what kind of trouble for myself and my parents. But they brought in the police liaison, gave me a good scare, and essentially realized that I was just a kid who made a stupid decision. I didn't even get a detention.
I understand that this situation is different, in that the kid didn't actually do anything wrong, but even still, having administrators who can step back and look objectively at the situation, even when there is some stupidity involved, is a must, especially when dealing with children.
I much prefer Hamlet in its original Klingon...like all of Tolstoy's works.
This implies, at least to me, that there is no security whatsoever protecting it from being read, closed or open. Are we to believe that this is seriously the best that they could come up with?
I know its bad form to reply to my own comment, but I just realized that there was another one I missed:
Obligatory:
Imagine a beowulf
Cluster of these things.
Obligatory:
But In Soviet Russia
Haiku Uses You
Granted, most users wouldn't know this and as such would be oblivious to the ability to change the settings, but the fact remains that it is possible to do.
While I'm not in favor of Microsoft deciding what is and is not bad for me or anyone else, we also have yet to see how strict their criteria are for determining what software is undesirable. Firefox, for example, may only be mildly undesirable, whereas a Linux ISO may get immediately deleted, with a friendly MS message indicating "This file contains executables that are potentially harmful to your Windows Vista installation."
While I'm not on Microsoft's side, that little phrase does temper the idea that everything has been taken away from the user. That implies that the "feature" can be disabled. I'd prefer if the entire thing could be removed, but the fact that many of these features can be disabled is a bit of a bonus.
I understand that the next step is to include features like this that cannot be disabled, but at this point, I'm more interested in the idea of Microsoft randomly requiring revalidation or reactivation. How many people have had false negatives for validation? How often will Vista decide to reduce my functionality because it did a random check in the background and determined that Vista was somehow not Genuine(TM)?
How is this different from things that have been tried in the past? Furthermore, how is this different from the various other situations we hear about occurring at financial institutions and the like, where a database is inadvertently printed or placed outside a firewall (or whatever)?
What makes this better than me simply typing my credit card number into the secure web site of an online store (or have I missed the intended purpose)?
It hasn't happened yet, but someday scientists will rename that planet to end stupid Uranus jokes once and for all. I predict: Urrectum.
VIII was also available on the PC. I don't believe any others were released for the PC.
For example, Vaan (in XII) probably doesn't work as a 45 year old drunken homeless man, fighting off enemies with his "Pint of Alcohol (Atk - 5)" or his "Double of Tequila (Atk - 15)". His new technique..."Drunken Rage".
This would, of course, mean that Penelo would have to be a hooker...I don't want to contemplate which weapons would be appropriate in an FF game for a hooker.
A 17 year old street-kid, who (as the game begins) is training himself on rats, quickly progresses to the wanton slaughter of the undead, not to mention elite Imperial guardsmen (in whichever order common sense would indicate with regards to their difficulty).
Many of the FF titles I've played have centered around remarkably young characters...who are capable of causing death and destruction. In some cases, they do so using rather improbable weapons (by which I do not mean sci-fi things like gunblades...I refer to things like blitzballs in FFX).
While I applaud the improvement of the plot in this FF over some of the previous iterations, I still find some of the things that are just taken for granted to be highly unlikely, such as the foregone conclusion that someone with extensive experience as a pirate (or as a soldier) would join with a young urchin, regardless of how many times their paths cross.
Further, I have never understood why the experience level of ones comrades does not accurately represent their life. If my character has lived on the street all his life, and someone who has been a professional soldier joins my party, he starts at the same level as I do (excepting that I can steal...since I'm a pickpocket).
I say all this not to be overly critical. I understand that some things must simply be accepted for the sake of the gameplay mechanics. However, with a little more attention to the detail in the story, I think that the game could go from something that is already very good to something superb.
My point was more related to the fallout associated with a situation wherein a minor is exposed to what the game *thinks* he wants to see, simply because some other user is surfing porn.
What happens when one person surfs porn all day, and then the younger teen goes to play the game? Suddenly, EA is distributing porn to minors.
Ol' Jack Thompson better get his guns out again.