One. I have one game, and its more than 10 years old. JFK Reloaded.
I paid for it new, and even tried my hand at the competition. Within a few years, it dissapeared from the internet and now, the cracked version is the only way to play it; since they used an online token based DRM to handle full versions vs demo.
I paid for the full, I want to play the damned full.
Except that most pirates are nothing like Jessie James. In fact, most evidence i have seen, both from studies and from my own experience is that the same teen and 20something pirating games 20 years ago is paying top dollar today now that he has a job and less time to play games.
In fact, the only people I have seen continueing to pirate much past that point have been both poor and physicaly disabled. Leaving them no extra money but plenty of time to consume volumes and volumes of media.
So basically.... as far as I can tell very little money is lost to piracy because anyone who can afford the game and wants to play it buys it. The only people who pirate it are the ones who wouldn't have otherwise bought it, generally because they couldn't afford to anyway.
So I can't imagine this issue actually matters at all, since the net result of it being different is almost 0.
Well what is honorable about war anyway? Every war I ever looked at turned out to be based on money and lies anyway. Its always been the people in power conning the poor into fighting for them.
The reason they tell you war is honorable is just the marketing of it. It never was.
Why? What does he add to the discussion? What could what a person deserves or doesn't deserve possibly matter? The world isn't fair and the world doesn't owe you anything, including people getting what you think they deserve.
He probably doesn't think about washing away the buzz. Next article is going to declare THIS is now going to be the era of thin clients too. Get off my lawn kid.
I sent this to a co-worker. We came to the conclusion that this "Shakeup" really means "We just noticed whats been happening already for like a decade now".
Yes, actual storage being centralized and compute resources are consuming it and caching file access.... if you wash away the buzz this sounds a lot like existing enterprise visualization setups.
I think the answer would be people who currently would not get a vasectomy at all, but might if it was easily reversible without another surgery? Perhaps some of those people get one anyway, but I imagine its not really of benefit to the people who already get them, or, if it is, simply would mean they would choose the procedure sooner since they don't need to have children first.
A lot of times things are not noticed missing until its too late and the hassle factor of doing anything has gone up. I lived with a con artist briefly. At the end of this period I had cause to chat with his previous roomates and landlord.
Landlord live in the same house, different unit. Landlord rents rooms, and owns a small business, cashes a lot of checks from multiple people.
Dude had no money in his bank account. He would write bad rent checks and then when the notice of a bounced check came, he stole the notice from the mail (no locked mailboxes). The few hundred dollars for one room was small enough that they were careless and didn't notice.
How did they catch him? He never moved out, he just left, and left behind the stack of stolen mail in his room. When he never returned, and the rent came due, it was a surprise for everyone. He had already been gone so long by the time they knew what was up, his next known address was the one I was already kicking his ass out of.
I was pissed at what he took me for, he got them for a lot more. I told them they should at least file a report. They just told me they spoke to a lawyer and he said the guy probably had no assetts to go after and it would be all cost with no benefit. They dropped it....
and so did the bar we all went to... a few weeks after he skipped town the owner asked if he still lived with me. Turns out he got a $3000 advance from them to update their website before he skipped town. I never heard more, but, I assume they dropped it too.
Tried to backup to the directory and see if there was more, but, I didn't find a path back to a download or code, just talk of it working as a screensaver.
Also found this just great discussion of people quite disturbed by the output it came up with and wanting to see it removed: http://www.fedoraforum.org/for...
On the fake traffic thing, there is a screen saver for Linux which will do web searches for images and create a collage. It always produced a fascinating results over time. Lots of random things, a fair amount of porn, just.... the internet...in all its naked boobs and pictures of text glory.
Well one day, I was feeling a little parnoid, and more than a little mischevious, so I tracked down how it invoked wget and made sure it used a local tor proxy. Didn't really seem to change the end result on my end, but... talk about generating fake traffic....
For one.... wtf? How do you spend $6k on a game? What kind of money grubbing whore develops a game designed to suck that much out of kids? What the fuck does a person actually get after spending 6k? The idea that a game is so heavily monetized and aimed at children says a lot about the people who developed it. Scumbags.
Don't tell me they have every right, I don't disagree. However, I have every right to judge them based on what they do with their right, and they are fucking scumbags.
Secondly, this is what you get with these walled gardens. The entire "app store" mentality which puts monetization first and foremost leads directly to this bullshit. It may drive content, but it drives shitty derivative content that does little more than provide metrics to sell the app store to new victims.
If you want your software developed by scumbags, you want an app store. If you want good developers to be drowned out by abusive copies intended to extract every last dollar from every drop of creativity out there....you want a fucking app store.
I always meant to seek out an english translation and read it. You know, being one of the most famous books in all of history, feels like I should be familiar with more than its title. I mean fuck, I read Uncle Tom's Cabin and I can't imagine Hitler is half as terrible of an author; then again, maybe he is worst.
I always hated how Stowe would stop the narrative to directly talk down to the reader. "The negro is, not by his nature, violent" still stands out 20 years later. I could almost see Hitler being worst about that.
Ahhh but what does "Full nazi" even mean? Sure, if you define things narrowly enough, it can never happen at all.
But we do have a democratic process so inadequate at dealing with scale and so poorly designed that it is basically a show in services of business interests. We basically have defacto fascism and have for quite a while.
Hell even the "unions" that are supposed to be some sort of communist influence, are almost entirely the prison and police gaurd unions now, and lobby hard for the expansion of their own powers and harsher laws, aligning them perfectly with the private owners of the very institutions they work for.
Hell, even the local swat team here is a private company.
Sure, I mean, its worth noting that there was a potential trend but, possibly worth looking at in the future. However, it very much wasn't worth a headline, it was a potentially interesting anomaly at most.
> What gets it into the papers is probably a University press officer who has to keep on putting out press releases to keep their job.
Sure but, in the end, the problem is that this shit is being published as if it is a real study result and not little more than a side note. We have good reason to believe that a large portion of well done studies give bogus results anyway, what confidence can we have in the things they can't even have confidence in?
What hope does the public have of separating speculation from results if the media insists on prioritizing entertainment value over measures of certainty?
There is no actual security gain from stripping symbols. If the logic of the code allows for something to be performed which shouldn't be, then stripping symbols changes nothing at all.
The most stripped symbols would do, is slow down a person reverse engineering the code, once done they still get their access and can reuse their knowledge, and even that assumes they don't have direct access to the source code...clearly a bad assumption here.
Its similar to the old "no compilers in production". It doesn't actually protect you from anything but the most unsophisticated attackers. Which, admittedly, is a form of protection, but only from opportunists who don't care that much.
I think its more subtle and worst. Its not just a matter of disregarding evidence, there is too much conflicting "evidence" that isn't even going through a first pass filter for sanity. This is ESPECIALLY true of science reporting.
It happens pretty regularly that studies are touted as saying one thing or another based on what amounts to little more than noise. We have studies being done, cherry picked, and hand fed.
Let me erase the topic here to avoid bias and lets take an example I ran into earlier today: "Study finds link between X and Z" "Compound Y, with enough exposure can cause Z" "We found 49 varients of X which contain Y, and 37 of those contained levels that we were ABLE TO DETECT".
Able to detect. No talk of anything more than "detection". You would think that they would mention exposure levels, or safety levels, not mentioned.... the entire "link" was based on "detectability".
What was this? A link between e-cigs and a disease caused by inhalation of one of its components. I have similarly seen studies that linked marjuana to heart disease based on a paltry sample size (a subsample of a study on a different primary topic, their headline grabbbing conclusion was based on a real sample size of under 30 people).
That is a real issue.... "Scientists further confirm expected results" is boring. "Scientists find oddity in their data" is much more "worthy" of publication by the for profit media.
I don't know that this is really a case for storing email forever. Yes that is true, but it also means that decades of email are available for searching and can be required to be searched or given up.
The reality is, design docs should be saved. These sorts of notes and work should be saved. Retaining emails may provide a solution, but that doesn't mean it is a good solution or the right one. I would submit the real issue here is that nobody saved the documents; but instead relied on email to save it for them.
Honestly, I think sometimes its better to fail, because crisis percipitates change. all sucess in a case like this does is reinforce that lazily leaving important docs in email is ok.
> They just talk about it beforehand on Facebook, but none of the agents who are supposed to be monitoring them give a damn.
Not true. they always care enough to report it to their superiors!.
How else can spin be prepared ahead of time? Plus they need to track that the terrorists are doing what they promised when they were trained and funded.
> What has actually happened here is that we as a Nation have modified the definition of terrorism, which now includes mere threats of violence instead of actual violence.
Nope, nobody has changed the definition of terrorism. It means now, and always has meant "Stuff other people do, that we may or may not also do, but we don't like that they do". That is what it always meant, what it always will mean.
Fuck his business reputation, its not actually tarnished.
That said....fuck the car dealership too. The real issue, to my mind is.... how much do you have to make a dealership pay so that they, and all the other dealers who might tell such lies think twice about which lies they tell next time?
1 million? Maybe that is enough, a good start for a warning.
> Or, more likely: 4. Be convicted of supporting terrorism.
Good point, there is only one legal way to support terrorists....pay your taxes. Then when the money is used for terrorism or to arm a terrorist group (and it will, and does), its A-OK.
Which is a very reasonable assumption for every scenario that is reasonable to consider for the vast majority of situations.
Frankly, if you are worried about an attacker with that level of both sophistication and personal interest in breaking your security, then your situation is solidly out of scope for this discussion.
Will it also correctly label US Military recruitment materials as terrorist recruiting? If not then this is doomed to failure as it ignores the root cause.
Slashdot Mirror
One. I have one game, and its more than 10 years old. JFK Reloaded.
I paid for it new, and even tried my hand at the competition. Within a few years, it dissapeared from the internet and now, the cracked version is the only way to play it; since they used an online token based DRM to handle full versions vs demo.
I paid for the full, I want to play the damned full.
Except that most pirates are nothing like Jessie James. In fact, most evidence i have seen, both from studies and from my own experience is that the same teen and 20something pirating games 20 years ago is paying top dollar today now that he has a job and less time to play games.
In fact, the only people I have seen continueing to pirate much past that point have been both poor and physicaly disabled. Leaving them no extra money but plenty of time to consume volumes and volumes of media.
So basically.... as far as I can tell very little money is lost to piracy because anyone who can afford the game and wants to play it buys it. The only people who pirate it are the ones who wouldn't have otherwise bought it, generally because they couldn't afford to anyway.
So I can't imagine this issue actually matters at all, since the net result of it being different is almost 0.
Well what is honorable about war anyway? Every war I ever looked at turned out to be based on money and lies anyway. Its always been the people in power conning the poor into fighting for them.
The reason they tell you war is honorable is just the marketing of it. It never was.
Why? What does he add to the discussion? What could what a person deserves or doesn't deserve possibly matter? The world isn't fair and the world doesn't owe you anything, including people getting what you think they deserve.
He probably doesn't think about washing away the buzz. Next article is going to declare THIS is now going to be the era of thin clients too. Get off my lawn kid.
Well Looks to me like Oxford says webster can suck it: http://www.oxforddictionaries....
I sent this to a co-worker. We came to the conclusion that this "Shakeup" really means "We just noticed whats been happening already for like a decade now".
Yes, actual storage being centralized and compute resources are consuming it and caching file access.... if you wash away the buzz this sounds a lot like existing enterprise visualization setups.
I think the answer would be people who currently would not get a vasectomy at all, but might if it was easily reversible without another surgery? Perhaps some of those people get one anyway, but I imagine its not really of benefit to the people who already get them, or, if it is, simply would mean they would choose the procedure sooner since they don't need to have children first.
A lot of times things are not noticed missing until its too late and the hassle factor of doing anything has gone up. I lived with a con artist briefly. At the end of this period I had cause to chat with his previous roomates and landlord.
Landlord live in the same house, different unit. Landlord rents rooms, and owns a small business, cashes a lot of checks from multiple people.
Dude had no money in his bank account. He would write bad rent checks and then when the notice of a bounced check came, he stole the notice from the mail (no locked mailboxes). The few hundred dollars for one room was small enough that they were careless and didn't notice.
How did they catch him? He never moved out, he just left, and left behind the stack of stolen mail in his room. When he never returned, and the rent came due, it was a surprise for everyone. He had already been gone so long by the time they knew what was up, his next known address was the one I was already kicking his ass out of.
I was pissed at what he took me for, he got them for a lot more. I told them they should at least file a report. They just told me they spoke to a lawyer and he said the guy probably had no assetts to go after and it would be all cost with no benefit. They dropped it....
and so did the bar we all went to... a few weeks after he skipped town the owner asked if he still lived with me. Turns out he got a $3000 advance from them to update their website before he skipped town. I never heard more, but, I assume they dropped it too.
I did a quick search and found this: https://www.jwz.org/webcollage...
Tried to backup to the directory and see if there was more, but, I didn't find a path back to a download or code, just talk of it working as a screensaver.
Also found this just great discussion of people quite disturbed by the output it came up with and wanting to see it removed: http://www.fedoraforum.org/for...
On the fake traffic thing, there is a screen saver for Linux which will do web searches for images and create a collage. It always produced a fascinating results over time. Lots of random things, a fair amount of porn, just.... the internet...in all its naked boobs and pictures of text glory.
Well one day, I was feeling a little parnoid, and more than a little mischevious, so I tracked down how it invoked wget and made sure it used a local tor proxy. Didn't really seem to change the end result on my end, but... talk about generating fake traffic....
For one.... wtf? How do you spend $6k on a game? What kind of money grubbing whore develops a game designed to suck that much out of kids? What the fuck does a person actually get after spending 6k? The idea that a game is so heavily monetized and aimed at children says a lot about the people who developed it. Scumbags.
Don't tell me they have every right, I don't disagree. However, I have every right to judge them based on what they do with their right, and they are fucking scumbags.
Secondly, this is what you get with these walled gardens. The entire "app store" mentality which puts monetization first and foremost leads directly to this bullshit. It may drive content, but it drives shitty derivative content that does little more than provide metrics to sell the app store to new victims.
If you want your software developed by scumbags, you want an app store. If you want good developers to be drowned out by abusive copies intended to extract every last dollar from every drop of creativity out there....you want a fucking app store.
I always meant to seek out an english translation and read it. You know, being one of the most famous books in all of history, feels like I should be familiar with more than its title. I mean fuck, I read Uncle Tom's Cabin and I can't imagine Hitler is half as terrible of an author; then again, maybe he is worst.
I always hated how Stowe would stop the narrative to directly talk down to the reader. "The negro is, not by his nature, violent" still stands out 20 years later. I could almost see Hitler being worst about that.
Ahhh but what does "Full nazi" even mean? Sure, if you define things narrowly enough, it can never happen at all.
But we do have a democratic process so inadequate at dealing with scale and so poorly designed that it is basically a show in services of business interests. We basically have defacto fascism and have for quite a while.
Hell even the "unions" that are supposed to be some sort of communist influence, are almost entirely the prison and police gaurd unions now, and lobby hard for the expansion of their own powers and harsher laws, aligning them perfectly with the private owners of the very institutions they work for.
Hell, even the local swat team here is a private company.
are you sure we didn't go full nazi decades ago?
Sure, I mean, its worth noting that there was a potential trend but, possibly worth looking at in the future. However, it very much wasn't worth a headline, it was a potentially interesting anomaly at most.
> What gets it into the papers is probably a University press officer who has to keep on putting out press releases to keep their job.
Sure but, in the end, the problem is that this shit is being published as if it is a real study result and not little more than a side note. We have good reason to believe that a large portion of well done studies give bogus results anyway, what confidence can we have in the things they can't even have confidence in?
What hope does the public have of separating speculation from results if the media insists on prioritizing entertainment value over measures of certainty?
> Traditionally, the first post is suppose to be utter nonsense. I suspect what you wrote will be a future regulation.
I submit that there is no contradiction here as these are not mutually exclusive.
There is no actual security gain from stripping symbols. If the logic of the code allows for something to be performed which shouldn't be, then stripping symbols changes nothing at all.
The most stripped symbols would do, is slow down a person reverse engineering the code, once done they still get their access and can reuse their knowledge, and even that assumes they don't have direct access to the source code...clearly a bad assumption here.
Its similar to the old "no compilers in production". It doesn't actually protect you from anything but the most unsophisticated attackers. Which, admittedly, is a form of protection, but only from opportunists who don't care that much.
I think its more subtle and worst. Its not just a matter of disregarding evidence, there is too much conflicting "evidence" that isn't even going through a first pass filter for sanity. This is ESPECIALLY true of science reporting.
It happens pretty regularly that studies are touted as saying one thing or another based on what amounts to little more than noise. We have studies being done, cherry picked, and hand fed.
Let me erase the topic here to avoid bias and lets take an example I ran into earlier today:
"Study finds link between X and Z"
"Compound Y, with enough exposure can cause Z"
"We found 49 varients of X which contain Y, and 37 of those contained levels that we were ABLE TO DETECT".
Able to detect. No talk of anything more than "detection". You would think that they would mention exposure levels, or safety levels, not mentioned.... the entire "link" was based on "detectability".
What was this? A link between e-cigs and a disease caused by inhalation of one of its components. I have similarly seen studies that linked marjuana to heart disease based on a paltry sample size (a subsample of a study on a different primary topic, their headline grabbbing conclusion was based on a real sample size of under 30 people).
That is a real issue.... "Scientists further confirm expected results" is boring. "Scientists find oddity in their data" is much more "worthy" of publication by the for profit media.
I don't know that this is really a case for storing email forever. Yes that is true, but it also means that decades of email are available for searching and can be required to be searched or given up.
The reality is, design docs should be saved. These sorts of notes and work should be saved. Retaining emails may provide a solution, but that doesn't mean it is a good solution or the right one. I would submit the real issue here is that nobody saved the documents; but instead relied on email to save it for them.
Honestly, I think sometimes its better to fail, because crisis percipitates change. all sucess in a case like this does is reinforce that lazily leaving important docs in email is ok.
> They just talk about it beforehand on Facebook, but none of the agents who are supposed to be monitoring them give a damn.
Not true. they always care enough to report it to their superiors!.
How else can spin be prepared ahead of time?
Plus they need to track that the terrorists are doing what they promised when they were trained and funded.
> What has actually happened here is that we as a Nation have modified the definition of terrorism, which now includes mere threats of violence instead of actual violence.
Nope, nobody has changed the definition of terrorism. It means now, and always has meant "Stuff other people do, that we may or may not also do, but we don't like that they do". That is what it always meant, what it always will mean.
Fuck his business reputation, its not actually tarnished.
That said....fuck the car dealership too. The real issue, to my mind is.... how much do you have to make a dealership pay so that they, and all the other dealers who might tell such lies think twice about which lies they tell next time?
1 million? Maybe that is enough, a good start for a warning.
> Or, more likely: 4. Be convicted of supporting terrorism.
Good point, there is only one legal way to support terrorists....pay your taxes. Then when the money is used for terrorism or to arm a terrorist group (and it will, and does), its A-OK.
Which is a very reasonable assumption for every scenario that is reasonable to consider for the vast majority of situations.
Frankly, if you are worried about an attacker with that level of both sophistication and personal interest in breaking your security, then your situation is solidly out of scope for this discussion.
Will it also correctly label US Military recruitment materials as terrorist recruiting? If not then this is doomed to failure as it ignores the root cause.