Maybe, but it all comes down to implementation. The reasons that party, xp, and loot systems are as they are in many MMORPGs is that they are the lesser of 2 evils. On one hand you have someone being happier because their kill was not stollen. On the other hand, you have a boatload of exploits to deal with that make it much harder to balance encounters for fun/loot/xp
why ? they are already leveled. there are already encounters for 3-4 people, dungeons for 5 coordinated people, and raids for 25 people. so, the system is there.
it doesnt hurt us to allow xp and loot to everyone who joins the fight in the open realm in any measure. harder creatures, they cant manage, and will need coordination.
i wont reply to each of you who think that some private corporation being able to ask to search someone's house is not normal and contrary to privacy. i have replied to others in the thread, please go and read them.
Depends on whether I did anything wrong. If I didn't I would probably be miffed and refuse them (perhaps even giving them the finger). But this is a far cry from your exaggerated claims of thuggery, vigilante justice, and executors of justice.
no it doesnt depend on whatever you do. because, when it does, you can not prevent people from taking various approaches to vigilante justice, because it becomes commonplace.
this is why in all civilized countries searches are limited to police, and they require warrant, and private investigators can only ask permission. you can NOT go to a citizen's home and ask to search their house without being a police or a p.i.
It violates no privacy, ethics or morals. If there was no cause, it might be snotty. No more than that..
yea private strangers going through your underwear, cupboards, pc definitely do not constitute any violation of privacy, ethics or morals. then, please explain what obligations in regard to privacy do these individuals have. lets say they have noticed that you have various sex fetishes. can one of them expose that information on the net ? what are the legal guidelines for these ?
so, you are brought into an office with your manager's manager, a hr rep, two police officers, and asked to provide access to the system to someone who you know that is able to screw up so grandly (like how they disclosed live user/passes as evidence in public court to a live system with sensitive info) and potentially expose millions of citizen's or the local authority's very sensitive data and pave way for insane hacking and stealing.
you would give the access to the idiot ? you would save your own ass, and you would do what is TECHNICALLY and legally right, but, would it be the RIGHT thing to do ?
if we exaggerate the concept a little bit, we can come up with an exaggerated example still in the same format with this :
you are an officer in a nuclear silo, and you are ordered to launch, practically ending the lives of countless people, and maybe ending the world. you know that who is ordering you is a top of the notch idiot that screws up.
it doesnt matter what you believe - what matters is going to ask someone to search their homes as a private corporation. if that is not creepy, i dont know what is. that doesnt happen even here in turkey.
for 2 times in the discussions in articles describing of apple ill will, im asking this question to apple fans. in turn, they are modding me down like madmen, and then proceeding to defend the wrongdoing, ill will of apple for days.
a particular one has been trying to justify a private corporation sending private people (not even p.i.s) to a citizen's door and asking the citizen permission to search his/her home. imagine you wake up a morning, some people in front of your door, neither police, nor private investigators, asking you permission to search your home and go through your belongings. the guy has been trying to justify that.
so im asking again - how much ill intent will it take on apple's side for you to realize that this going is no good ?
indeed others should be a welcome sight, not something unwanted in mmo games. after all, what's the point of playing a mmo, if you are going to limit your social circle to some limited number of people in your play group or your guild ? LAN play already offers such gameplay, or games that have limited server capacity.
A mmo should aim for MASSIVE multiplayer. that is the whole point of it. it shouldnt encourage seclusion, isolation, animosity in between players.
youre just another one who read the articles half assedly. this is not about the seizure in gizmodo editor's home. it was by police. this is about 'apples' representatives' going to the home of person who gave the phone to the gizmodo editor and asking permission to search it.
They were not being police or executors of justice. They asked if they could search for it and abided by the request to leave. If they claimed they had a warrant (they didn't) or broke the door down (they didn't) your comparison with the police would work. But your comparison is phony. They didn't conduct vigilante justice. And yes, if the person gives them permission they aren't breaking any law searching for it.
im appalled at your acceptance of complete strangers coming to ask you that whether they could search YOUR house, and you being ok with it, with no reason whatsoever.
it doesnt make a single bit of difference whether this was legal at that point or not. it is not normal, uncommon, and also incompliant with innumerable privacy considerations, ethics and morals of our society. these are not police, not investigators not d.a. these are RANDOM people. a house is a house, which is a PRIVATE place, loaded with private things of individuals. not to mention that all kinds of legal liabilities would ensue from conducting such a search, REGARDLESS of the 'permission' given.
while police needs warrants to search houses, and even has to be on a particular investigation officially to enter someone's house and search their belongings, private people cannot go and search anyone's house with or without permission. they can only ask to be handed out certain items, and even not demand.
thats why they have censored any potential porn app and access to them recently... and left playboy, hustler related stuff still in app store, and sites reachable... for some reason...
and now they are condoning a 'puff puff' game, for smoking cigarettes or pipe. all the while protecting the children.
im calling the apple fans to defend this kind of thing reasonably. i wonder whether any of you will succeed. i also wonder how lonw will it take you people to realize that apple has been going down the drain ethically.
we are not talking about the legality of the issue here. we are talking about the commonness, the boldness factor.
it is uncommon. it is a practice that private sources do NOT ask to search people's homes. a company, doing this, without noticeable precedent, shows how bold and ethically uncaring they are. they didnt even think this would be bad PR
Sorry. You missed the point. The point of that sentence was the warrant part. So I mixed up two people. The police served a warrant on someone who received stolen property. That seems like a pretty good way to find out what they knew (i.e. if they thought it was stolen). It was still a warrant, which means it was signed off on by a judge, and not just some company searching a private citizen. It was the government, after going through the process set out to prevent unreasonable searches.
It's a free country. You are allowed to go to someone's door and ask them a question, and ask to come in. They can say no. If you keep it up, they can call the cops and have you arrested for trespassing/harassment. But asking "can I come in to talk to you" is perfectly legal.
they didnt ask to come in and talk, they asked to be allowed to SEARCH it. its much more bolder and on the borderline than talking.
and the boldness of that matters. private corporations anywhere in the world has no authority to their own detective work. they have to hire p.i.s to do it. the fact that apple didnt refrain from doing that tells volumes about their control freakness.
On Friday, the REACT task force executed a warrant to search the home and car of Gizmodo blogger Jason Chen, who had possession of the iPhone prototype before it was returned to Apple, and who was responsible for the gadget blogs breaking stories on the device.
you are missing the point - this is the blogger's house. its different. apple went to the guy before the gizmodo guy.
SOME PEOPLE saying that they were REPRESENTING APPLE came to the guy's apartment asked to search the apartment. not prosecutor's office or investigating detective.
Yeah and if I lost a valuable phone and the anti-theft feature told my boss where it was, he might send people to ask the owner of the house if they could come in and find it too. How is that evil? Mind you the home owner has every right to refuse and make them call the cops who will get a warrant to come in and look for it.
it is evil, because individual citizens are NOT police and the executors of justice. its a step away from thuggery.
If they have reason to believe their stolen property is in someone's home, they have every right to go ask if they can come in and look for it. If you lost your phone and location tracked it to a house would it be evil for you to ask the residents if you can come in and look for it?
Stealing the phone someone lost at the bar is unethical. Selling it to the highest bidder is unethical. Looking for your lost property... not unethical.
no, they dont have any right to conduct vigilante justice or search anyone's home even with permission. there is a reason why private investigators have to obtain licenses, and it is precisely to prevent the above from happening.
so, because you have no sympathy, you are ok with a private corporation sending 'representatives' to search his house ? so, you would be ok with waking up a morning and suddenly finding 'representatives' of a private corporation 'asking permission' to search YOUR home ?
with this mindset, you may find yourself trying to justify people getting beaten with baseball bats when they tried to jailbreak an iphone in 4-5 years in future.
last story, there were people who were defending apple and maintained that no linkage of evil could be established about the prosecution regarding the iphone dismantlers. it turns out that 'representatives' of apple went out to a private citizen's quarters, and intending to search the premises.
so, a private corporation sends 'representatives' to search people's homes... will there be anyone that would come up and defend this, i wonder...
more links. these sightings are pacing up. this is exactly why, u.s., previously very secretive and heavy handed in these matters, is easing up the blockade of information on these subjects. cnn has covered a panel that was comprised of former high level govt officials talking about ufo interactions for the first time, and noted that 'this is no panel of kooks - serious business'. and hawking came out, leave aside denying ufo interaction possibility, tried to scare people off contact. expect to see much more on these, since ufos are also becoming more liberal with exposing themselves :
above is long beach, ca police FLIR (forward looking infrared) recording a ufo which was being chased by a police chopper at the time. later police dept reported that the object seemed under intelligent control and chase lasted a few minutes. this is a recent case.
above is a much more liberal occurrence. a shot in length, made in geelong australia recently.
if you want more, keep following http://www.ufo-blogger.com/ . Its the most solid source on footages. They send all footate to numerous experts around the world to check for validity. you will find which of the videos were deemed real, which were deemed fake in the postings of the videos themselves.
establish relevance first. so he was convicted of aggravated robbery and burglary. how is this relevant to refusal of disclosing of passwords ?
do you know what were the circumstances involved in that case ? do you know how many people are jailed in u.s. prisons with charges that they are not even guilty of ? do you know that even patting a little child on the head can get you a sex offender record if you chance up with a mad enough mom ?
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, but it all comes down to implementation. The reasons that party, xp, and loot systems are as they are in many MMORPGs is that they are the lesser of 2 evils. On one hand you have someone being happier because their kill was not stollen. On the other hand, you have a boatload of exploits to deal with that make it much harder to balance encounters for fun/loot/xp
why ? they are already leveled. there are already encounters for 3-4 people, dungeons for 5 coordinated people, and raids for 25 people. so, the system is there.
it doesnt hurt us to allow xp and loot to everyone who joins the fight in the open realm in any measure. harder creatures, they cant manage, and will need coordination.
i wont reply to each of you who think that some private corporation being able to ask to search someone's house is not normal and contrary to privacy. i have replied to others in the thread, please go and read them.
Depends on whether I did anything wrong. If I didn't I would probably be miffed and refuse them (perhaps even giving them the finger). But this is a far cry from your exaggerated claims of thuggery, vigilante justice, and executors of justice.
no it doesnt depend on whatever you do. because, when it does, you can not prevent people from taking various approaches to vigilante justice, because it becomes commonplace.
this is why in all civilized countries searches are limited to police, and they require warrant, and private investigators can only ask permission. you can NOT go to a citizen's home and ask to search their house without being a police or a p.i.
It violates no privacy, ethics or morals. If there was no cause, it might be snotty. No more than that..
yea private strangers going through your underwear, cupboards, pc definitely do not constitute any violation of privacy, ethics or morals. then, please explain what obligations in regard to privacy do these individuals have. lets say they have noticed that you have various sex fetishes. can one of them expose that information on the net ? what are the legal guidelines for these ?
where the buck stops.
so, you are brought into an office with your manager's manager, a hr rep, two police officers, and asked to provide access to the system to someone who you know that is able to screw up so grandly (like how they disclosed live user/passes as evidence in public court to a live system with sensitive info) and potentially expose millions of citizen's or the local authority's very sensitive data and pave way for insane hacking and stealing.
you would give the access to the idiot ? you would save your own ass, and you would do what is TECHNICALLY and legally right, but, would it be the RIGHT thing to do ?
if we exaggerate the concept a little bit, we can come up with an exaggerated example still in the same format with this :
you are an officer in a nuclear silo, and you are ordered to launch, practically ending the lives of countless people, and maybe ending the world. you know that who is ordering you is a top of the notch idiot that screws up.
what would you do ?
it doesnt matter what you believe - what matters is going to ask someone to search their homes as a private corporation. if that is not creepy, i dont know what is. that doesnt happen even here in turkey.
for 2 times in the discussions in articles describing of apple ill will, im asking this question to apple fans. in turn, they are modding me down like madmen, and then proceeding to defend the wrongdoing, ill will of apple for days.
a particular one has been trying to justify a private corporation sending private people (not even p.i.s) to a citizen's door and asking the citizen permission to search his/her home. imagine you wake up a morning, some people in front of your door, neither police, nor private investigators, asking you permission to search your home and go through your belongings. the guy has been trying to justify that.
so im asking again - how much ill intent will it take on apple's side for you to realize that this going is no good ?
indeed others should be a welcome sight, not something unwanted in mmo games. after all, what's the point of playing a mmo, if you are going to limit your social circle to some limited number of people in your play group or your guild ? LAN play already offers such gameplay, or games that have limited server capacity.
A mmo should aim for MASSIVE multiplayer. that is the whole point of it. it shouldnt encourage seclusion, isolation, animosity in between players.
is that why uo has never took off ? is that why wow has been such a success ?
youre just another one who read the articles half assedly. this is not about the seizure in gizmodo editor's home. it was by police. this is about 'apples' representatives' going to the home of person who gave the phone to the gizmodo editor and asking permission to search it.
i dont know. geeee. maybe because it is insightful ?
They were not being police or executors of justice. They asked if they could search for it and abided by the request to leave. If they claimed they had a warrant (they didn't) or broke the door down (they didn't) your comparison with the police would work. But your comparison is phony. They didn't conduct vigilante justice. And yes, if the person gives them permission they aren't breaking any law searching for it.
im appalled at your acceptance of complete strangers coming to ask you that whether they could search YOUR house, and you being ok with it, with no reason whatsoever.
it doesnt make a single bit of difference whether this was legal at that point or not. it is not normal, uncommon, and also incompliant with innumerable privacy considerations, ethics and morals of our society. these are not police, not investigators not d.a. these are RANDOM people. a house is a house, which is a PRIVATE place, loaded with private things of individuals. not to mention that all kinds of legal liabilities would ensue from conducting such a search, REGARDLESS of the 'permission' given.
while police needs warrants to search houses, and even has to be on a particular investigation officially to enter someone's house and search their belongings, private people cannot go and search anyone's house with or without permission. they can only ask to be handed out certain items, and even not demand.
thats why they have censored any potential porn app and access to them recently ... and left playboy, hustler related stuff still in app store, and sites reachable ... for some reason ...
and now they are condoning a 'puff puff' game, for smoking cigarettes or pipe. all the while protecting the children.
im calling the apple fans to defend this kind of thing reasonably. i wonder whether any of you will succeed. i also wonder how lonw will it take you people to realize that apple has been going down the drain ethically.
s/he should be given the guy's job, so she will have to cope up with stupid managers.
it is uncommon. it is a practice that private sources do NOT ask to search people's homes. a company, doing this, without noticeable precedent, shows how bold and ethically uncaring they are. they didnt even think this would be bad PR
Sorry. You missed the point. The point of that sentence was the warrant part. So I mixed up two people. The police served a warrant on someone who received stolen property. That seems like a pretty good way to find out what they knew (i.e. if they thought it was stolen). It was still a warrant, which means it was signed off on by a judge, and not just some company searching a private citizen. It was the government, after going through the process set out to prevent unreasonable searches.
the apple 'representatives' had no warrant.
It's a free country. You are allowed to go to someone's door and ask them a question, and ask to come in. They can say no. If you keep it up, they can call the cops and have you arrested for trespassing/harassment. But asking "can I come in to talk to you" is perfectly legal.
they didnt ask to come in and talk, they asked to be allowed to SEARCH it. its much more bolder and on the borderline than talking.
and the boldness of that matters. private corporations anywhere in the world has no authority to their own detective work. they have to hire p.i.s to do it. the fact that apple didnt refrain from doing that tells volumes about their control freakness.
On Friday, the REACT task force executed a warrant to search the home and car of Gizmodo blogger Jason Chen, who had possession of the iPhone prototype before it was returned to Apple, and who was responsible for the gadget blogs breaking stories on the device.
you are missing the point - this is the blogger's house. its different. apple went to the guy before the gizmodo guy.
so lets see.
what if the reporters bought the nixon tapes from another source, and then it turned out that that source had stolen the tapes ?
actually since there is no reason nixon would give out the tapes, they had to be stolen in any case, even if its 'leaked'.
you read the article half assedly maybe.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/dude-apple/
SOME PEOPLE saying that they were REPRESENTING APPLE came to the guy's apartment asked to search the apartment. not prosecutor's office or investigating detective.
Yeah and if I lost a valuable phone and the anti-theft feature told my boss where it was, he might send people to ask the owner of the house if they could come in and find it too. How is that evil? Mind you the home owner has every right to refuse and make them call the cops who will get a warrant to come in and look for it.
it is evil, because individual citizens are NOT police and the executors of justice. its a step away from thuggery.
If they have reason to believe their stolen property is in someone's home, they have every right to go ask if they can come in and look for it. If you lost your phone and location tracked it to a house would it be evil for you to ask the residents if you can come in and look for it?
Stealing the phone someone lost at the bar is unethical. Selling it to the highest bidder is unethical. Looking for your lost property... not unethical.
no, they dont have any right to conduct vigilante justice or search anyone's home even with permission. there is a reason why private investigators have to obtain licenses, and it is precisely to prevent the above from happening.
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/gizmodo-search-warrant-illegal
eff believes it.
so, because you have no sympathy, you are ok with a private corporation sending 'representatives' to search his house ? so, you would be ok with waking up a morning and suddenly finding 'representatives' of a private corporation 'asking permission' to search YOUR home ?
with this mindset, you may find yourself trying to justify people getting beaten with baseball bats when they tried to jailbreak an iphone in 4-5 years in future.
last story, there were people who were defending apple and maintained that no linkage of evil could be established about the prosecution regarding the iphone dismantlers. it turns out that 'representatives' of apple went out to a private citizen's quarters, and intending to search the premises.
... will there be anyone that would come up and defend this, i wonder ...
so, a private corporation sends 'representatives' to search people's homes
its modern version of witch hunt.
more links. these sightings are pacing up. this is exactly why, u.s., previously very secretive and heavy handed in these matters, is easing up the blockade of information on these subjects. cnn has covered a panel that was comprised of former high level govt officials talking about ufo interactions for the first time, and noted that 'this is no panel of kooks - serious business'. and hawking came out, leave aside denying ufo interaction possibility, tried to scare people off contact. expect to see much more on these, since ufos are also becoming more liberal with exposing themselves :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvFTpAIwAWs
above is long beach, ca police FLIR (forward looking infrared) recording a ufo which was being chased by a police chopper at the time. later police dept reported that the object seemed under intelligent control and chase lasted a few minutes. this is a recent case.
http://blip.tv/file/3522986
above is a much more liberal occurrence. a shot in length, made in geelong australia recently.
if you want more, keep following http://www.ufo-blogger.com/ . Its the most solid source on footages. They send all footate to numerous experts around the world to check for validity. you will find which of the videos were deemed real, which were deemed fake in the postings of the videos themselves.
one of the jurors ... one.
establish relevance first. so he was convicted of aggravated robbery and burglary. how is this relevant to refusal of disclosing of passwords ?
do you know what were the circumstances involved in that case ? do you know how many people are jailed in u.s. prisons with charges that they are not even guilty of ? do you know that even patting a little child on the head can get you a sex offender record if you chance up with a mad enough mom ?