I wish Tivo would advertise that fact a bit more. I had forgotten about that little bit of information over the last several months. I might have given them a bit more consideration for the purchase.
You can go ahead and call me a nutcase... I've been called worse.
The three things that really sold me on the Replay were the broadband connection, the web scheduling, and the program sharing. Again, Tivo might have been higher in the running if I had known about the $10 USB to Ethernet option.
I put off buying a PVR for a while just so I could get the broadband connection. My TV is in a bad location for running an extra phone jack, but is in a good location for running a connection to my network. The phone lines in my house are marginal at best, and a modem quality powerline phone jack would cost about $90. Since Tivo didn't support broadband "out of the box", the advantage swung to Replay.
The Replay web scheduling is very nice, but lacks a couple of features I want. Like Tivo, the Replay only connects to the schedule servers once a day. As a result, if I use myReplayTV.com to change my unit's settings, it doesn't take effect until the next day, after the nightly schedule sync. I would prefer a 'push' system. I could open a restricted port in my firewall and myReplayTV.com could use it to push my changes to my ReplayTV unit. You have to do something similar to set up external program sharing with other ReplayTV units, so I don't see that it would be a big problem for SonicBlue to implement this feature.
I have had my ReplayTV about a week. So far, I have enjoyed it a great deal. I imagine if I had decided on a Tivo instead, I would feel similarly.
This is one of the reasons I just bought a ReplayTV instead of a Tivo.
The Tivo attempts to figure out what you like based on your "thumbs up/thumbs down" ratings of shows and/or the shows you have previously recorded. When you haven't told it to specifically record a program, it searches for programs it thinks you might like and records them.
I recently read an article which described how this "Tivo-profiling" of your viewing habits can go terribly wrong. One woman's Tivo started loading up with Korean news broadcasts, a heterosexual man's Tivo apparently thought he was gay and started recording lots of gay-themed programs. In each case it took a considerable amount of effort to change their Tivo's opinion of what they would like to watch.
One reason I bought a ReplayTV was I didn't want my recorder trying to psychoanalyse me. Instead I can tell it to record what I want (either specific programs, by keyword search, or by category). It connects to the program guide via my home network, instead of modem-ing into some host in the dark of night. I can share programs with others, and there is software to pull the programs off of the unit and onto my PC. I can also do next day schedule changes to my recordings via the web. Not bad for $250 bucks and a $10/month service fee.
I.V.
p.s. If you are a married with kids, Live TV Pause is worth the price of the unit and subscription by itself.
Plus: They are making it. Minus: They are not using Harlon Ellison's script that Asimov approved.
You can buy an illustrated copy of Ellison's script on Amazon, etc. It is an interesting adaptation of some of the stories in the book. Ellison did a great job of picking, adapting, and threading the stories together. Ellison emphasised the main themes to built a really solid story. He created a story that ties the others together; one that twists and turns and leaves you with a very poinient ending. Basically, Ellison recognized that Susan Calvin was the tragic heart and soul of the I, Robot stories.
I can't say much more without revealing his plot. I can give you a hint though: Ellison realised that Susan Calvin must be the little girl in the story "Robbie". Combine that together with a couple of other stories, especially "Liar, Liar" and you can see how Calvin's tragic story parallels the story of the rise (and fall) of the robots.
Excellent stuff. Highly recommended. Its a shame they aren't making it.
The first download of the electronic key that goes with a CD is free. SME plans to charge about A5200 (US$1.64) per song for the second time onwards, Ide said. Users cannot opt to just decode one song from a CD, but have to purchase the key for the entire CD, he said.
Copy protection on CDs isn't about stopping file sharing, its about creating new per-play revenue streams WHILE ALSO preserving obscenely high hard-media profits.
Most of the large professional greenhouses I have seen in the last few years use very thick (20+ mil) clear polypropilene sheets instead of glass. Glass is expensive, plastic is cheap.
Note: If we did make greenhouses that covered several sq. miles, we could easily get cheap eco-friendly electrical power as a side benefit - solar tower.
Yes, a very good compromise. Plus it allows for the voters to make sure their votes were counted properly. The fact that it is both transparent and anonymous makes it that much stronger. Having them hold onto the receipt is a potential security flaw, because then anyone who gets a look at that receipt before you destroy it can break the anonmity and look at their vote online. Very bad if your Republi-crat boss doesn't like that you voted Demo-can.
Your proposal also suffers from the addition of potential vulnerabilities due to the obscurity function. Example: I take my receipt and check the web-site. It shows my vote correcty. I'm happy and ask no more questions. The reporting program however happens to be looking at a slightly different set of data (either an oops or malice). My vote is counted for the wrong guy and turns the election. Very bad and I don't know that my vote was altered/misreported ex post facto. Of course I can't know that now, either. So I guess it is better than it is now.
I still like signing the receipts though. I think it adds just a little more conviction to the vote and it makes your voting receipt a binding legal instrument representing your interests.
If you are willing to accept a little less anonmity, then signing the receipt allows a judge to put you under oath and ask you how you voted, should things get truly fouled up. It also allows you to go back and say "I don't trust your computers and your web-site. SHOW ME that my vote was recorded and counted correctly."
To be honest, I think your suggestion is an easier sell than mine. Plus practically speaking, yours will provide just as much protection of the voter's interests in all but a few unlikely nightmare election scenarios.
Signatures would only be viewed under controlled circumstances by officers of the court. Also, they would only be viewed in the event of a contested election. Apply anonymity laws liberally and you are ok.
In most elections, the 'fast' computer based voting would be used. This would be similar to the electromechanical systems today. My proposal is to provide a better auditing trail.
BTW, one of the hidden advantages of my proposal is that the election board can conduct better audits on the machines and voting areas to make sure no other hanky panky is going on, even in uncontested elections.
Absolutely right. We need that audit trail. However, the current crop of electro-mechanical voting machines have lots of problems too (hanging chads anyone?)
How about this: use touch-screen voting, but print a voting record receipt for each voter. Receipt includes a printout of who the voter selected. Voter makes sure that the receipt is correct, signs it, and puts it in the ballot box. If it wasn't correct, they cancel their last vote and try again. The electronic votes are used for the election. The receipts are used in a contested election, since they were actually SIGNED by the voters as being correct.
A thought: Put it on a big scroll-like roll of receipt paper, and you don't need to worry about lost receipts. They would all be on one big roll of paper. The voter could verify and sign right in the booth. They sign and their vote rolls up into the machine. Only the signed votes on the roll would count.
Only the original voter and sworn election officials would ever see the signed voting receipts, so the voter would risk little or no backlash from their vote. In extreme cases where there are STILL disputes, you can now have the disputed voters come back in (anonymously or in front of a closed court) and vote again.
Of course if it is a contested election and a voter didn't turn in or sign their receipt, they lose their vote- We have to preserve at least one weakness for future pundits to argue about.
Not sure that's the case: choosing people for public office by selecting randomly from the population would also be a fairly orderly system, but probably wouldn't work too well in practice.
This is how juries and grand juries are selected in most parts of the country. Having sat on three juries, and as foreman on one, I have to agree with you. Most of the people selected were nice, but clueless. On one jury, they wanted to convict the lawyer not the defendant! (hmmm, maybe they weren't that clueless after all...)
Actually, some of the Founders proposed that the Presidency be split into a committee of 3.
Your proposal is basically a parlamentary system with a couple of twists. Parlamentary systems are notoriously volatile, particularly on divisive issues. For all the noise we American's make about Individualism, we love having one leader, figurehead or no.
What cinched their selection of a Presidency was George Washington. When they wrote the Constitution, they knew the only way they would get a concensus on the new constitution was if Washington took the leadership of the country. Everyone KNEW Washington would be the first president (some feared he would be the first King). He served two fairly innocuous terms. When he stepped down, the system was in place and working.
You are close. What you are refering to is known as Clarke's 1st Law. Arthur C. Clarke (scientist, futurist, and one of the great Science Fiction authors of all time) came up with 3 laws:
Clarke's 1st Law
When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
Clarke's 2nd Law
The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them into the impossible.
Clarke's 3rd Law
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Basically it is an idea stock market. When you become a member, you receive a small amount of fake investment money. You can then buy and sell against ideas posted by other members. The premise is the the closer an idea is to being true/possible, the higher its value will be in the market. Ideas do have adjudicators who are responsible for judging when and if a stock has met its criteria and can be pulled off the exchange.
Here is an example of the top 10 traded ideas on Foresight Exchange now:
No idea where war figures into "wardialing" either, though, except that it probably sounded cool at the time.
It was coined in homage to the movie WAR GAMES in the early 80s. Mathew Broderick's character (David Lightman) used a program to auto-dial numbers and identify open computer systems.
Before the movie, it was a little-known exploit. After the movie, every wannabe cracker script kiddie was running wardialers downloaded from a BBS. The first couple of months after the movie released, I don't think I went a day without being wardialed. Very annoying.
Uh, hello, 5 hours a month is about 1.2 hours a week. That's nothing at all. How many people are going to pay $10 a month for 5 hours of play? Thats $2 an hour. Do you think someone will pay $120 a year for that? I don't think so. Anyone who does is an idiot...
It would not make them idiots, it would make them a) casual players and/or b) people with limited time available to play. I know several people who are casual MMORG players who only play a couple of days a month. I am one of them. I average between 10-15 hours per month in my MMORG.
Would I like to play more? No, I have a full life with plenty of interests and a good job. The 10-15 hours a month I play provides me with enough time to feel satisfied without getting burned out on the game. It is also enough time to keep in touch with my Guild friends and how everyone is doing. Do my characters advance as fast as most others? No. Do I participate in all the guild events, raids, etc? No. Does it bother me, no.
I get as much out of the game as I am willing to put into it. It is worth the $12/month to me (by your standards I am $24/year more foolish than the average casual player). I spend much more a month on going to the movies and WAY more a month on soda. Actually, I tend to save money because I no longer buy 2-3 new games a month. My subscription fee is automagically deducted from my account, and I play when and only when I am in the MOOD to play... a very important factor. Playing a game for the sake of maximizing your time/dollar is just dumb. Playing when you really WANT to play, maximizes your ENJOYMENT per dollar.
Politeness note: calling someone an Idiot when you don't see their Point-Of-View doesn't prove they are an Idiot, but it might indicate that you are one. Caveat Orator.
"what the critics mean by "innovation" is legalizing the breaking of protection codes, without which there is no protection"
Copyright law already protects these works. You're not talking about protection, you're talking about corporate mandated enforcement.
You are absolutely right. What is really busting their collective humps is that all these nifty new individually empowering technologies (PCs, Internet, Digital Recorders, etc.) make it impossible to ABSOLUTELY control distribution. That control is the core of their past and current revenue streams. They can't use conventional Copyright control (e.g. legal carpet bombing) on the new "threat". Even though record companies and movie studios are making record sales and profits and show all signs of INCREASING, they FEEL they are being cheated by a stinging swarm of evil copyright pirates.
A big component of this obsessive control freak paranoia is a variant of Lottery Dreamer Syndrom: "If we could get all those dirty rotten pirates to buy AND we could charge everybody per use on all our properties, THEN we would REALLY see some mula!!! Muahhahaha!!!"
Couple all of the above with the sheer boom-town greed that all these guys feel about the prospect of a Brand New Distribution Frontier (the Internet) and the frustration of not being able to control it, they then turn to the only means they have left to control the situation: lawmaking. Hence, we have the WTO, DMCA, and so on, and more to follow. They have money, which gives them influence. That lawmaking influence is the only weapon they have against we rapacious pirates, er loyal customers.
I agree with you that their loud complaints about guarenteeing their traditional revenue falls on very deaf ears with me. What kind of unmitigated sleezy amoral GALL do they have to sweepingly call their customers thieves and lobby governments to force us to buy their product?
Do these media moguls have a point? Yes. Are they accepting that we who are many, but have faint voices, have a point? No. New technology, as it always does, is disturbing and changing the commercial and rights balance in the world. They are simultaneously panicing and power-grabbing. In fairness, many individuals are pirating and immorally profiting off of the work of others too.
The bottom line is that all this brouhaha will settle out eventually. However, unless individuals fight for their Fair Use rights and for a fair, open, and TRULY competative market then we consumers are going to find ourselves with unreasonble and unnecessary restrictions and unwanted mandates about how we live our lives.
Some of the information I read about this a couple of years ago indicated that the ultrasonic beams they can use (obviously more expensive) can create very tight sound points in space (sound voxels, soxels?). I wish I could remember the reference, but they indicated that they could easily focus seperate sounds on individual ears, such that someone a foot away could hear little or none of the sound. With tight enough beam widths, perhaps the sidelobe interference could be minimized (similar to the way it is done in phased array radars). A worst case for a multilingual theater then would be to put the seats a little farther apart or to have language specific rows or sections of the theater. The technology would be expensive, at least at first. The likely first applications would be in Imax or similar specialty theaters in big urban areas.
Spot sound cancelation hardware would have to be installed near the effect area to counter the problems you described. Probably the user would have to wear a locator badge with wireless microphones. In general, sound cancelation technology acts more to muffle and reduce the volume of sounds than to actually eliminate them. Still useful and implementatble for the applications I described, I think.
Thanks for the compliment on my other ideas. They are what occured to me when I first heard about this stuff a couple of years ago.
The Sega Joyopolis thing probably is an implementation of the haunted house idea. BTW, the magic frequency idea isn't totally new. Decades ago, some haunted houses used a subsonic pipe organ whistle to generate those "creepy" frequencies. I imagine today it would be simple to do with specialized subwoofers and a frequency generator. Being able to spotlight people with these things would be interesting though.
I am very interested in seeing how this technology develops in the next couple of decades.
There are many more applications of this technology than the article lists:
Multi-lingual Movie Theaters: Push a button on your arm rest and get the movie in English, French, Spanish, etc. (or in the original Klingon). Pushing the "G-Rated" button on your child's seat would tune out all those nasty 4-letter words (although visual violence and sex would remain on screen). You could also control the volume from whisper to bone-rattling.
Spot sound cancelation: Lots of uses for this one. Create quiet zones by coupling with sound cancelation techniques. Imagine being able to punch the "Cone of Silence" (CoS) button in your office when your co-workers are getting a little loud or you need to really concentrate. You could also listen to your favorite music without wearing headphones or disturbing your cube-mate. This would be particularly useful for airplanes. You could engage your CoS when you want to get some rest or simply to block out the airplane noise. The pilot could engage everyone's CoS to nudge people into staying in their seat (if they get up, they get the loud airplane noises again). Or how about for good neighbor relations- are your neighbors complaining that your dog Sparky is keeping them up all night with his barking? Just install the BarkStop(TM) system in your back yard and put the tracking collar on him. All his barking gets muffled. It also acts as an invisible sonic fence to keep him inside the yard.
Super Surround-Sound Home Theater: DVD's could contain extra sound encoding information to paint the viewing space with individual sounds. All of the sounds in the movie would come from a 3D location in space. This is similar to what the conductor in the article wanted to do.
Point-To-Point Smart Intercom: Rig an office building with locator ID badges, tracking microphones, and sound projectors. Now you can tap your badge ala ST:TNG and speak to anyone in the building in total privacy. Rig it into the phone system and you can talk to anyone out of the office via their cell phone or in another office building a continent away.
Thrill rides and haunted houses: Structure the experience by controlling sound location, volume, etc. Easy to make "ghosts" follow behind you, chains rattling above, and so on. Heighten the experience by using selectively transmiting magic frequencies that induce unease and nervousness.
And of course practical jokes: Echoing footsteps, sqeaky shoes, body sounds, etc. Use your imagination.
The possibilites are almost unlimited. It is funny that what the DOD really wants out of this is a classic SFish Sonic Disruptor.
What I really want out of it is a Sonic Screwdriver.
What I find strange is that Apple Computer is not on the list. I thought MPEG-4 was based on the QuickTime format. I am very sceptical that Apple doesn't have several existing patents on QuickTime or wouldn't be involved in the MPEG-4 specification.
I found the following news release with the licensing terms here:
For Immediate Release
CONTACT:
Lawrence Horn
MPEG LA®
301.986.6660
301.986.8575 Fax lhorn@mpegla.com
Terms of MPEG-4 Visual Patent Portfolio License Announced
(Denver, Colorado, US - 31 January 2002) - MPEG LA, LLC today announced
that it will offer fair, reasonable, nondiscriminatory, worldwide access to
patents that are essential to the MPEG-4 Visual (Simple and Core) digital
compression standard under a single license to be known as the MPEG-4 (Visual)
Patent Portfolio License ("License"). The License currently includes
patents owned by the following companies: Canon Inc.; France Télécom;
Fujitsu Limited; Hitachi, Ltd.; Hyundai Curitel, Inc.; KDDI Corporation;
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.; Microsoft Corporation; Mitsubishi
Electric Corporation; Oki Electric Industry Co., Ltd.; Philips Electronics;
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd.; Sharp Kabushiki
Kaisha; Sony Corporation; Telenor AS; Toshiba Corporation; and Victor Company
of Japan, Limited. MPEG LA convened these patent owners in December 2000
following an independent patent expert's finding that each of them owns one or
more patents essential to the international MPEG-4 Visual Standard. The
objective of the License is to include as much essential MPEG-4 Visual (Simple
and Core) intellectual property as possible in one license for the convenience
of all users. Patent holders are required to include all of their essential
MPEG-4 Visual (Simple and Core) patents worldwide. In addition, new patent
holders and their essential patents will continue to be added following a
determination of essentiality.
"The essential patent owners are pleased that their intellectual
property has made a substantial and essential contribution to the development
of this exciting new technology," said MPEG LA Chief Executive Officer
Baryn S. Futa. "The MPEG-4 (Visual) Patent Portfolio License manifests
their desire to 'partner' with other industry participants to encourage
widespread adoption of MPEG-4. The patent owners understand the risks inherent
in a startup technology in which companies large and small are asked to make a
pioneering investment and are sensitive to the role that their licensing model
will play in that process. Therefore, the License has been specially designed
so that reasonable royalties are shared fairly by a variety of industry
participants in order to stimulate early, rapid and widespread MPEG-4 product
investment, development, deployment and use."
Under the License terms, Licensees will pay the following royalty rates for
MPEG-4 Simple or Core Products:
US $0.25 per decoder (in hardware or software) for a license to make and
sell and for personal use in receiving private video (i.e., not video for
which a service provider or content owner receives remuneration as a result of
offering/providing the video for viewing or having the video viewed), subject
to a cap of $1,000,000 per year/per legal entity.
US $0.25 per encoder (in hardware or software) for a license for personal
use only to create private video data (i.e., not video for which a service
provider or content owner receives remuneration as a result of
offering/providing the video for viewing or having the video viewed), subject
to a cap of $1,000,000 per year/per legal entity.
US $0.00033/minute or portion (equivalent to US $0.02/hour) based on
playback/normal running time for every stream, download or other use of MPEG-4
video data in connection with which a service provider or content owner
receives remuneration as a result of offering/providing the video for viewing
or having the video viewed (including without limitation pay-per-view,
subscription and advertiser/underwriter-supported services). This royalty, to
be paid by entities that disseminate the MPEG-4 video data, is not subject to
a cap. (In the case of MPEG-4 video for which the number of uses cannot be
directly determined (e.g., video supplied as part of a basic cable service or
to a transmitter for broadcasting), a surrogate (e.g., standard industry
audience measurement) is under consideration.)
US $0.00033/minute or part (equivalent to US $0.02/hour) based on
playback/normal running time of MPEG-4 video data encoded (for other than
personal use) on each copy of packaged medium. This royalty, to be paid by the
packaged medium replicator, is not subject to a cap.
For one year from the start date of the license program, parties that sign
the license (or a memorandum of intent to sign a license) will be forgiven
their payment of royalties for all MPEG-4 Visual Simple and Core products
during and before that one year period.
The initial term of the License has not yet been finalized but when
decided, will be subject to renewal on reasonable terms and conditions for the
useful life of any patents in the Portfolio.
In agreeing to the foregoing terms, the patent holders considered the need
for simplicity, promoting the widest possible use of MPEG-4, maximizing the
opportunity for full efficient compliance with intellectual property licensing
requirements and recognition of the likely business models for deploying
MPEG-4 Visual Standard technology so as to assure that the License is aligned
with the real-world flow of MPEG-4 commerce.
As the objective of the MPEG-4 (Visual) Patent Portfolio License is to include
as much essential MPEG-4 Visual (Simple and Core) intellectual property as
possible in one license, MPEG LA reiterates that any party that believes it
has essential patents (Sections 9, 9.1 and 9.2 and Tables 9-1 and 9-2 of ISO\IEC
14496-2 Information Technology - Coding of Audio-Visual Objects - Part 2:
Visual) and wishes to join upon successful evaluation, is invited to submit
such patents to the independent Patent Evaluator together with a statement
confirming its agreement with the objectives and intention to abide by terms
and procedures governing the patent submission process, which may be obtained
from Lawrence A. Horn, Vice President, Licensing and Business Development,
MPEG LA, LLC (lhorn@mpegla.com, phone 1-301-986-6660, fax 1-301-986-8575).
# # #
Overview of the MPEG-4 Standard
MPEG-4 is an ISO/IEC multi-media representation standard developed by its
Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG). MPEG also developed MPEG-1, which makes
possible interactive video on CD-ROM and is present on virtually every
personal computer, and MPEG-2, the core compression technology underlying the
efficient transmission, storage and display of digitized moving images and
sound tracks on which high definition television (HDTV), Digital Video
Broadcasting (DVB), direct broadcast by satellite (DBS), digital cable
television systems, multichannel-multipoint distribution services (MMDS),
personal computer video, digital versatile discs (DVD), interactive media and
other forms of digital video delivery, storage, transport and display are
based.
MPEG-4 is the result of yet another international effort involving hundreds
of researchers and engineers from all over the world. Building on the
successes of MPEG's earlier standards, MPEG-4 enables integration of the
production, distribution and content access features of digital television,
interactive graphics applications and interactive multimedia across internet
protocol, wireless, low bitrate, broadcast, satellite, cable and mobile
environments. With MPEG-4, all content elements can be maintained as discrete
objects enabling richer interactivity and use across many different devices
More information about MPEG-4 can be found at MPEG's home page http://www.cselt.it/mpeg
and at the home page of the MPEG-4 Industry Forum http://www.m4if.org.
MPEG LA, LLC
MPEG LA successfully pioneered one-stop technology standards licensing,
starting with a portfolio of essential patents for the international digital
video compression standard known as MPEG-2, which it began licensing in 1997.
One-stop technology standards licensing enables widespread technological
implementation, interoperability and use of fundamental broad-based
technologies covered by many patents owned by many different patent holders.
MPEG LA provides users with fair, reasonable, nondiscriminatory access to
these essential patents on a worldwide basis under a single license. The
MPEG-2 Patent Portfolio License now has more than 360 licensees and includes
more than 400 MPEG-2 essential patents in 39 countries owned by 20 patent
holders. As the legal and business template for one-stop technology standards
licensing, MPEG LA also provides an innovative way to achieve fair,
reasonable, nondiscriminatory access to patent rights for other technology
standards - the high-speed transfer digital interconnect standard known as
IEEE 1394 and the terrestrial digital television standard used in Europe and
Asia known as DVB-T. In addition, MPEG LA has been asked to facilitate the
development of joint licenses for other MPEG-4 technologies. The company is
based in Denver, CO and has offices in Chevy Chase, MD (Washington DC
metropolitan area), the greater San Francisco area and London, England. For
more information, please refer to http://www.mpegla.com,
http://www.dvbla.com, and http://www.1394la.com.
I've played EQ and I now occasionally play Dark Age of Camelot (DAoC). Mythic, the makers of DAoC, tried to address many of the economy problems inherent in games like EQ.
One approach was broadening the currency base: 100 copper = 1 silver, 100 silver = 1 gold, and so on up through mithral. It is much harder to accumulate the higher denominations for a given high level character. The combination of hard to earn plus depth of economy helps slow down the deflation. So, in EQ a platinum piece is almost worthless, in DAoC it is a real measure of wealth.
Another DAoC economic feature is the variety of money sinks. The most prominent of these is loss of Constitution Points when your character dies. To gain these points back, you must visit a non-player character healer in a town or village. For a fee, the healer will restore your constitution points. The fee is tied to level, so, as your character gains levels, it costs more to restore constitution. In addition to being a money sink, this is a mechanism for encouraging grouping, since several character classes get the ability to resurrect dead characters without loss of constitution points.
One of my favorite money sinks are dyes. Most clothing and armor in the game can be dyed. This is a huge money sink for characters who wish to maintain a certain color-coordinated look. Dye prices go up dramatically based on the color. Many players can and do spend an inordinate amount of time and money fooling around with their character's appearance.
I think Mythic's biggest attempt to stabilize the DAoC economy is item decay. As noted above, EQ's economy suffers because items never leave service. All objects in DAoC, on the other hand, experience decay with use. The items do not disappear with decay, but they do lose effectiveness. This process can be delayed by frequently repairing items (another money sink). It cannot be stopped though. All items have a finite usable lifespan. After that, they lose most of their effectiveness and are usually sold or given to low level characters. This disturbs the economy very little, since the effectiveness and worth of the item are very little. Most of these devalued items eventually end up being taken out of the economy by being placed in storage or sold to a non-player character vendor.
Also because of item decay, lower level characters are harder to "twink" with high level items. Items that are too high a level decay and become worthless at a vastly accelerated rate. Items thus tend to get passed down slower, thus slowing economic deflation. Low level characters can and do receive "twink" items, but the very high level items are generally placed in storage until the character is at a level they can effectively use the item. This item banking serves to further remove items from the economy, thus slowing the deflation rate.
Mythic's approach isn't perfect, but it does point out that there are techniques for balancing a virtual economy and thereby improve game play.
Sigh. Does knowledge in the Internet age only extend back to 1990? It sure seems that way sometimes.
The first couple of M.A.N.T.I.S. episodes were good. The show went down hill from there, though.
Basically it was a rip off of the Marvel Comics Iron Man character, albeit without Tony Stark's litany of personal problems.
Even Iron Man, who first appeared circa 1963, is not that original. Robert Heinlein's Hugo award winning novel Starship Troopers, which prominently featured powered armor, was first published in 1959.
I know that GE did a great deal of development in the early 60's on the Hardiman and related "Warehouseman" (I forget the name) human augment suits.
I do not doubt that the idea of power suits predates 1959. It can at least be traced to the late 50's early 60's. So when someone pops up on a decades old idea with a "hey this idea goes all the way back to the 90s!", I get a little testy.
Slashdot Mirror
I wish Tivo would advertise that fact a bit more. I had forgotten about that little bit of information over the last several months. I might have given them a bit more consideration for the purchase.
You can go ahead and call me a nutcase... I've been called worse.
The three things that really sold me on the Replay were the broadband connection, the web scheduling, and the program sharing. Again, Tivo might have been higher in the running if I had known about the $10 USB to Ethernet option.
I put off buying a PVR for a while just so I could get the broadband connection. My TV is in a bad location for running an extra phone jack, but is in a good location for running a connection to my network. The phone lines in my house are marginal at best, and a modem quality powerline phone jack would cost about $90. Since Tivo didn't support broadband "out of the box", the advantage swung to Replay.
The Replay web scheduling is very nice, but lacks a couple of features I want. Like Tivo, the Replay only connects to the schedule servers once a day. As a result, if I use myReplayTV.com to change my unit's settings, it doesn't take effect until the next day, after the nightly schedule sync. I would prefer a 'push' system. I could open a restricted port in my firewall and myReplayTV.com could use it to push my changes to my ReplayTV unit. You have to do something similar to set up external program sharing with other ReplayTV units, so I don't see that it would be a big problem for SonicBlue to implement this feature.
I have had my ReplayTV about a week. So far, I have enjoyed it a great deal. I imagine if I had decided on a Tivo instead, I would feel similarly.
Cheers,
I.V.
This is one of the reasons I just bought a ReplayTV instead of a Tivo.
The Tivo attempts to figure out what you like based on your "thumbs up/thumbs down" ratings of shows and/or the shows you have previously recorded. When you haven't told it to specifically record a program, it searches for programs it thinks you might like and records them.
I recently read an article which described how this "Tivo-profiling" of your viewing habits can go terribly wrong. One woman's Tivo started loading up with Korean news broadcasts, a heterosexual man's Tivo apparently thought he was gay and started recording lots of gay-themed programs. In each case it took a considerable amount of effort to change their Tivo's opinion of what they would like to watch.
One reason I bought a ReplayTV was I didn't want my recorder trying to psychoanalyse me. Instead I can tell it to record what I want (either specific programs, by keyword search, or by category). It connects to the program guide via my home network, instead of modem-ing into some host in the dark of night. I can share programs with others, and there is software to pull the programs off of the unit and onto my PC. I can also do next day schedule changes to my recordings via the web. Not bad for $250 bucks and a $10/month service fee.
I.V.
p.s. If you are a married with kids, Live TV Pause is worth the price of the unit and subscription by itself.
Plus: They are making it.
Minus: They are not using Harlon Ellison's script that Asimov approved.
You can buy an illustrated copy of Ellison's script on Amazon, etc. It is an interesting adaptation of some of the stories in the book. Ellison did a great job of picking, adapting, and threading the stories together. Ellison emphasised the main themes to built a really solid story. He created a story that ties the others together; one that twists and turns and leaves you with a very poinient ending. Basically, Ellison recognized that Susan Calvin was the tragic heart and soul of the I, Robot stories.
I can't say much more without revealing his plot. I can give you a hint though: Ellison realised that Susan Calvin must be the little girl in the story "Robbie". Combine that together with a couple of other stories, especially "Liar, Liar" and you can see how Calvin's tragic story parallels the story of the rise (and fall) of the robots.
Excellent stuff. Highly recommended. Its a shame they aren't making it.
I.V.
Started? That's the heart of the plan:
Copy protection on CDs isn't about stopping file sharing, its about creating new per-play revenue streams WHILE ALSO preserving obscenely high hard-media profits.
I.V.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."
No, wait. I was thinking of http://slashdot.org/
(Just kidding Taco.)
I.V.
Note: If we did make greenhouses that covered several sq. miles, we could easily get cheap eco-friendly electrical power as a side benefit - solar tower.
I.V.
Yes, a very good compromise. Plus it allows for the voters to make sure their votes were counted properly. The fact that it is both transparent and anonymous makes it that much stronger. Having them hold onto the receipt is a potential security flaw, because then anyone who gets a look at that receipt before you destroy it can break the anonmity and look at their vote online. Very bad if your Republi-crat boss doesn't like that you voted Demo-can.
Your proposal also suffers from the addition of potential vulnerabilities due to the obscurity function. Example: I take my receipt and check the web-site. It shows my vote correcty. I'm happy and ask no more questions. The reporting program however happens to be looking at a slightly different set of data (either an oops or malice). My vote is counted for the wrong guy and turns the election. Very bad and I don't know that my vote was altered/misreported ex post facto. Of course I can't know that now, either. So I guess it is better than it is now.
I still like signing the receipts though. I think it adds just a little more conviction to the vote and it makes your voting receipt a binding legal instrument representing your interests.
If you are willing to accept a little less anonmity, then signing the receipt allows a judge to put you under oath and ask you how you voted, should things get truly fouled up. It also allows you to go back and say "I don't trust your computers and your web-site. SHOW ME that my vote was recorded and counted correctly."
To be honest, I think your suggestion is an easier sell than mine. Plus practically speaking, yours will provide just as much protection of the voter's interests in all but a few unlikely nightmare election scenarios.
Cheers,
I.V.
Signatures would only be viewed under controlled circumstances by officers of the court. Also, they would only be viewed in the event of a contested election. Apply anonymity laws liberally and you are ok.
In most elections, the 'fast' computer based voting would be used. This would be similar to the electromechanical systems today. My proposal is to provide a better auditing trail.
BTW, one of the hidden advantages of my proposal is that the election board can conduct better audits on the machines and voting areas to make sure no other hanky panky is going on, even in uncontested elections.
Absolutely right. We need that audit trail. However, the current crop of electro-mechanical voting machines have lots of problems too (hanging chads anyone?)
How about this: use touch-screen voting, but print a voting record receipt for each voter. Receipt includes a printout of who the voter selected. Voter makes sure that the receipt is correct, signs it, and puts it in the ballot box. If it wasn't correct, they cancel their last vote and try again. The electronic votes are used for the election. The receipts are used in a contested election, since they were actually SIGNED by the voters as being correct.
A thought: Put it on a big scroll-like roll of receipt paper, and you don't need to worry about lost receipts. They would all be on one big roll of paper. The voter could verify and sign right in the booth. They sign and their vote rolls up into the machine. Only the signed votes on the roll would count.
Only the original voter and sworn election officials would ever see the signed voting receipts, so the voter would risk little or no backlash from their vote. In extreme cases where there are STILL disputes, you can now have the disputed voters come back in (anonymously or in front of a closed court) and vote again.
Of course if it is a contested election and a voter didn't turn in or sign their receipt, they lose their vote- We have to preserve at least one weakness for future pundits to argue about.
I.V.
This is how juries and grand juries are selected in most parts of the country. Having sat on three juries, and as foreman on one, I have to agree with you. Most of the people selected were nice, but clueless. On one jury, they wanted to convict the lawyer not the defendant! (hmmm, maybe they weren't that clueless after all...)
I.V.
Actually, some of the Founders proposed that the Presidency be split into a committee of 3.
Your proposal is basically a parlamentary system with a couple of twists. Parlamentary systems are notoriously volatile, particularly on divisive issues. For all the noise we American's make about Individualism, we love having one leader, figurehead or no.
What cinched their selection of a Presidency was George Washington. When they wrote the Constitution, they knew the only way they would get a concensus on the new constitution was if Washington took the leadership of the country. Everyone KNEW Washington would be the first president (some feared he would be the first King). He served two fairly innocuous terms. When he stepped down, the system was in place and working.
How well it works is another issue.
I.V.
The technical name for that is "combustion". You don't need nanotech for that. White phosphorus or napalm work just fine.
I.V.
Clarke's 1st Law
When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
Clarke's 2nd Law
The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them into the impossible.
Clarke's 3rd Law
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Basically it is an idea stock market. When you become a member, you receive a small amount of fake investment money. You can then buy and sell against ideas posted by other members. The premise is the the closer an idea is to being true/possible, the higher its value will be in the market. Ideas do have adjudicators who are responsible for judging when and if a stock has met its criteria and can be pulled off the exchange.
Here is an example of the top 10 traded ideas on Foresight Exchange now:
Rank Volume % Symbol Short Description
1 26234 83.4% T2007 True on Jan 1 2007
2 1034 3.3% BBRP Bal Bdgt 2002 w/2000 GOP Pres
3 803 2.6% USIraq US attacks Iraq in a year.
4 437 1.4% HURR02 Atlantic Tropical Storms 2002
5 371 1.2% ObL1yr Osama bin Laden 1 year after
6 275 0.9% $bill U.S. Prints New Dollar Bill
7 222 0.7% SCHRDR Schröder Remains Chancelor
8 193 0.6% Clone Human Clone before 2005
9 160 0.5% King Prince Charles remains heir
10 154 0.5% SLvl 1 m rise in Sea Level
"That's no moon, its a rocket casing!"
I.V.
It was coined in homage to the movie WAR GAMES in the early 80s. Mathew Broderick's character (David Lightman) used a program to auto-dial numbers and identify open computer systems.
Before the movie, it was a little-known exploit. After the movie, every wannabe cracker script kiddie was running wardialers downloaded from a BBS. The first couple of months after the movie released, I don't think I went a day without being wardialed. Very annoying.
I.V.
The ambitious little cockroaches have already struck. It is a nifty little innovation called a "magazine".
They seem to have the formula backwards though. Most have 10 pages of advertising for every single page of content.
I.V.
It would not make them idiots, it would make them a) casual players and/or b) people with limited time available to play. I know several people who are casual MMORG players who only play a couple of days a month. I am one of them. I average between 10-15 hours per month in my MMORG.
Would I like to play more? No, I have a full life with plenty of interests and a good job. The 10-15 hours a month I play provides me with enough time to feel satisfied without getting burned out on the game. It is also enough time to keep in touch with my Guild friends and how everyone is doing. Do my characters advance as fast as most others? No. Do I participate in all the guild events, raids, etc? No. Does it bother me, no.
I get as much out of the game as I am willing to put into it. It is worth the $12/month to me (by your standards I am $24/year more foolish than the average casual player). I spend much more a month on going to the movies and WAY more a month on soda. Actually, I tend to save money because I no longer buy 2-3 new games a month. My subscription fee is automagically deducted from my account, and I play when and only when I am in the MOOD to play... a very important factor. Playing a game for the sake of maximizing your time/dollar is just dumb. Playing when you really WANT to play, maximizes your ENJOYMENT per dollar.
Politeness note: calling someone an Idiot when you don't see their Point-Of-View doesn't prove they are an Idiot, but it might indicate that you are one. Caveat Orator.
I.V.
Copyright law already protects these works. You're not talking about protection, you're talking about corporate mandated enforcement.
You are absolutely right. What is really busting their collective humps is that all these nifty new individually empowering technologies (PCs, Internet, Digital Recorders, etc.) make it impossible to ABSOLUTELY control distribution. That control is the core of their past and current revenue streams. They can't use conventional Copyright control (e.g. legal carpet bombing) on the new "threat". Even though record companies and movie studios are making record sales and profits and show all signs of INCREASING, they FEEL they are being cheated by a stinging swarm of evil copyright pirates.
A big component of this obsessive control freak paranoia is a variant of Lottery Dreamer Syndrom: "If we could get all those dirty rotten pirates to buy AND we could charge everybody per use on all our properties, THEN we would REALLY see some mula!!! Muahhahaha!!!"
Couple all of the above with the sheer boom-town greed that all these guys feel about the prospect of a Brand New Distribution Frontier (the Internet) and the frustration of not being able to control it, they then turn to the only means they have left to control the situation: lawmaking. Hence, we have the WTO, DMCA, and so on, and more to follow. They have money, which gives them influence. That lawmaking influence is the only weapon they have against we rapacious pirates, er loyal customers.
I agree with you that their loud complaints about guarenteeing their traditional revenue falls on very deaf ears with me. What kind of unmitigated sleezy amoral GALL do they have to sweepingly call their customers thieves and lobby governments to force us to buy their product?
Do these media moguls have a point? Yes. Are they accepting that we who are many, but have faint voices, have a point? No. New technology, as it always does, is disturbing and changing the commercial and rights balance in the world. They are simultaneously panicing and power-grabbing. In fairness, many individuals are pirating and immorally profiting off of the work of others too.
The bottom line is that all this brouhaha will settle out eventually. However, unless individuals fight for their Fair Use rights and for a fair, open, and TRULY competative market then we consumers are going to find ourselves with unreasonble and unnecessary restrictions and unwanted mandates about how we live our lives.
I.V.
Some of the information I read about this a couple of years ago indicated that the ultrasonic beams they can use (obviously more expensive) can create very tight sound points in space (sound voxels, soxels?). I wish I could remember the reference, but they indicated that they could easily focus seperate sounds on individual ears, such that someone a foot away could hear little or none of the sound. With tight enough beam widths, perhaps the sidelobe interference could be minimized (similar to the way it is done in phased array radars). A worst case for a multilingual theater then would be to put the seats a little farther apart or to have language specific rows or sections of the theater. The technology would be expensive, at least at first. The likely first applications would be in Imax or similar specialty theaters in big urban areas.
Spot sound cancelation hardware would have to be installed near the effect area to counter the problems you described. Probably the user would have to wear a locator badge with wireless microphones. In general, sound cancelation technology acts more to muffle and reduce the volume of sounds than to actually eliminate them. Still useful and implementatble for the applications I described, I think.
Thanks for the compliment on my other ideas. They are what occured to me when I first heard about this stuff a couple of years ago.
The Sega Joyopolis thing probably is an implementation of the haunted house idea. BTW, the magic frequency idea isn't totally new. Decades ago, some haunted houses used a subsonic pipe organ whistle to generate those "creepy" frequencies. I imagine today it would be simple to do with specialized subwoofers and a frequency generator. Being able to spotlight people with these things would be interesting though.
I am very interested in seeing how this technology develops in the next couple of decades.
I.V.
There are many more applications of this technology than the article lists:
Multi-lingual Movie Theaters:
Push a button on your arm rest and get the movie in English, French, Spanish, etc. (or in the original Klingon). Pushing the "G-Rated" button on your child's seat would tune out all those nasty 4-letter words (although visual violence and sex would remain on screen). You could also control the volume from whisper to bone-rattling.
Spot sound cancelation:
Lots of uses for this one. Create quiet zones by coupling with sound cancelation techniques. Imagine being able to punch the "Cone of Silence" (CoS) button in your office when your co-workers are getting a little loud or you need to really concentrate. You could also listen to your favorite music without wearing headphones or disturbing your cube-mate. This would be particularly useful for airplanes. You could engage your CoS when you want to get some rest or simply to block out the airplane noise. The pilot could engage everyone's CoS to nudge people into staying in their seat (if they get up, they get the loud airplane noises again). Or how about for good neighbor relations- are your neighbors complaining that your dog Sparky is keeping them up all night with his barking? Just install the BarkStop(TM) system in your back yard and put the tracking collar on him. All his barking gets muffled. It also acts as an invisible sonic fence to keep him inside the yard.
Super Surround-Sound Home Theater:
DVD's could contain extra sound encoding information to paint the viewing space with individual sounds. All of the sounds in the movie would come from a 3D location in space. This is similar to what the conductor in the article wanted to do.
Point-To-Point Smart Intercom:
Rig an office building with locator ID badges, tracking microphones, and sound projectors. Now you can tap your badge ala ST:TNG and speak to anyone in the building in total privacy. Rig it into the phone system and you can talk to anyone out of the office via their cell phone or in another office building a continent away.
Thrill rides and haunted houses:
Structure the experience by controlling sound location, volume, etc. Easy to make "ghosts" follow behind you, chains rattling above, and so on. Heighten the experience by using selectively transmiting magic frequencies that induce unease and nervousness.
And of course practical jokes:
Echoing footsteps, sqeaky shoes, body sounds, etc. Use your imagination.
The possibilites are almost unlimited. It is funny that what the DOD really wants out of this is a classic SFish Sonic Disruptor.
What I really want out of it is a Sonic Screwdriver.
I.V.
What I find strange is that Apple Computer is not on the list. I thought MPEG-4 was based on the QuickTime format. I am very sceptical that Apple doesn't have several existing patents on QuickTime or wouldn't be involved in the MPEG-4 specification.
For Immediate Release
CONTACT:
Lawrence Horn
MPEG LA®
301.986.6660
301.986.8575 Fax
lhorn@mpegla.com
Terms of MPEG-4 Visual Patent Portfolio License Announced
(Denver, Colorado, US - 31 January 2002) - MPEG LA, LLC today announced that it will offer fair, reasonable, nondiscriminatory, worldwide access to patents that are essential to the MPEG-4 Visual (Simple and Core) digital compression standard under a single license to be known as the MPEG-4 (Visual) Patent Portfolio License ("License"). The License currently includes patents owned by the following companies: Canon Inc.; France Télécom; Fujitsu Limited; Hitachi, Ltd.; Hyundai Curitel, Inc.; KDDI Corporation; Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.; Microsoft Corporation; Mitsubishi Electric Corporation; Oki Electric Industry Co., Ltd.; Philips Electronics; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd.; Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha; Sony Corporation; Telenor AS; Toshiba Corporation; and Victor Company of Japan, Limited. MPEG LA convened these patent owners in December 2000 following an independent patent expert's finding that each of them owns one or more patents essential to the international MPEG-4 Visual Standard. The objective of the License is to include as much essential MPEG-4 Visual (Simple and Core) intellectual property as possible in one license for the convenience of all users. Patent holders are required to include all of their essential MPEG-4 Visual (Simple and Core) patents worldwide. In addition, new patent holders and their essential patents will continue to be added following a determination of essentiality.
"The essential patent owners are pleased that their intellectual property has made a substantial and essential contribution to the development of this exciting new technology," said MPEG LA Chief Executive Officer Baryn S. Futa. "The MPEG-4 (Visual) Patent Portfolio License manifests their desire to 'partner' with other industry participants to encourage widespread adoption of MPEG-4. The patent owners understand the risks inherent in a startup technology in which companies large and small are asked to make a pioneering investment and are sensitive to the role that their licensing model will play in that process. Therefore, the License has been specially designed so that reasonable royalties are shared fairly by a variety of industry participants in order to stimulate early, rapid and widespread MPEG-4 product investment, development, deployment and use."
Under the License terms, Licensees will pay the following royalty rates for MPEG-4 Simple or Core Products:
US $0.25 per decoder (in hardware or software) for a license to make and sell and for personal use in receiving private video (i.e., not video for which a service provider or content owner receives remuneration as a result of offering/providing the video for viewing or having the video viewed), subject to a cap of $1,000,000 per year/per legal entity.
US $0.25 per encoder (in hardware or software) for a license for personal use only to create private video data (i.e., not video for which a service provider or content owner receives remuneration as a result of offering/providing the video for viewing or having the video viewed), subject to a cap of $1,000,000 per year/per legal entity.
US $0.00033/minute or portion (equivalent to US $0.02/hour) based on playback/normal running time for every stream, download or other use of MPEG-4 video data in connection with which a service provider or content owner receives remuneration as a result of offering/providing the video for viewing or having the video viewed (including without limitation pay-per-view, subscription and advertiser/underwriter-supported services). This royalty, to be paid by entities that disseminate the MPEG-4 video data, is not subject to a cap. (In the case of MPEG-4 video for which the number of uses cannot be directly determined (e.g., video supplied as part of a basic cable service or to a transmitter for broadcasting), a surrogate (e.g., standard industry audience measurement) is under consideration.)
US $0.00033/minute or part (equivalent to US $0.02/hour) based on playback/normal running time of MPEG-4 video data encoded (for other than personal use) on each copy of packaged medium. This royalty, to be paid by the packaged medium replicator, is not subject to a cap.
For one year from the start date of the license program, parties that sign the license (or a memorandum of intent to sign a license) will be forgiven their payment of royalties for all MPEG-4 Visual Simple and Core products during and before that one year period.
The initial term of the License has not yet been finalized but when decided, will be subject to renewal on reasonable terms and conditions for the useful life of any patents in the Portfolio.
In agreeing to the foregoing terms, the patent holders considered the need for simplicity, promoting the widest possible use of MPEG-4, maximizing the opportunity for full efficient compliance with intellectual property licensing requirements and recognition of the likely business models for deploying MPEG-4 Visual Standard technology so as to assure that the License is aligned with the real-world flow of MPEG-4 commerce.
As the objective of the MPEG-4 (Visual) Patent Portfolio License is to include as much essential MPEG-4 Visual (Simple and Core) intellectual property as possible in one license, MPEG LA reiterates that any party that believes it has essential patents (Sections 9, 9.1 and 9.2 and Tables 9-1 and 9-2 of ISO\IEC 14496-2 Information Technology - Coding of Audio-Visual Objects - Part 2: Visual) and wishes to join upon successful evaluation, is invited to submit such patents to the independent Patent Evaluator together with a statement confirming its agreement with the objectives and intention to abide by terms and procedures governing the patent submission process, which may be obtained from Lawrence A. Horn, Vice President, Licensing and Business Development, MPEG LA, LLC (lhorn@mpegla.com, phone 1-301-986-6660, fax 1-301-986-8575).
# # #
Overview of the MPEG-4 Standard
MPEG-4 is an ISO/IEC multi-media representation standard developed by its Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG). MPEG also developed MPEG-1, which makes possible interactive video on CD-ROM and is present on virtually every personal computer, and MPEG-2, the core compression technology underlying the efficient transmission, storage and display of digitized moving images and sound tracks on which high definition television (HDTV), Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB), direct broadcast by satellite (DBS), digital cable television systems, multichannel-multipoint distribution services (MMDS), personal computer video, digital versatile discs (DVD), interactive media and other forms of digital video delivery, storage, transport and display are based.
MPEG-4 is the result of yet another international effort involving hundreds of researchers and engineers from all over the world. Building on the successes of MPEG's earlier standards, MPEG-4 enables integration of the production, distribution and content access features of digital television, interactive graphics applications and interactive multimedia across internet protocol, wireless, low bitrate, broadcast, satellite, cable and mobile environments. With MPEG-4, all content elements can be maintained as discrete objects enabling richer interactivity and use across many different devices More information about MPEG-4 can be found at MPEG's home page http://www.cselt.it/mpeg and at the home page of the MPEG-4 Industry Forum http://www.m4if.org.
MPEG LA, LLC
MPEG LA successfully pioneered one-stop technology standards licensing, starting with a portfolio of essential patents for the international digital video compression standard known as MPEG-2, which it began licensing in 1997. One-stop technology standards licensing enables widespread technological implementation, interoperability and use of fundamental broad-based technologies covered by many patents owned by many different patent holders. MPEG LA provides users with fair, reasonable, nondiscriminatory access to these essential patents on a worldwide basis under a single license. The MPEG-2 Patent Portfolio License now has more than 360 licensees and includes more than 400 MPEG-2 essential patents in 39 countries owned by 20 patent holders. As the legal and business template for one-stop technology standards licensing, MPEG LA also provides an innovative way to achieve fair, reasonable, nondiscriminatory access to patent rights for other technology standards - the high-speed transfer digital interconnect standard known as IEEE 1394 and the terrestrial digital television standard used in Europe and Asia known as DVB-T. In addition, MPEG LA has been asked to facilitate the development of joint licenses for other MPEG-4 technologies. The company is based in Denver, CO and has offices in Chevy Chase, MD (Washington DC metropolitan area), the greater San Francisco area and London, England. For more information, please refer to http://www.mpegla.com, http://www.dvbla.com, and http://www.1394la.com.
I've played EQ and I now occasionally play Dark Age of Camelot (DAoC). Mythic, the makers of DAoC, tried to address many of the economy problems inherent in games like EQ.
One approach was broadening the currency base: 100 copper = 1 silver, 100 silver = 1 gold, and so on up through mithral. It is much harder to accumulate the higher denominations for a given high level character. The combination of hard to earn plus depth of economy helps slow down the deflation. So, in EQ a platinum piece is almost worthless, in DAoC it is a real measure of wealth.
Another DAoC economic feature is the variety of money sinks. The most prominent of these is loss of Constitution Points when your character dies. To gain these points back, you must visit a non-player character healer in a town or village. For a fee, the healer will restore your constitution points. The fee is tied to level, so, as your character gains levels, it costs more to restore constitution. In addition to being a money sink, this is a mechanism for encouraging grouping, since several character classes get the ability to resurrect dead characters without loss of constitution points.
One of my favorite money sinks are dyes. Most clothing and armor in the game can be dyed. This is a huge money sink for characters who wish to maintain a certain color-coordinated look. Dye prices go up dramatically based on the color. Many players can and do spend an inordinate amount of time and money fooling around with their character's appearance.
I think Mythic's biggest attempt to stabilize the DAoC economy is item decay. As noted above, EQ's economy suffers because items never leave service. All objects in DAoC, on the other hand, experience decay with use. The items do not disappear with decay, but they do lose effectiveness. This process can be delayed by frequently repairing items (another money sink). It cannot be stopped though. All items have a finite usable lifespan. After that, they lose most of their effectiveness and are usually sold or given to low level characters. This disturbs the economy very little, since the effectiveness and worth of the item are very little. Most of these devalued items eventually end up being taken out of the economy by being placed in storage or sold to a non-player character vendor.
Also because of item decay, lower level characters are harder to "twink" with high level items. Items that are too high a level decay and become worthless at a vastly accelerated rate. Items thus tend to get passed down slower, thus slowing economic deflation. Low level characters can and do receive "twink" items, but the very high level items are generally placed in storage until the character is at a level they can effectively use the item. This item banking serves to further remove items from the economy, thus slowing the deflation rate.
Mythic's approach isn't perfect, but it does point out that there are techniques for balancing a virtual economy and thereby improve game play.
I.V.
Basically it was a rip off of the Marvel Comics Iron Man character, albeit without Tony Stark's litany of personal problems.
Even Iron Man, who first appeared circa 1963, is not that original. Robert Heinlein's Hugo award winning novel Starship Troopers, which prominently featured powered armor, was first published in 1959.
I know that GE did a great deal of development in the early 60's on the Hardiman and related "Warehouseman" (I forget the name) human augment suits.
I do not doubt that the idea of power suits predates 1959. It can at least be traced to the late 50's early 60's. So when someone pops up on a decades old idea with a "hey this idea goes all the way back to the 90s!", I get a little testy.
Cheers
I.V.