I primarily use my R4DS for homebrew software and games. I have also used it to try out games, in order to see if they are worth my time and money.
(Nintendo should have added a way to get demos of games for the DS.)
Because I've wasted quite a few euros on real stinkers of games. That's 40+ euros per game I could've used on other/better games.
But still I mostly use it for homebrew. There are some real gems out there (though you do have to wade through a lot of Tetris-like games). Here is a large list: http://nintendo-ds.dcemu.co.uk/NintendoDS-HomebrewGames.php
(Setsuzoko no Puzzle is a good one, also Puzzlemaniak. And if you dig a bit deeper you can even find "make-your-own-adventure" stories from LoneWolf or how about an Incredible Machine like game such as Pocket Physics.)
Not to mention the media playback capabilities that those cards add (Moonshell), or the PIM functionalities added by DS Organize.
These cards have a lot more functionality than just play ROM files.
Just make sure that the telephone sanitizers stay here... I don't want to be wiped out by a weird disease transmitted through dirty telephone handsets.
if you read carefully, Mike did say that Hasbro was in the right to sue, but that it probably wasn't the right move with regards to the reputation of HASBRO. (which took a nose-dive)
Do you honestly believe that the existence of Scrabulous was bad for HASBRO? That it threatened their bottom line?
Would it have hurt HASBRO much, if they would let this one slide?
I mean, Mattel (who owns the rights to Scrabble in the rest of the world) is so far doing nothing to stop Scrabulous.
All kidding aside. I see a lot of text on the internet that's riddled with grammar mistakes. Especially in Dutch, where the writers use the wrong tense. ("ik heb dat gezegt" instead of "ik heb dat gezegd" or something similar, mixing up their "d"s and "t"s.)
So I'm not sure if the internet is really helping. But I'm also not sure if it's detrimental.
But how many times do we have to fight against this?
I mean the software patents issue was brought up at least 2 times if I remember correctly.
And the second time was really sneaky in a committee that had nothing to do with software patents (it was a agricultural committee), and it took a last minute effort to push it off the table.
95 years... so a toddler can create some piece of music, and receive money from it until he's 100?
The average lifespan is what? about 75?
So basically 20 years after their death, their next-of-kin can still benefit from their work, that they created when they were 5.
Give me a break!
We all know that it's the RECORD company that's behind this corrupt move.
It's a bit weird for an ISP to let some company change the ads on a certain site.
Those original ads pay to be displayed on that site, so the ISP has NO business changing them, because that would bereave the website of their income.
It'd be a bit weird for a magazine stand to replace the ads in a magazine for other ads from companies that pay the magazine stand.
And another upside was, if they had made a deal and accepted the money, they would have had a pretty strong player in the field to make better deals with Apple iTunes to name just one example of legitimate sources that the recording industry was having problems with
(Remember the hubbub about Apple's unwillingness to give in to RIAA's demands for variable pricing in iTunes?)
D. seems to be under the mistaken assumption that you NEED security software to be secure.
It's just because Windows is as secure as a sieve, that you need said software.
The rest of the post doesn't really make much sense to me.
What you describe there has already happened. At least I can remember reading a story somewhere where a "news" station had used the picture of a dog dressed up in Christmas attire as part of one of their Holiday promos.
That picture was not theirs, but from someone else, they had just grabbed it from someone's Flickr account without attributing the source, nor asking for the rights to use it.
IIRC, the cost of starting a lawsuit against that station did not weigh up to the 'damages' incurred by use of that image.
Another instance I remember was from (I believe) Nokia, which had taken a picture of a building from someone's Flickr feed to use in one of their business websites and other promotional material. Without asking for permission.
In both cases I have forgotten where I read it, though I suspect the latter story was featured here on Techdirt.
The big media corporations don't care. They want you to buy it all anew. (and many people did during the switch from Vinyl to CD)
And they expect to do the same with digital formats. Only problem is, that it's impossible for them to clamp down on that, so they try to force it with clunky DRM.
That's the only reason. They don't like the provisions set by Google, and are trying to weasel themselves out of it by accusing Google of gaming the auction.
But how much more corruption can any government take before the public starts a revolt?
I know that if I type in Google.com in a fresh browser, I get redirected to google.nl
I have to step in, and go to the preferences to change its behaviour to direct me to google.com
are you sure that's the truth, and not propaganda?
If the videos would be that damning for the Tibetan people, don't you think the Chinese Government would try to leverage that, to increase anger against Tibet, and try to gain more control over it?
I was talking about actual shoplifting, shops hike prices for that. But that's getting beside the point now.
Here in many European countries we pay an extra levy on blank media. On CDs, cassettes, DVDs, video tapes, MiniDV tapes etc. On all of those we pay a levy, and for us downloading is legal (though BREIN in NL does try to make it seem not to be that way). It's the uploading that's illegal here.
But indeed, copyright infringement is not theft. :) The RIAA should just see these shared music tracks as promotion for the bands of their members.
In the past, I have thought that this would be a good idea, but I'm not so sure any more. What you are saying makes perfect sense to me. A voluntary system sounds indeed better.
On the post: Nintendo Freaks Out That People Can Use Memory Card To Pirate Games
(Nintendo should have added a way to get demos of games for the DS.)
Because I've wasted quite a few euros on real stinkers of games. That's 40+ euros per game I could've used on other/better games.
But still I mostly use it for homebrew. There are some real gems out there (though you do have to wade through a lot of Tetris-like games). Here is a large list:
http://nintendo-ds.dcemu.co.uk/NintendoDS-HomebrewGames.php
(Setsuzoko no Puzzle is a good one, also Puzzlemaniak. And if you dig a bit deeper you can even find "make-your-own-adventure" stories from LoneWolf or how about an Incredible Machine like game such as Pocket Physics.)
Not to mention the media playback capabilities that those cards add (Moonshell), or the PIM functionalities added by DS Organize.
These cards have a lot more functionality than just play ROM files.
On the post: How Come There Aren't More Technologists On The Board Setting Voting Tech Standards?
Re: Farce
On the post: Hasbro's Nightmare: Scrabulous Returns With New Name And (A Few) New Rules
Re: As Always...
Do you honestly believe that the existence of Scrabulous was bad for HASBRO? That it threatened their bottom line?
Would it have hurt HASBRO much, if they would let this one slide?
I mean, Mattel (who owns the rights to Scrabble in the rest of the world) is so far doing nothing to stop Scrabulous.
On the post: Yes, Reading Online Is Still Reading
All kidding aside. I see a lot of text on the internet that's riddled with grammar mistakes. Especially in Dutch, where the writers use the wrong tense. ("ik heb dat gezegt" instead of "ik heb dat gezegd" or something similar, mixing up their "d"s and "t"s.)
So I'm not sure if the internet is really helping. But I'm also not sure if it's detrimental.
On the post: EU Plans To Extend Copyright; Turns Copyright System Into Welfare For Musicians
Re: Don't be quite so pessimistic
I mean the software patents issue was brought up at least 2 times if I remember correctly.
And the second time was really sneaky in a committee that had nothing to do with software patents (it was a agricultural committee), and it took a last minute effort to push it off the table.
On the post: EU Plans To Extend Copyright; Turns Copyright System Into Welfare For Musicians
95years?!
The average lifespan is what? about 75?
So basically 20 years after their death, their next-of-kin can still benefit from their work, that they created when they were 5.
Give me a break!
We all know that it's the RECORD company that's behind this corrupt move.
On the post: Prince Sues Musicians For Making A Tribute Album For His Birthday
I vote he changes his name again
TANOKAH.
On the post: Phorm Did Track IP Addresses, Replaced Charity Ads With Behavioral Ads
ISPs have no business altering ads on sites
Those original ads pay to be displayed on that site, so the ISP has NO business changing them, because that would bereave the website of their income.
It'd be a bit weird for a magazine stand to replace the ads in a magazine for other ads from companies that pay the magazine stand.
On the post: Sad: We're Thrilled That A Content Creator Isn't Suing Over A Derivative Work
Re: *Sigh*
http://lolcatz.net/144/invisible-lolcat/
On the post: RIAA Drops Allofmp3 Lawsuit; Pretends Mp3Sparks Doesn't Exist
Re: Accepting payment
And another upside was, if they had made a deal and accepted the money, they would have had a pretty strong player in the field to make better deals with Apple iTunes to name just one example of legitimate sources that the recording industry was having problems with
(Remember the hubbub about Apple's unwillingness to give in to RIAA's demands for variable pricing in iTunes?)
On the post: Microsoft Confirms That Windows Media Centers Use The Broadcast Flag
Re: Re: Re:
It's just because Windows is as secure as a sieve, that you need said software.
The rest of the post doesn't really make much sense to me.
On the post: How Do You Infringe The Copyright Of Public Domain Works?
Re: I say it again and again
That picture was not theirs, but from someone else, they had just grabbed it from someone's Flickr account without attributing the source, nor asking for the rights to use it.
IIRC, the cost of starting a lawsuit against that station did not weigh up to the 'damages' incurred by use of that image.
Another instance I remember was from (I believe) Nokia, which had taken a picture of a building from someone's Flickr feed to use in one of their business websites and other promotional material. Without asking for permission.
In both cases I have forgotten where I read it, though I suspect the latter story was featured here on Techdirt.
On the post: Microsoft's Final 'Up Yours' To Those Who Bought Into Its DRM Story
Re: re: Steve R.'s Ticking Time Bomb
And they expect to do the same with digital formats. Only problem is, that it's impossible for them to clamp down on that, so they try to force it with clunky DRM.
On the post: AT&T-Funded Politicians Accuse Google Of Gaming The Spectrum Auction System
They just don't like freedom
But how much more corruption can any government take before the public starts a revolt?
On the post: Google.com Inaccessible From The UK?
Re: Actually
On the post: Google.com Inaccessible From The UK?
Actually
I know that if I type in Google.com in a fresh browser, I get redirected to google.nl
I have to step in, and go to the preferences to change its behaviour to direct me to google.com
Try www.google.com/ncr to see if you get directed to google.com.
On the post: DirecTV DVR Will Delete Pay-Per-View Shows
Hollywood execs = gun+foot+itchy trigger finger...
On the post: Videos Of Tibetan Protest Get YouTube Banned In China
Re: Censorship protects the dalai lama
If the videos would be that damning for the Tibetan people, don't you think the Chinese Government would try to leverage that, to increase anger against Tibet, and try to gain more control over it?
On the post: RIAA Now Open To 'You Must Be A Criminal' Tax On ISP Fees
Re: Re: You pay a similar tax in regular stores
Here in many European countries we pay an extra levy on blank media. On CDs, cassettes, DVDs, video tapes, MiniDV tapes etc. On all of those we pay a levy, and for us downloading is legal (though BREIN in NL does try to make it seem not to be that way). It's the uploading that's illegal here.
On the post: RIAA Now Open To 'You Must Be A Criminal' Tax On ISP Fees
You pay a similar tax in regular stores
But indeed, copyright infringement is not theft. :) The RIAA should just see these shared music tracks as promotion for the bands of their members.
In the past, I have thought that this would be a good idea, but I'm not so sure any more. What you are saying makes perfect sense to me. A voluntary system sounds indeed better.
Next >>