Seriously - pretending that the whole Prenda saga is about them forgetting to dot an "i" or cross a "t" is ludicrous in the extreme.
A bench warrant for missing a deposition without cause isn't some sacrifice to a "Blood God" or inviting "rape" by "super-max inmates", nor is it unusual or exceptional.
Re: This is why we need judges to throw out massive numbers of convictions
This would be a great solution if the three branches weren't all in bed together. In reality, what you're asking for is the government to admit fault for actions by the government in the hopes of teaching the government a lesson.
TL;DNR: Do not, under any circumstances, engage a troll. It never yields any benefits, and it always results in harm.
Longer version - To engage a troll at all is a harmful to you and the community for two reasons:
[1] The troll loves attention. Any attention at all results in more troll posts. The troll doesn't care what you post, it just wants to suck as many people possible into its little game of ego-stroking. Your logic is useless against the troll, because it doesn't care about logic. Engaging it only encourages further trollish behavior.
[2] By engaging the troll, you take away your time from contributing to the actual conversation/debate at hand. Furthermore, as more and more people get sucked under the trolls bridge, less and less of value is actually said. Take a quick look at any thread on TD where people are engaging trolls. It's all chaff and no wheat. This destroys community.
For trolls and the TD site, simply click REPORT and move on. I know you think you're helping by engaging the troll, but you are not. Without exception, you only make things worse.
If you don't validate their behavior, most of them will go away. The one's that don't will get more and more furious as no one says anything to them. It makes it easier and easier to see them, and thus easier to REPORT their posts.
PS: If you want to get all conspiracy theory on trolls, you might posit that a fair share of them are hired guns designed to side track every conversation about their employers.
Corrupt Government Defense: We claim state secrets
Corrupt Government Judge(s): Dismissed
The US Constitution died years ago. And there isn't any amount of bitching now that is going to change any of it. The power has long since left the hands of the people. You don't get a say in what happens next.
So, Lutz is the patsy that has replaced Gibbs. I wonder if Lutz knows how much trouble he's getting himself in for whatever pittance Steele is throwing at him.
Also, isn't the wording by Lutz "I am the manager of a company, AF Holdings, LLC" a bit misleading? I don't remember exactly, but isn't the current claim by the Prenda crew is that Lutz the owner of the company?
Just about 100% of the comments in the NYDN article are calling NYDN on their hit piece. I'm guessing whoever paid for the piece isn't going to happy with the result...
This will eventually turn into the last part of Reservoir Dogs where they end up in a circle, with every villain ends up shooting the villain to his left - leaving no survivors.
Not possible. This problem has not ever come up before in the history of computing.
If it had, and I'm not making any fact based claims about that, it certainly isn't solvable. Our saves must float above us, quiet and serene, in the clouds above us. Or say I think EA told me.
Requires large amounts of server resources? Nope. From a [url=http://www.simcity.com/en_US/blog/article/simcity-update-5]Simcity web site blog post[/url], posted by the Assistant Producer Kyle Dunham:
i[...we’ve begun upgrading several of our servers to both increase their capacity and mitigate connection issues. This process has been going well and we successfully upgraded 10 servers yesterday: NA West 2, EU West 1-4, EU East 2-3, and Oceanic 1-2. Today we’re working on upgrading our remaining servers, so bear with us as we take them offline one-by-one to perform these upgrades. While this is going on, we also released the new server South America today, bringing our total server count up to 24, including our Test server.]i
24 servers (NOW), including a test, so 23 production. It's hard to tell what they started with, but digging through the 5 updates, I get:
Update 1 - Added 4 new servers (EU West 3/4, EU East 3, Oceanic 2)
Update 2 - No mention of new servers
Update 3 - 1 new server (Antarctica)
Update 4 - No mention of new servers
Update 5 - 1 new server (South America)
So it sounds like they started with no more than 17 production servers, and added 6 over the last few weeks.
So 23 servers are running everything (registration, authentication, cross player interactions, region stuff, etc) but the item that interests me the most is the region work. Which, even given the most beneficial "looking through a glass darkly" interpretation of EA's claims, must be done server side. It requires to many horses or something.
Taking away the overseas servers that I know about (EU East 1-3, EU West 1-4, Oceanic 1-2, Antarctica 1, and South America 1), that leaves 12 US servers.
I'm having a hard time running a solid number to ground, but update 3 mentions "Tens of thousands of new players are logging in every day", and update 4 says "...8 million hours of gameplay time". Both updates may include all players (US, Europe, etc).
But these numbers seem to indicate hundreds of thousands of players, and potentially tens of thousands playing at once.
The region processing cannot be very CPU and/or RAM intensive at all. How could it be? 23 servers CPU's and RAM for tens of thousands (at least) of players at once. The amount of CPU/RAM slice per player must be very thin indeed for this to work at all.
And if the thin slice theory - (TM) is correct, than once again, I circle back to how come this couldn't have been done on the client? The client whose available resources in CPU and RAM are almost certainly going to exceed the very small amount available per player on the server?
Again, I come to the conclusion that the server component is completely about control, and not in the least about offloading processing power.
Like everything I post, everything above is my opinion, and not a statement of fact.
Of all the people ordered to appear, Team Prenda decided not to bother -- instead telling the judge they were available by phone, though the judge chose not to call. The only person (outside of Gibbs and Morgan Pietz) who did make it was Alan Cooper.
I wonder if the Judge is filling out bench warrants right now.
This is Ground Control to Major Polygon
You've really changed the grade
And the blogs want to know whose money you take
Now it’s time to leave the capsule if you dare
I mentioned this on another thread, but repeating myself - if the game requires more horsepower then the average desktop could deliver, how is it financially viable to stand up (and maintain) servers behind the players to crunch those same numbers? It's not like servers have "super CPU" and "super RAM" components. If it beats up the desktop, it's gonna beat up the server.
Sure, servers can hold more RAM and more processors than the average desktop, but those components are expensive (for both systems). A lot more expensive then a one time per customer $60 purchase would ever cover, even if every penny went to the server infrastructure.
Unless you did it on the cheap, and simply didn't put enough server resources in place to handle the player load. Maybe build a queuing system to force players to wait for their slice of server CPU/RAM. Nah, that would be an evil thing to do to your customers.
I think the point at which I’m smelling a rotten fish here is that the computational resources you’re talking about doesn't change just because it’s being run on a server. The computers in the rack aren't somehow superior in processing power to the one’s in the desktop*. If the game beats up your local computer’s CPU, it’ll do the same to computer in the rack.
If it takes this much, PER PLAYER, to run the game, than there is no server architecture that would support this and be financial viable for a one time $60 per player purchase. And for me, that’s where the smell comes from.
* To forestall the obvious; yes, if you are running a 386 without the math co-processor on the desktop, it’s probably not going to do very well compared to a modern CPU in the server. The argument assumes that we’re talking about generally similar desktop and server CPU’s. There isn't a magic server CPU that does things automatically faster than their desktop brethren. If there was, every gamer on the planet would be using them.
You didn't buy the game, you are renting it from them, and doing so under terms that are completely advantageous to them. They are under no obligation to keep their end of the game running at all. There is no contract between you and EA to allow you access to their servers (locked out), on the timely availability of game services, to store your save games, or to even keep servers available to you at all.
Even worse, chances are you are now locked into the EA "upgrade" cycle. EA tends to milk properties with an online component by regularly releasing incremental (imho) changes as a new product. For example, for the vast majority of their sports games, there is a new "version" every year (updated roster, generally minor tweaks to game play) at the full retail price.
The consequences to you, the renter of their games, is that once the new version is out, the previous version's online services are shut down by EA, forcing you into a full box price repurchase (rerent?) if you want to keep playing online.
The sports games generally have an offline component that does continue to function. With SimCity, you are now doubly screwed (twice the screwing, half the fun!) as there is no offline component AND your saves are on their servers. Once they decide to shut down SimCity, or go to the next version, the game and anything YOU created in the game your purchased is gone.
The lesson here? If you want your game purchase to be under your control, and available to you long term, don't rent your game from EA or any other company that controls how and when you play your game.
On the post: Courts Start Demanding Actual Answers From Team Prenda
Re: Re:
Seriously - pretending that the whole Prenda saga is about them forgetting to dot an "i" or cross a "t" is ludicrous in the extreme.
A bench warrant for missing a deposition without cause isn't some sacrifice to a "Blood God" or inviting "rape" by "super-max inmates", nor is it unusual or exceptional.
Wait - are you OOTB in disguise?
On the post: DEA Not Only Gets Intelligence Data, But Then Is Instructed To Cover Up Where It Gets The Info
Re: This is why we need judges to throw out massive numbers of convictions
On the post: House Intelligence Committee Threatens Rep. Grayson For Informing Other Reps About Leaked NSA Docs From The Guardian
Re:
This isn't a problem - it's a simple common sense way to operate given limited resources and expertise.
On the post: Team Prenda Keeps Trying To Convince Judges That The Lawyers Who Exposed Them Are The Real Scammers
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS
Longer version - To engage a troll at all is a harmful to you and the community for two reasons:
[1] The troll loves attention. Any attention at all results in more troll posts. The troll doesn't care what you post, it just wants to suck as many people possible into its little game of ego-stroking. Your logic is useless against the troll, because it doesn't care about logic. Engaging it only encourages further trollish behavior.
[2] By engaging the troll, you take away your time from contributing to the actual conversation/debate at hand. Furthermore, as more and more people get sucked under the trolls bridge, less and less of value is actually said. Take a quick look at any thread on TD where people are engaging trolls. It's all chaff and no wheat. This destroys community.
For trolls and the TD site, simply click REPORT and move on. I know you think you're helping by engaging the troll, but you are not. Without exception, you only make things worse.
If you don't validate their behavior, most of them will go away. The one's that don't will get more and more furious as no one says anything to them. It makes it easier and easier to see them, and thus easier to REPORT their posts.
PS: If you want to get all conspiracy theory on trolls, you might posit that a fair share of them are hired guns designed to side track every conversation about their employers.
On the post: EFF Files Massive Lawsuit Over NSA Surveillance: Gun Rights, Civil Liberties Groups, Religious Groups Team Up
Corrupt Government Judge(s): Dismissed
The US Constitution died years ago. And there isn't any amount of bitching now that is going to change any of it. The power has long since left the hands of the people. You don't get a say in what happens next.
Sorry - painful, but true.
On the post: Team Prenda Gets Even More Ridiculous: Mark Lutz Files Bar Complaint Against Brett Gibbs
Also, isn't the wording by Lutz "I am the manager of a company, AF Holdings, LLC" a bit misleading? I don't remember exactly, but isn't the current claim by the Prenda crew is that Lutz the owner of the company?
On the post: Internet Takes Smears Against Glenn Greenwald And Make It An Awesome Meme
NYDN is getting flamed in their comments
On the post: Judge Wright Tells Team Prenda To Pay $80k, Refers Their Activity To State Bars, Feds & IRS
White Collar Crime
On the post: Brett Gibbs Returns The Favor: Points Out That Steele And Hansmeier Were In Control Over Florida Prenda Farce
Reservoir Dogs
On the post: Six Strikes Is Just 'Soft SOPA'
On the post: Modder Makes SimCity Capable Of Offline Play Which Works Flawlessly
Re: From the article...
If it had, and I'm not making any fact based claims about that, it certainly isn't solvable. Our saves must float above us, quiet and serene, in the clouds above us. Or say I think EA told me.
On the post: Modder Makes SimCity Capable Of Offline Play Which Works Flawlessly
An easy local save hack
That's a bad joke, but not by much.
On the post: Maxis Insider: EA Lying About Needing Servers For Single Player SimCity
Re: The numbers just don't add up
On the post: Maxis Insider: EA Lying About Needing Servers For Single Player SimCity
The numbers just don't add up
i[...we’ve begun upgrading several of our servers to both increase their capacity and mitigate connection issues. This process has been going well and we successfully upgraded 10 servers yesterday: NA West 2, EU West 1-4, EU East 2-3, and Oceanic 1-2. Today we’re working on upgrading our remaining servers, so bear with us as we take them offline one-by-one to perform these upgrades. While this is going on, we also released the new server South America today, bringing our total server count up to 24, including our Test server.]i
24 servers (NOW), including a test, so 23 production. It's hard to tell what they started with, but digging through the 5 updates, I get:
Update 1 - Added 4 new servers (EU West 3/4, EU East 3, Oceanic 2)
Update 2 - No mention of new servers
Update 3 - 1 new server (Antarctica)
Update 4 - No mention of new servers
Update 5 - 1 new server (South America)
So it sounds like they started with no more than 17 production servers, and added 6 over the last few weeks.
So 23 servers are running everything (registration, authentication, cross player interactions, region stuff, etc) but the item that interests me the most is the region work. Which, even given the most beneficial "looking through a glass darkly" interpretation of EA's claims, must be done server side. It requires to many horses or something.
Taking away the overseas servers that I know about (EU East 1-3, EU West 1-4, Oceanic 1-2, Antarctica 1, and South America 1), that leaves 12 US servers.
I'm having a hard time running a solid number to ground, but update 3 mentions "Tens of thousands of new players are logging in every day", and update 4 says "...8 million hours of gameplay time". Both updates may include all players (US, Europe, etc).
But these numbers seem to indicate hundreds of thousands of players, and potentially tens of thousands playing at once.
The region processing cannot be very CPU and/or RAM intensive at all. How could it be? 23 servers CPU's and RAM for tens of thousands (at least) of players at once. The amount of CPU/RAM slice per player must be very thin indeed for this to work at all.
And if the thin slice theory - (TM) is correct, than once again, I circle back to how come this couldn't have been done on the client? The client whose available resources in CPU and RAM are almost certainly going to exceed the very small amount available per player on the server?
Again, I come to the conclusion that the server component is completely about control, and not in the least about offloading processing power.
Like everything I post, everything above is my opinion, and not a statement of fact.
On the post: Team Prenda Does Not Show Up In Court; Judge Is Not Amused
I wonder if the Judge is filling out bench warrants right now.
On the post: SimCity: The Backlash
Re: Polygon review down to 4
This is Ground Control to Major Polygon
You've really changed the grade
And the blogs want to know whose money you take
Now it’s time to leave the capsule if you dare
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
On the post: SimCity: The Backlash
Re: Re:
Sure, servers can hold more RAM and more processors than the average desktop, but those components are expensive (for both systems). A lot more expensive then a one time per customer $60 purchase would ever cover, even if every penny went to the server infrastructure.
Unless you did it on the cheap, and simply didn't put enough server resources in place to handle the player load. Maybe build a queuing system to force players to wait for their slice of server CPU/RAM. Nah, that would be an evil thing to do to your customers.
Wouldn't it?
On the post: Prenda Law Showdown Happening Monday: Judge Orders Everyone To Show Up In Court
Re:
Please be so!!!!
Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, pretty please.
On the post: Launch Day Punishment: SimCity's Online-Only DRM Locking Purchasers Out Of Servers, Purchases
Re: Online-only isn't just about DRM
If it takes this much, PER PLAYER, to run the game, than there is no server architecture that would support this and be financial viable for a one time $60 per player purchase. And for me, that’s where the smell comes from.
* To forestall the obvious; yes, if you are running a 386 without the math co-processor on the desktop, it’s probably not going to do very well compared to a modern CPU in the server. The argument assumes that we’re talking about generally similar desktop and server CPU’s. There isn't a magic server CPU that does things automatically faster than their desktop brethren. If there was, every gamer on the planet would be using them.
On the post: Launch Day Punishment: SimCity's Online-Only DRM Locking Purchasers Out Of Servers, Purchases
...And here some other bad news for purchasers
Even worse, chances are you are now locked into the EA "upgrade" cycle. EA tends to milk properties with an online component by regularly releasing incremental (imho) changes as a new product. For example, for the vast majority of their sports games, there is a new "version" every year (updated roster, generally minor tweaks to game play) at the full retail price.
The consequences to you, the renter of their games, is that once the new version is out, the previous version's online services are shut down by EA, forcing you into a full box price repurchase (rerent?) if you want to keep playing online.
The sports games generally have an offline component that does continue to function. With SimCity, you are now doubly screwed (twice the screwing, half the fun!) as there is no offline component AND your saves are on their servers. Once they decide to shut down SimCity, or go to the next version, the game and anything YOU created in the game your purchased is gone.
The lesson here? If you want your game purchase to be under your control, and available to you long term, don't rent your game from EA or any other company that controls how and when you play your game.
Next >>