So, you don't offer anything that your claimed target audience of children would understand?
I'm sure that children will find some of the 600 features useful for creating cool 3d graphics and animations. They don't need to use all of them, but if they explore just the first 30 of them, they'll already feel like they'd get something useful done.
Blender has been around for far longer than your shit-ass software
So featuresets do not matter, only development time? Maybe we should drop the features and just idle during the development, so that we gain dev time without actually implementing features?
I don’t need to check the price of the product when I know Blender is free and open source;
You're not calculating the full price of the software. The price isn't about money amount in free software projects. But it's how much annoying operations developers of such software will need to endure to get the project up and running. The money (as you mentioned) is zero, but on those kind of products, different metrics are needed which captures the full impact of the development to the world. This means that if some poor developer used 15 years of his life to make blender reality, then that's the true cost of blender, not your sucky 0 money amount.
Count the real impact to the world, do not look just the money.
That means you have no one to sue, since no infringement has occured
Copyright owners need to prepare for all the possible alternatives, including copyright infringements. Even if it doesn't happen today, the situation could be different in 3 years or something.
and you lack standing to sue for any other reason '
I can always sue the neighbours for loud noises, or shopkeeper for not providing magic wands, or restaurant for selling steak with a fly in it, or tier/voi scooters for making their scooters not survive stone impacts.
(including your imagined right to a mansion paid for by your government).
This is a long term project. I only expect this plan to activate when I get retired, so there's still like 20 years of time left before that plan is relevant. But proper beforehand preparation is the key to getting plans up and running.
I never claimed that I'm good at handling humans or sales activities.
Technology is our speciality, and unless you can turn humans into robots, we cannot really debug them.
By your own admission, you literally closed off the source code of Meshpage because other people tried to edit it.
No, the decision to close the source code stems from several aspects:
1) there was new management available (called qtamo)
2) stallman didn't contribute enough to the project
3) it was developed on windows systems for several years
4) it was gaming, which is not critical to behaviour of linux systems
5) it was preparation for steam release (which is known to be against free software)
6) the github repository was being misused by internet community
=> and thus we wanted source code hidden and free software licenses do not like source code hidden
7) the web is using different rules than free software, i.e. the server-side source code is usually not public, and commercial/proprietary entities are welcome
Basically the decision is a combination of all these aspects.
> If they wanted piracy use-cases, those were rejected.
If they wanted legitimate cases, you’d still reject them because of the potential of copyright infringement.
Their requirements are stuff like:
a) mp4 file support, so that hollywood movie clips can be used with the animations
b) mp3 file support, so that RIAA's music files can be used with the animations. (this was actually approved, even though it's dubious; given that I have no other way to get sounds done)
c) text support, so that pirates can implement localised texts/subtitles for pirated movies (this was implemented, but in a way that prevents large scale operations handling whole movies)
d) taking screenshots and screen grabbing of builder window (this was approved because youtube is significant non-infringing use case, but it's still dubious since screen grabbing video files allows our animations to be used as "logos" of pirate groups and mere aggregation is then needed to include it to pirated hollywood movies)
Which one would you prefer that definitely needs to be implemented?
Note that meshpage/gameapi builder is struggling with the same problem, given that .obj and .gltf files are standard file format which could possibly enable pirated 3d objects to be used with the tooling. But we've decided that the piracy ecosystem with .obj files isn't significant enough (and it isn't the only alternative source of models) that it's still legal to develop the technology. But if the situation changes, we might need to change our position of supporting those file formats.
> This basically is an admission that emulators do not have legal use-cases available
No, it isn’t.
Yes it is. The logic goes like this:
1) developing a game does not need emulator
2) Thus the only reason why emulator exist is to run existing copyrighted games illegally
3) instead of running homebrew games, the key element in emulator ecosystem is the pirated game roms
4) given that the emulators were designed for piracy, they're illegal to develop or distribute over internet.
This logic is watertight. It all stems from your admission that game developers do not need the emulator at all.
Note that there are emulators which are legal. But those do not have large collection of pirate games available as rom files which emulator enables users to play.
If they’re building their own games, they don’t need to build emulators for them
This basically is an admission that emulators do not have legal use-cases available, and all of them should be illegal to develop or distribute on internet.
The main point countering this admission was that homebrew games could be developed for the emulators. But this doesn't seem to be the case, given that emulator is not required at all, if you write your own game. So long for that argument and we can get back to the real issue, i.e. building and distributing emulators is actually illegal activity.
If you spent a tenth as much time working as you do bitching.
I actually did the work before arriving to this place. Now I just sell air to people who doesn't bother to check the featuresets that are available. All the extra work is not really helping since YOU as users don't even bother to check them out. How is that "working" actually contributing to the end result, if users don't even bother to check out the existing features?
Are you a bitter bitch because no bought your work, or did no one buy your work because you are a bitter bitch?
If you're looking value from actual humans, you should go to some other shop. We're not trafficing humans. We only sell technology. We never considered nerds like Bill Gates to be good salespeople, so the human aspect you need to find from some other shop. Come back when you've fulfilled your human requirements, our technology will help once you get your bricks in order.
If you can’t stand having your work compared to the work of one person or the work of one hundred thousand other people, don’t put your work out there for everyone to judge.
I'm always up for fair comparision, but your attempts at comparing products seem kinda shortsighted:
1) you don't bother to look at the featuresets of the products
2) you don't bother to check the price of the product
3) you're only comparing humans. I'm not selling a human, I already know you wouldn't pay anything to get access to this particular human, so I just write technologies and sell you tech. If that isn't acceptable, I sell you air in a convinient can of fresh air taken from english countryside.
So you didn't even look at the technical superiority of the product? Tell me exactly why are software developers developing technologies for your use? Shouldn't you be happy if the tech just disappears? You don't seem to value the technical aspects enough, so we could sell you air and you wouldn't be any wiser?
you could feed those into a CAM system capable of translating it to physical grid points for 3D manufacturing.
Your process has a magic box in it which does something magical which you haven't told what it actually does or who can manufacture such boxes. And even if someone could manufacture such a magic box, that's anyway outside of blender. I.e. blender cannot do it.
Comparisons between the output you’ve made in Meshpage and the output others have made in Blender
It's better to compare output of one person to output of another "one person"... Basically comparing output of one person to output of whole country or whole community is just showing your reasonablessness.. Basically what makes you do it is google's search. They made their technology work in such way that people need to "find technologies" and "reject large number of them" by "comparing their output to the output of the whole country"....
Basically I could claim that blender cannot do a real tank, even though finnish army has several real tanks available. And that would be always true statement recardless of the features that blender has. I don't even need to look at blenders featureset to know that it cannot simply create a real tank.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm sure that children will find some of the 600 features useful for creating cool 3d graphics and animations. They don't need to use all of them, but if they explore just the first 30 of them, they'll already feel like they'd get something useful done.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re:
explain it more carefully, why would allowing pirating hollywood movies somehow make it useful?
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
So featuresets do not matter, only development time? Maybe we should drop the features and just idle during the development, so that we gain dev time without actually implementing features?
You're not calculating the full price of the software. The price isn't about money amount in free software projects. But it's how much annoying operations developers of such software will need to endure to get the project up and running. The money (as you mentioned) is zero, but on those kind of products, different metrics are needed which captures the full impact of the development to the world. This means that if some poor developer used 15 years of his life to make blender reality, then that's the true cost of blender, not your sucky 0 money amount.
Count the real impact to the world, do not look just the money.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
Copyright owners need to prepare for all the possible alternatives, including copyright infringements. Even if it doesn't happen today, the situation could be different in 3 years or something.
I can always sue the neighbours for loud noises, or shopkeeper for not providing magic wands, or restaurant for selling steak with a fly in it, or tier/voi scooters for making their scooters not survive stone impacts.
This is a long term project. I only expect this plan to activate when I get retired, so there's still like 20 years of time left before that plan is relevant. But proper beforehand preparation is the key to getting plans up and running.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
I never claimed that I'm good at handling humans or sales activities.
Technology is our speciality, and unless you can turn humans into robots, we cannot really debug them.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
No, the decision to close the source code stems from several aspects:
1) there was new management available (called qtamo)
2) stallman didn't contribute enough to the project
3) it was developed on windows systems for several years
4) it was gaming, which is not critical to behaviour of linux systems
5) it was preparation for steam release (which is known to be against free software)
6) the github repository was being misused by internet community
=> and thus we wanted source code hidden and free software licenses do not like source code hidden
7) the web is using different rules than free software, i.e. the server-side source code is usually not public, and commercial/proprietary entities are welcome
Basically the decision is a combination of all these aspects.
Their requirements are stuff like:
a) mp4 file support, so that hollywood movie clips can be used with the animations
b) mp3 file support, so that RIAA's music files can be used with the animations. (this was actually approved, even though it's dubious; given that I have no other way to get sounds done)
c) text support, so that pirates can implement localised texts/subtitles for pirated movies (this was implemented, but in a way that prevents large scale operations handling whole movies)
d) taking screenshots and screen grabbing of builder window (this was approved because youtube is significant non-infringing use case, but it's still dubious since screen grabbing video files allows our animations to be used as "logos" of pirate groups and mere aggregation is then needed to include it to pirated hollywood movies)
Which one would you prefer that definitely needs to be implemented?
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Check miraculous failure called ngage. It kinda explains the situation.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's available in the builder's user interface as a graph node which you can use to compose your 3d models and scenes.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re:
Note that meshpage/gameapi builder is struggling with the same problem, given that .obj and .gltf files are standard file format which could possibly enable pirated 3d objects to be used with the tooling. But we've decided that the piracy ecosystem with .obj files isn't significant enough (and it isn't the only alternative source of models) that it's still legal to develop the technology. But if the situation changes, we might need to change our position of supporting those file formats.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
Yes it is. The logic goes like this:
1) developing a game does not need emulator
2) Thus the only reason why emulator exist is to run existing copyrighted games illegally
3) instead of running homebrew games, the key element in emulator ecosystem is the pirated game roms
4) given that the emulators were designed for piracy, they're illegal to develop or distribute over internet.
This logic is watertight. It all stems from your admission that game developers do not need the emulator at all.
Note that there are emulators which are legal. But those do not have large collection of pirate games available as rom files which emulator enables users to play.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't know where you get your implications from, but the statement doesn't seem to hold. Maybe check your logic rules.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
This basically is an admission that emulators do not have legal use-cases available, and all of them should be illegal to develop or distribute on internet.
The main point countering this admission was that homebrew games could be developed for the emulators. But this doesn't seem to be the case, given that emulator is not required at all, if you write your own game. So long for that argument and we can get back to the real issue, i.e. building and distributing emulators is actually illegal activity.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This isn't true.
Yes, my way or the high way.
If they wanted piracy use-cases, those were rejected.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I actually did the work before arriving to this place. Now I just sell air to people who doesn't bother to check the featuresets that are available. All the extra work is not really helping since YOU as users don't even bother to check them out. How is that "working" actually contributing to the end result, if users don't even bother to check out the existing features?
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This will be appreciated. Let me know if the tech fails in some way, maybe there's easy fixes available.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: It's a chicken and egg thing
If you're looking value from actual humans, you should go to some other shop. We're not trafficing humans. We only sell technology. We never considered nerds like Bill Gates to be good salespeople, so the human aspect you need to find from some other shop. Come back when you've fulfilled your human requirements, our technology will help once you get your bricks in order.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
I'm always up for fair comparision, but your attempts at comparing products seem kinda shortsighted:
1) you don't bother to look at the featuresets of the products
2) you don't bother to check the price of the product
3) you're only comparing humans. I'm not selling a human, I already know you wouldn't pay anything to get access to this particular human, so I just write technologies and sell you tech. If that isn't acceptable, I sell you air in a convinient can of fresh air taken from english countryside.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So you didn't even look at the technical superiority of the product? Tell me exactly why are software developers developing technologies for your use? Shouldn't you be happy if the tech just disappears? You don't seem to value the technical aspects enough, so we could sell you air and you wouldn't be any wiser?
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re: Re: Re:
Your process has a magic box in it which does something magical which you haven't told what it actually does or who can manufacture such boxes. And even if someone could manufacture such a magic box, that's anyway outside of blender. I.e. blender cannot do it.
On the post: Nintendo Killed Emulation Sites Then Released Garbage N64 Games For The Switch
Re:
It's better to compare output of one person to output of another "one person"... Basically comparing output of one person to output of whole country or whole community is just showing your reasonablessness.. Basically what makes you do it is google's search. They made their technology work in such way that people need to "find technologies" and "reject large number of them" by "comparing their output to the output of the whole country"....
Basically I could claim that blender cannot do a real tank, even though finnish army has several real tanks available. And that would be always true statement recardless of the features that blender has. I don't even need to look at blenders featureset to know that it cannot simply create a real tank.
Next >>