That's what Infinity Ward has used as reasons to lock down the game.
They won't allow dedicated servers because they're afraid of cheaters, yet from what I could tell, they're using Valve Anti-Cheat (VAC), which is fully supportable on dedicated servers. I basically only play TF2 on third party dedicated servers with VAC enabled.
The FOV issue? Well I'm sorry to say, but it's not balanced forcing everyone to have see the same thing horizontally, but force widescreen owners to see a reduced picture vertically.
Restriction to 9 vs. 9 multiplayer. What is this, 1999? The original CS had support for 12 vs. 12 AFAIK. 99% of the time, I play TF2 on 32 player (or greater, even) servers. With the exception of the King of the Hill and Arena maps (and even including some of them), all of the first party maps and many of the community maps can easily handle 16 players per team, and most stop being fun when the number of players dips below 16.
Suffice it to say, I'm not going to purchase this game. TF2, L4D, and L4D2 will provide me with much more online entertainment in the coming months than MW2 ever could.
There are many reasons for wanting to change the FOV in an FPS. For instance, someone who easily fixates on a point won't even notice action happening away from the centre of the screen, and the angle of the FOV isn't a huge concern. OTOH, someone who continuously scans the entire screen will greatly benefit from a larger FOV. Does this mean he's cheating? No, he's just a good player taking advantage of his skill to make him even better. Obviously there should be limits to this. Anything beyond 120 degrees is ridiculous, and the games I've played where there is a selectable FOV have the limits set to 45 degrees for the absolute lowest (some are 60) and 90 or 100 at the high end.
any options that can be 'tweaked' to give an advantage will be abused to death and should be locked down tight
So, in addition to not being able to set my FOV so that I don't get an unfair disadvantage from people sniping me high above me and out of view, I have to set my graphics to the level of a Geforce 7600 so that I can't tell where someones head ends and their body begins? I can't use my 5.1 headset because someone might be using a set of mono speakers? Give me a break. Cheating is wall hacks and aim bots, speed mods and damage mods. Not the options that make skilled players better.
There are many reasons for wanting to change the FOV in an FPS. For instance, someone who easily fixates on a point won't even notice action happening away from the centre of the screen, and the angle of the FOV isn't a huge concern. OTOH, someone who continuously scans the entire screen will greatly benefit from a larger FOV. Does this mean he's cheating? No, he's just a good player taking advantage of his skill to make him even better. Obviously there should be limits to this. Anything beyond 120 degrees is ridiculous, and the games I've played where there is a selectable FOV have the limits set to 45 degrees for the absolute lowest (some are 60) and 90 or 100 at the high end.
Except the way we pass laws in the US, Canada, and most of Europe means that politicians have to try and cram as much content into each bill as possible. It takes much more time to draft and pass two small bills compared to a single larger bill, especially if there are numerous similarities between the two, as is the case here. If we didn't double up on bills, then either many bills wouldn't see the light of day, or our representatives would have to spend a lot more time in their respective legislative body.
I hate to tell you this, but both you and Michael Geist are probably wrong, and the best solution lies somewhere in between. Personally, I don't want any of my personal information collected without my consent (either implied or expressed, depending on the situation). I have given my consent to businesses such as my bank to collect and store my personal information. I haven't given my consent to random people or businesses on the net.
You too are misleading as well. Dr. Geist never described the various copyright lobbyists as a "united copyright lobby". In fact, he explicitly states that they were lobbyists from the music and software industries. Sure, they were putting on a united front, but they are not a united lobby. They have the same concerns about the bill, and so would logically send the same messages to the MPs. It should also be noted that their lobbying efforts towards the bill are all about the interests of who they represent, not the interests of Canadian citizens. Sure, the prevention of wire-fraud, and the investigation into it is in the interests of Canadians, and therefore the concerns of the banks and law enforcement need addressing (just as a subset example). However, how I use legally purchased software is of no concern to the copyright holder unless I'm causing monetary damage to them (through copyright infringement), or are doing something illegal with it (which is the for the police to take care of). By allowing these exemptions, you allow a company to legally make a program that "phones home" to report the activities of that user for the purpose of "investigating a breach of an agreement" (i.e. a contract, e.g. a EULA) without the express consent or knowledge of the user. Wow, that's a breach of privacy.
Perhaps both you and Dr. Geist need to think a little more critically.
Higher competition in handsets, or higher competition in contracts? Personally, I'd prefer the later. And actually, the competition extends well beyond just the price for a given contract. It also includes the quality of service that you get, from customer service to cell coverage to data speeds. If Verizon had gotten the iPhone along with AT&T, they probably would have ran their new "There's a map for that" ads back then, differentiating their service.
There's also the fact that even without exclusive deals, there is still plenty of competitive motivation to keep developing. You merely have to look at the Blackberry Storm to see that, which would have come out regardless of which carriers had the iPhone. Sure, it might not be as high as it would be with exclusive handsets, but the on the contract side, the difference is huge. The example in the post of Rogers charging large data rates shows just that. A little competition to gain iPhone customers would have forced them to offer unlimited (or at least a very high cap) data plan at a reasonable price. That sounds a whole lot better to me than a slightly less competitive handset market.
Are you suggesting that a radio station would furnish stolen or otherwise illegally acquired merchandise for a contest? I realize it's not unheard of, but enough people can get in enough shit for it that I highly doubt it happens all that often, especially for items worth more than a couple hundred dollars, which is probably the lower limit for the cost of these tickets.
Well let's take Steam as an example, and in fact extend this discussion to Valve's offering of physical versions (ie CDs) of its computer games. As soon as you purchase a game over Steam (not as a gift), it's tied to your Steam account. The only way you have to sell that game to someone else is by selling your entire account (which I believe is against Valve's EULA and TOS, but that hasn't stopped me before with another company's game). In a similar manner, purchasing the game on disc will require you to tie it to a Steam account, but that doesn't happen until you install it, meaning you are free to resell it until that time. Once you install it, the CD key for that disc is associated with your Steam account. You can still sell the disc, but without the account that the CD key is associated with, it's of little value to anyone else except as a backup or a means to quickly reinstall the game.
Re: Re: And another govt bail out will be under way .....
Except few people complain about the overall market. What they complain about is the local economic impact such a closure has on a community. If even a 1/4 of a community is employed in one industry, and all of a sudden it no longer makes economic sense to continue that industry in that community, what do you think happens there? All of a sudden, 1/4 of your workforce is unemployed. If they can't get another job in a related industry in close proximity to the community quickly, then you start to see ripple effects in the service and tertiary industries. Eventually, if that community can't attract another primary or secondary industry, it'll likely disappear.
Sure, the entire market will likely be better off (higher demand for competitors due to lower output from the first company, the same company being able to offer the same product at a lower price and/or higher profit margin, etc), but at the cost of a community being devastated. Jobs may be created somewhere else, but they were lost in that community. From someone who lives in a region where this has happened, it can have a huge and lasting effect until you start to reinvent yourself.
What about the UFC games? Didn't the owner say he would kick out anyone who had their likeness in the game? Or maybe he was a little more precise and said licensed their likeness.
I also assume there'll be international issues to deal with as well, since most NFL players are American, whereas in the NHL and MLB, you have a significant number of players from other countries. What happens if an individuals right to their likeness (whatever that means) in their country trumps an equivalent to the first amendment?
One of the primary problems with the patients crowdsourcing idea was that there was no possible way for him to post every pertinent piece of information that the team already had. There's also the fact that while a crowdsourced solution is usually correct, when it's wrong, it's horribly wrong (as was the case in the episode of House).
Personally, I would trust my attending over a crowdsourced answer any day. I may suggest the crowdsourced answer to my doctor, but if he/she knocks it down, then that's that, end of discussion.
I was going to say that there was evidence of people taking up guitar because of Rock Band or Guitar Hero, but couldn't point to that evidence. Thank you for doing so. I'm pretty sure I heard something similar from music teachers saying that they have seen an increase in interest for guitar lessons, although (again), I can't point to the evidence.
Of course these plastic instruments aren't a replacement for learning the real thing (although the drums do provide a pretty good analogue). But is that really the point? No, the point of these games is to provide a fun and engaging group experience (again, see the reference to xkcd). The exact same reason why the original Halo was such a resounding success. Two XBoxes between you and 7 of your friends and you had a party. It makes you wonder why someone is promoting what is ostensibly a solitary activity (you need to be able to play guitar before you can even consider being in a rock band) at the expense of a very communal activity. (Yes, I know, Rock Band can be played alone, but so could Halo.)
This wouldn't work for the sciences and engineering, as more than just information is needed to become competent. There's a hands on factor that's necessary in the form of labs. For nearly all my non computer labs, three pieces of equipment were necessary: an oscilloscope, a DC voltage source, and a function generator. (Occasionally, the later two would be combined into one.) The voltage source was typically the cheapest of the three, with a non-varying one being made from an old computer power supply, but the other two can easily reach over $200 for base models, and some of the oscilloscopes I used in labs cost over $500 each. The cost is simply prohibitive for the basic lab tools necessary to complete even the first two years of an electrical engineering degree, to say nothing of the specialized equipment used in some upper year courses. I haven't even mentioned software that I've used. Matlab, a common mathematical modeling program, can cost $50-$100 for a student license.
The simple fact is that a brick-and-mortar university can spread the cost of non-expendable lab equipment over many students, in some cases hundreds or thousands of them, and can cover all of their students with a decent site license and spend a fraction of what the combined students would pay. If you consider how much I would have spent for the tools necessary for me to receive my degree in addition to the $99/month price point just for the information and exams, then I would definitely say that my money was well spent going to a brick-and-mortar university.
Except you are missing the point. Hulu isn't competing with over the air analog transmissions, which in and of itself is (or was in the US) good enough for many people. No, Hulu is competing with the likes of cable and digital TV, and downloads (iTunes, torrents, what have you), all of which offer higher resolutions and generally a consistent quality. Where Hulu beats them is on the convenience of watching, and ease of use. Shows on traditional TV are only on a certain times, it takes time to download shows from iTunes, and torrents can be difficult to find, especially legal ones (if they even exist yet). Hulu's resolution is good enough considering you can watch whatever you want (within reason, it needs to be available), whenever you want, and it's easy to do. Other offerings simply can't do that.
This idea of lock up everything seems similar to the mindset of the RIAA. They don't realize that if their artists put they're best work on display for a minimal cost to the consuming public, then they can probably sell more of the worthless crap that these artists produce along with their best stuff. Okay, maybe not the best business model around. However, if you only show off your crap, then people will start to think that all you can produce is crap. If you're able to produce works that at or near the level of the best works that are showcased, however, your business will only grow as more people become aware of the consistent quality of your work (unless of course your best work is no better than the average amateur).
Wow, that's a fail. First of all, informatique as a single word has no good literal translation (to data process is probably the most accurate). Computer translates as ordinature, not informatique, and most online translators returns pirate informatique as hacker. In any case, information pirate and computer pirate amount to the same thing this day and age (for most cases, there are a few caveats), because anyone who physically takes computer hardware would not be termed a computer pirate, but a computer thief because they have actually stolen something physical. When you "steal" or "pirate" a digital copy of a song, movie, TV show, famous painting, photograph, computer game, accounting software, etc., etc., you don't deprive the original owner of the use of that song/movie/game. All you did was make a copy, nothing more.
Now, please tell me how you would duplicate exactly another persons lunch for free without breaking the second law of thermodynamics, requiring massive amounts of energy (which might as well not be free), or requiring the use of a Heisenberg Compensator. You can't. You would still need to buy the ingredients, and invest the time necessary to make them into a meal. And even then, you don't have an exact duplicate. Now compare that to an MP3: the only costs associated from an end users POV is the cost of storage (we're talking on the order of less than pennies for a USB flash drive down to hundredths of a penny for a HDD) and the cost of moving those bits around (minuscule). Don't compare information to physical goods, because they are not the same.
"Mike, you make a very broad and wild assumption, that your personal rights trump everything else. Your personal rights bump up against other's rights and they may stop sooner or later than you expected."
Wow, you're either not an American, or simply don't believe in your own constitution. Although I'm not an American, I've read through the Bill or Rights and generally understand it. I may not agree with all of it, but that's another issue. However, it's clear from the language of the first ten amendments that the intention was to give Americans very broad rights and freedoms. Hate speech, which is generally illegal in most other Western countries, is protected by the first amendment, as an example. Sure, there are limits to a person's rights and freedoms, but I'm sure they're well beyond what you think they are.
I was going to bring this up as well, in addition to Reddit and Digg. None of which I use, but that's beside the point. There's a lot of purely random stuff that you can find using just those three sites.
On the post: Modern Warfare 2 Shows How To Piss Off Fans
Useless excusses
They won't allow dedicated servers because they're afraid of cheaters, yet from what I could tell, they're using Valve Anti-Cheat (VAC), which is fully supportable on dedicated servers. I basically only play TF2 on third party dedicated servers with VAC enabled.
The FOV issue? Well I'm sorry to say, but it's not balanced forcing everyone to have see the same thing horizontally, but force widescreen owners to see a reduced picture vertically.
Restriction to 9 vs. 9 multiplayer. What is this, 1999? The original CS had support for 12 vs. 12 AFAIK. 99% of the time, I play TF2 on 32 player (or greater, even) servers. With the exception of the King of the Hill and Arena maps (and even including some of them), all of the first party maps and many of the community maps can easily handle 16 players per team, and most stop being fun when the number of players dips below 16.
Suffice it to say, I'm not going to purchase this game. TF2, L4D, and L4D2 will provide me with much more online entertainment in the coming months than MW2 ever could.
On the post: Modern Warfare 2 Shows How To Piss Off Fans
Re:
any options that can be 'tweaked' to give an advantage will be abused to death and should be locked down tight
So, in addition to not being able to set my FOV so that I don't get an unfair disadvantage from people sniping me high above me and out of view, I have to set my graphics to the level of a Geforce 7600 so that I can't tell where someones head ends and their body begins? I can't use my 5.1 headset because someone might be using a set of mono speakers? Give me a break. Cheating is wall hacks and aim bots, speed mods and damage mods. Not the options that make skilled players better.
On the post: Modern Warfare 2 Shows How To Piss Off Fans
Re:
On the post: Time To Take Down That Animated Under Construction GIF; GeoCities Goes Away
Re: Re:
On the post: Why Would The Copyright Lobby Be Concerned About An Anti-Spam Bill?
Re:
Wait, I think I just solved all our problems.
On the post: Why Would The Copyright Lobby Be Concerned About An Anti-Spam Bill?
Re: Reply to Professor Geist
You too are misleading as well. Dr. Geist never described the various copyright lobbyists as a "united copyright lobby". In fact, he explicitly states that they were lobbyists from the music and software industries. Sure, they were putting on a united front, but they are not a united lobby. They have the same concerns about the bill, and so would logically send the same messages to the MPs. It should also be noted that their lobbying efforts towards the bill are all about the interests of who they represent, not the interests of Canadian citizens. Sure, the prevention of wire-fraud, and the investigation into it is in the interests of Canadians, and therefore the concerns of the banks and law enforcement need addressing (just as a subset example). However, how I use legally purchased software is of no concern to the copyright holder unless I'm causing monetary damage to them (through copyright infringement), or are doing something illegal with it (which is the for the police to take care of). By allowing these exemptions, you allow a company to legally make a program that "phones home" to report the activities of that user for the purpose of "investigating a breach of an agreement" (i.e. a contract, e.g. a EULA) without the express consent or knowledge of the user. Wow, that's a breach of privacy.
Perhaps both you and Dr. Geist need to think a little more critically.
On the post: iPhone To Be Offered From Multiple Carriers, eh
There's also the fact that even without exclusive deals, there is still plenty of competitive motivation to keep developing. You merely have to look at the Blackberry Storm to see that, which would have come out regardless of which carriers had the iPhone. Sure, it might not be as high as it would be with exclusive handsets, but the on the contract side, the difference is huge. The example in the post of Rogers charging large data rates shows just that. A little competition to gain iPhone customers would have forced them to offer unlimited (or at least a very high cap) data plan at a reasonable price. That sounds a whole lot better to me than a slightly less competitive handset market.
On the post: Court Once Again Confirms Right Of First Sale For Software: You Own It, Not License It
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Can A Radio Station Give Away Tickets To A Football Game? The Eagles Say No...
Re: Eagles tickets...
On the post: Court Once Again Confirms Right Of First Sale For Software: You Own It, Not License It
Re:
On the post: Shooting Down The Claim That The AK-47 Needed Intellectual Property Protection
Re: Re: And another govt bail out will be under way .....
Sure, the entire market will likely be better off (higher demand for competitors due to lower output from the first company, the same company being able to offer the same product at a lower price and/or higher profit margin, etc), but at the cost of a community being devastated. Jobs may be created somewhere else, but they were lost in that community. From someone who lives in a region where this has happened, it can have a huge and lasting effect until you start to reinvent yourself.
On the post: Judge Says Video Games Can Use Sports Stars Likenesses
I also assume there'll be international issues to deal with as well, since most NFL players are American, whereas in the NHL and MLB, you have a significant number of players from other countries. What happens if an individuals right to their likeness (whatever that means) in their country trumps an equivalent to the first amendment?
On the post: The Myth Of Crowdsourcing... Or Misunderstanding Crowdsourcing?
Re:
Personally, I would trust my attending over a crowdsourced answer any day. I may suggest the crowdsourced answer to my doctor, but if he/she knocks it down, then that's that, end of discussion.
On the post: Elderly Classic Rock Musicians Don't Like Music Video Games
Re: If you read the link...
Of course these plastic instruments aren't a replacement for learning the real thing (although the drums do provide a pretty good analogue). But is that really the point? No, the point of these games is to provide a fun and engaging group experience (again, see the reference to xkcd). The exact same reason why the original Halo was such a resounding success. Two XBoxes between you and 7 of your friends and you had a party. It makes you wonder why someone is promoting what is ostensibly a solitary activity (you need to be able to play guitar before you can even consider being in a rock band) at the expense of a very communal activity. (Yes, I know, Rock Band can be played alone, but so could Halo.)
On the post: Next Up For Disruption? College
Only works for a subset of degrees
The simple fact is that a brick-and-mortar university can spread the cost of non-expendable lab equipment over many students, in some cases hundreds or thousands of them, and can cover all of their students with a decent site license and spend a fraction of what the combined students would pay. If you consider how much I would have spent for the tools necessary for me to receive my degree in addition to the $99/month price point just for the information and exams, then I would definitely say that my money was well spent going to a brick-and-mortar university.
On the post: It's Not The 'Good Enough' Revolution; It's Recognizing What The Consumer Really Wants
Re:
On the post: Being Unique Is Not The Same As Exclusive (Or Scarce)
Influenced by the RIAA?
On the post: Can There Be A Fair File Sharing Trial When The Language Is All Biased?
Re: Re: Re:
Now, please tell me how you would duplicate exactly another persons lunch for free without breaking the second law of thermodynamics, requiring massive amounts of energy (which might as well not be free), or requiring the use of a Heisenberg Compensator. You can't. You would still need to buy the ingredients, and invest the time necessary to make them into a meal. And even then, you don't have an exact duplicate. Now compare that to an MP3: the only costs associated from an end users POV is the cost of storage (we're talking on the order of less than pennies for a USB flash drive down to hundredths of a penny for a HDD) and the cost of moving those bits around (minuscule). Don't compare information to physical goods, because they are not the same.
On the post: As Expected, Judge Still Bans Real From Selling RealDVD
Re:
Wow, you're either not an American, or simply don't believe in your own constitution. Although I'm not an American, I've read through the Bill or Rights and generally understand it. I may not agree with all of it, but that's another issue. However, it's clear from the language of the first ten amendments that the intention was to give Americans very broad rights and freedoms. Hate speech, which is generally illegal in most other Western countries, is protected by the first amendment, as an example. Sure, there are limits to a person's rights and freedoms, but I'm sure they're well beyond what you think they are.
On the post: Is Serendipity Lost Online?
Re: umm stumbleupon.com
Next >>