SEIV is being Pirated

#1 August 30th, 2001, 04:21 PM

In case there is any doubt, everything I have posted at Shrapnel Games' Forums is the intellectual property of Shrapnel Games' Forums. This should be implicitly understood by anyone using a forum.

I gave you a couple hours work providing a general web router data structure. To effectively use it you need algorithms which create a tolerant adaptive system. I can easily do that too, but giving it away for free would be cheating all the dummies out there who struggle so hard and still write programs full of bugs.....

dogscoff · #2 August 30th, 2001, 04:22 PM

Picard: Replicator, Earl Grey Tea, hot. Actually, cancel that, I think I'd prefer an Ice cold Coca Cola(tm). Mmmm, just can't get enough of that taste...

This idea might take off for a while, but I can't imagine it proving too popular. I think the general trend in advertising lately has ben towards th subtle. Advertisers will soon realise that if their advertising is too intrusive, it will generate a negative response from the purchasing public. I hope so anyway.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Work out your code at http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm

[This message has been edited by dogscoff (edited 30 August 2001).]

LazarusLong42 · #3 August 30th, 2001, 04:28 PM

quote:
Originally posted by tesco samoa:
If it is then a rolling stop at a stop sign is a criminal activity. And you are a criminal if you do it.

Erm... yeah. It is/you are. In Ohio, first offense is a minor misdemeanor; second and subsequent offenses are misdemeanors of the fourth degree.

(No. I don't make rolling stops <G> )

LL

LazarusLong42 · #4 August 30th, 2001, 04:46 PM

<shudder> Did I hear someone say "Windows XP"?

Indeed, there's no reason for it. Piracy is one thing; using your own copy of software on more than one computer is another. And for that reason I will refuse to buy WinXP, OfficeXP, or any other technology that does the same thing.

(NB: The academic edition of Office2K had the same "feature" on it; they were apparently testing it for bigger and better things--and finding ways to get around those of us who got around it.)

Personally, I see no reason why they don't offer a "family" license: use WinXP/whatever on all of your family's computers. You pay $30-$40 more than standard pricing, and we don't care how many computers you put it on, but you're on your honor not to put it on computers not in your home/in dorm rooms or apartments belonging to people whose permanent address is still your home.

Much as I dislike Microsoft in many ways, I think I might even be willing to pay the extra few bucks, just to make sure they're not out looking for me.

LL

disabled · #5 August 30th, 2001, 05:09 PM

Intrusive advertising hasn't stopped commericial breaks from growing in length, telemarketing, and ezboard & geocities popups.

------------------
HADRIAN T. AVENTINE
admin@spaceempires.org
Administrator | SpaceEmpires.org

geoschmo · #6 August 30th, 2001, 05:09 PM

quote:
Napster? No. You CAN use it for the same idea as warz, and THAT is bad, but napster itself it not. You might as well say the WWW is bad because it allows Warz sites..

The only reason you can see a difference between Napster and Warez is that you like Napster, and you don't like Warez. That's called situational ethics, and it's garbage.

The fact is, you aren't allowed to copy a song you bought and give it to someone who didn't. And you aren't allowed to receive a song you didn't buy from someone who did.

I understand their are technical differances between Napster and Warez. But if you were truthful, are those the reasons you support Napster? What if Napster was setup to allow "sharing" of software instead of music? Is it really the technical differences you are defending, or the content?

The fact that Napster doesn't actually hold the song at any time, and only makes it easier for the two of you to get together does not absolve them of any responsibility. And the fact that they profit from the theft makes them much more than a condiut. It makes them an active participant in the transaction.

Warez is a pawn shop, dealing in stolen goods. Napster is the same thing, without actually holding the inventory. All sales are on a "consignment", but Napster still gets their "cut" by selling advertising, and making it easy for theives and buyers to get together.

Geoschmo

[This message has been edited by geoschmo (edited 30 August 2001).]

Phoenix-D · #7 August 30th, 2001, 05:43 PM

quote:
The only reason you can see a difference between Napster and Warez is that you like Napster, and you don't like Warez. That's called situational ethics, and it's garbage.

Nope. I have over 50 MP3s on my hard drive. All legal. Notice I didn't say ethical- *legal*. Using Napster or a similar service to share *those* files is OK, using it to transfer, say, a work that ISN'T available for free is NOT.

See the difference? It's also difficult to keep said unethical trading off a setup like napster, since MP3s don't have "free yes/no" tag, and even if they did that could be easily changed. Filtering by titles has been attempted but doesn't work all that well.

To use your anaology, Warz is a parn shop, whereas Napster is more like a swap meet, or the guy the pawn shop pays the rent to. Responsible? Only in a roundabout sort of way.

Phoenix-D