Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Of course... (Score 2) 699

It has apparently never occurred to publishers to band together and fund the creation of a system for buying content at dirt cheap prices using something like ACH transfers to keep the transaction costs low. How about a one-click purchase model where you pay $0.50/article or $3 for all content published that day?

It's been tried. Nobody bought. Except for the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, no news outlet adds enough value that people will pay for it.

Comment Re:Removed after Initial sales spike (Score 1) 310

Exactly this.

There is a good argument for a store like Target not to stock a game like GTA 5 or, indeed, any media rated R. I'll bet you money that Target doesn't carry any Catherine Briellat movies, and their Lars von Trier section is pretty small too. Something else that pretty much everyone on this thread missed was that this was partly in response to an advertising flyer which had GTA5 right next to a Peppa Pig DVD.

That Target decided not to sell GTA5 hurts almost exactly nobody. Game stores will still stock it. It will still be on all the download stores. JB Hi-Fi and EB Games will still sell it, and make it available via game stores. Hell, DVD stores (of which there still are plenty in Australia) will still stock it. Most people in the target audience for GTA 5 will continue playing the copy they got at some point in the last year.

The number of people who were hurt in any way by this decision was almost exactly zero. This is a big whoop over nothing.

But here's what makes me sad about the whole thing:

Target is within its rights not to sell GTA5, but it's hard not to see it as cynical and hypocritical.

Take Two is within its rights to make and sell GTA5, but it's hard not to see it as a symptom of a wider problem with the portrayal of women in media, and video games in particular.

The people who made and signed the petition are within their rights to do so, and certainly had noble motives for doing so, but it's hard not to see it as a symptom of the wider moral panic over video games as being somehow "different" from other artforms.

The gamers who lashed back at the petition (even the non-gators) are within their rights to do so, and even had good reason to do so, but it's hard not to see this as yet more pseudo-victim mentality.

In summary, there is no such thing as "the good guys".

Comment Re: Of Course It Was (Score 1) 355

I did read your post. I was answering your question about what I was telling you.

On the rest of your post, I don't think that it's likely that we will "measure intelligence" to the level of precision required to find a significant difference that correlates with "race" at any point in the forseeable future. Leaving aside that we don't have a precise enough definition of "intelligence", the only way we currently know to increase precision is more samples. There aren't enough people in the world to get the confidence level down to one decimal place. The Sun would go nova before we got "trillions".

Comment Re:Joyent unfit to lead them? (Score 1) 254

Changing a pronoun is not worth of developer resources. I would have reversed it too -- we don't need everyone's principled opinions infiltrating the codebase and starting problems between people's values and beliefs.

The thing is, the change was done by some third party. Rejecting it and justifying actually took *more* work than just accepting it. The change was just inside comments. Now if the change was to function names or something, that would be different.

If I were faced with a commit that just changed he to they or he to she or she to he or they to he, I'd probably accept it because I don't care what a comment says. The exception would be if it became apparent that two committers cared in different ways about such an asinine thing, then I'd have to think. As this stands, someone rejected a practically patch that some people cared about and should have just accepted the damn patch.

Comment Re:difference? (Score 4, Informative) 254

People don't fork 'just because they can'. They fork because they are failing to get what they want out of the project. It remains to be seen if they are wasting their time.

It could be like ethereal to wireshark, where the holder of the copyright has precisely *zero* development skin in the game.

It could be like XFree86 to Xorg where both had some nominal capability to continue, but it becomes quickly apparent that the fork is where the development effort went.

It could be like Wayland fork where the fork pretty much died (though the main project isn't seeing massive adoption either).

Worst case would be something like the ffmpeg/libav fiasco, where both forks go and which one is available readily for a given distribution is almost more a matter of politics than technical merit, and yet they have significantly diverged.

Comment Incorrect... (Score 1) 254

A 'project' is a vague concept. What 'sponsorship' means can be vague too. Are they providing hosting services? Are they managing the authentication configuration? Did they impose some CI where they get final say? Did they provide employment to some or all participants? Did they pay as part of a contract arrangement for the time of some developers?

In short, knowing how corporate sponsorship historically happens in open source, the corporation maybe provides some contribution, but does take control of the project hosting and copyright such that the 'authoritative' source follows their will, but they do not actually offer many of the developers financial benefit or bind their hands to fork.

This happens not infrequently to very prominent software in open source land, sometimes without the commercial facet. MySQL and MariaDB. Ethereal and Wireshark. gPXE and iPXE. XFree86 and Xorg. ffmpeg and and libav. Openoffice and Libreoffice. Usually it becomes clear where the *real* meat of development was and only one fork is technically viable.

Slashdot Top Deals

The moon is made of green cheese. -- John Heywood

Working...