Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Sounds good. (Score 2) 555

by PhilHibbs (#48632949) Attached to: FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

This whole gamergate thing has been deeply confusing right from the start. It's hard to work out which side is which. Earlier this year, a couple of rape-threat trolls were jailed here in the UK - and one of them was a woman. Sending rape threats. To someone who was campaiging to get Jane Austen put on a UK banknote. I just can't make sense of the world any more!

Comment: Re:Religious is better than philosophical? (Score 1) 1051

by PhilHibbs (#48587637) Attached to: Time To Remove 'Philosophical' Exemption From Vaccine Requirements?

Religion is not a choice. You either believe something, or you don't. Can you choose your belief? If you think so, here's an easy test. Pick something that you believe - that you are genuinely convinced is true - and stop believing it. Or, if you prefer, pick something that you are utterly convenced is untrue, and try believing that it is really true. Really believe it, not just say so and pretend. Tricky, isn't it?

Comment: Re:Oh, the entitlement... (Score 1) 246

by PhilHibbs (#48502861) Attached to: 10-Year-Old iTunes DRM Lawsuit Heading To Trial

Except that Microsoft never had a monopoly on either music players or music downloads, so there would be no case to answer here. And neither did Apple. There's always been plenty of viable non-Apple choice in the digital music marketplace. And I suspect the fact that the iPod and iTunes started up at the same time, locked to each other, will go a long way to exonerating them - they didn't suddenly decide to use an established monopoly in one area as a foothold to gain a monopoly in the other. They started up two inextricably linked services, and if they gained a monopoly (which I do not believe the did) then they gained both togther as a package deal. Which, I suspect (IANAL), is probably not anti-trust.

Comment: Re:EU is getting Lame (Score 1) 334

by PhilHibbs (#48448061) Attached to: The EU Has a Plan To Break Up Google

Google is not an EU company. The EU doesn't have any control over Google.

They have control over any company that wants to do business in the EU. They can't directly break them up, but they can give them an ultimatum - "form a separate company to run your EU search business, or we will ban you from doing business within the EU". Or something like that. My example is probably overly simplistic and naive as I'm not an expert on international trade law, but just because they are incorporated in the US does not render the EU entirely toothless.

Comment: Re:Shattered (Score 1) 473

by PhilHibbs (#48412921) Attached to: Elite: Dangerous Dumps Offline Single-Player

I backed at the £750 level, the top reward at that tier is an invite to the launch party this Saturday. As well as that you get access to the design descussion forum, the alpha and beta stages, a bunch of naming rights (system, planet, station, NPCs, etc.), and a few extra starting options in the game.

Comment: Re:"Just pay extra..." (Score 1) 473

by PhilHibbs (#48412879) Attached to: Elite: Dangerous Dumps Offline Single-Player

The number of paid Alpha's, premium content, several Beta's (Beta Premium!) is unbelievable and they seem to want to make me wait until the very day of release before I get anything out of my backing unless I pay more money.

Why is it unbelievable? You will get the product when it is released, presumably that's the level that you backed it at. They just don't want to give stuff away for free that others have paid for.

"Is it really you, Fuzz, or is it Memorex, or is it radiation sickness?" -- Sonic Disruptors comics

Working...