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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:It is absolutely not trademark infringement (Score 1) 80

by gsslay (#49750665) Attached to: Take Two Sues BBC Over Drama About GTA Development

In the UK, they can sue for libel if it runs their image through the dirt, even if it is true.

Bollocks. They certainly could sue. And then the BBC demonstrates it's true, and the case is dismissed.

Truth is the complete defence to libel. You cannot be found guilty of libel for stating a truth. Even if the BBC deliberately sets out to do a hatchet job. If it's true, it cannot be libel.

Comment: Re:Not sure if smart or retarded (Score 3, Insightful) 204

So it's ok if Blizztard sells you cheats, but not so if a Chinese entrepreneur does the same thing...?

Yes, because it's their game and in their interests they don't screw it up. A Chinese entrepreneur didn't develop the game and doesn't care. If Blizzard are screwing up, then feel free to go play somewhere else.

Also..

Blizztard

What are you? Ten years old?

Comment: Re:One thing to keep in mind... (Score 3, Insightful) 244

by gsslay (#49690695) Attached to: RTFM? How To Write a Manual Worth Reading

This is not just a problem you see in command line or open source software. You find it in the documentation of many niche applications and it's invariably because it was written by one of the developers. Someone who has spent months working on the software, so it doesn't occur to them how someone completely unfamiliar with the software might approach it, or what they might want to know. So you get online documentation that dives right into technical details, scarcely touching on an overview of what it actually does.

And this happens even with software where the developer wants you to buy it. Just how many sales they get when the potential customer has to first puzzle out what it is, I don't know.

Comment: Re:Unnecessary (Score 1) 45

A good solution would be to stop calling instances like this "identity theft" (a person has had their identity "stolen") and instead call it what it is; "identity fraud" (a company has been fooled into thinking a thief is someone else and given them money).

Once it's clearer that the victim is the company, and not the person, then they might start taking the process of handing out money a bit more care over ensuring that people are who they claim to be.

Comment: Re:So? (Score 1) 202

by gsslay (#49665313) Attached to: Study Reveals Wikimedia Foundation Is 'Awash In Money'

Have you ever read or seen an appeal for money from any charity or not-for profit?

They all do this, because if they didn't the donations would be drastically lower. People simply aren't interested in donating to a "long term sustainable investment endowment", they need prompted into action through a suggestion that it's a very immediate need, or indeed emergency.

Comment: Re:Why I refused to sign up (Score 2) 359

by gsslay (#49558605) Attached to: Google Insiders Talk About Why Google+ Failed

This was certainly one of the reasons I didn't use Google+, or indeed 90% of Goggle's offerings. I have no interest in other people being able to track my life over multiple environments. I know that Google can follow me, that's unfortunately unavoidable, but what possible benefit is there to me that everyone else, (particularly total strangers, spammers, companies, work colleagues), can also follow me? Unless I am set on becoming some kind of internet celebratory, why would I want that?

But for most people, the main reason Google+ failed is because they already had Facebook and Google+ was just a me-too product. No reason to switch and too much hassle to operate both.

Comment: Re:The UK Government Are Massively Out Of Touch (Score 4, Insightful) 191

by gsslay (#49509733) Attached to: Assange Talk Spurs UK Judges To Boycott Legal Conference

Did you read what the statement said?

It's nothing to do with him being "an alleged criminal", it's to do with him being currently a fugitive from justice. And they aren't "simply listening to them". They are attending a conference where he is addressing them.

I can't imagine any circumstances where it's ok for a wanted person to evade capture, while at the same time being given a platform to deliver a lecture to judges.

"Take that, you hostile sons-of-bitches!" -- James Coburn, in the finale of _The_President's_Analyst_

Working...