Movie censorship in the US of A is bad enough as it is.
Skipping all the issues with the actual censorship process, movie companies effectively sensor themselves, which gives us a clusterfuck of PG-13 rated movies, just so they can cash in more on the extra audience/target group. I'm not saying all PG-13 movies are bad, but I'm personally left with a feeling that such movies don't show their true potential; especially when the story/theme inherently targets adults. I feel I was robbed for a better experience, just so some children's feelings won't get hurt. $deity forbid if they were to see a boob.
I like games and movies that push the limits of what's considered 'proper' (by the US moralists and people in general), and I also enjoy my slasher/grindhouse/exploitation movies occasionally (Incidentally they're all made in the 70's). There is no reason to believe that game censorship won't have a similar side-effect. This could be remedied by stretching the limits of what is considered appropriate for teenagers, so most games could be made for this age demographic without having to butcher their expressiveness in the process. Be it scary scenes, violence, cussing, drug use or sex. But since the moral values of whomever makes these censorship laws are warped compared to most people who actually *watch* movies and *play* games, I don't see this happening anytime soon.
Multiple layers of security. If you outwit the millions of dollars in research we spent then we get you thrown out of the game with a lawsuit.
False. It is a criminal case, not a civil case. It was not the owner of the robot (Timber Hills) who took the case to court. It's the local court in Oslo, Oslo Tingrett who took the case from the finance police, who got tipped off by the Oslo stock exchange. Both men appealed, so this case will go to the Supreme Court (hoeyesterett).
If Stuxnet was designed by a hostile state to damage Iranian industry, it's quite possible that, lacking any good way to deploy it inside Iran, it was released into the wild in hopes that it would find its way in on its own.
The infection statistics are against you. 58% of all the infections are inside Iran. Clearly the worm was first released there. Read the report from Symantec. The top infected countries are: Iran 58%, Indonesia 17%, and India: 9%
The fact that the worm spread to other countries is just collateral damage. It's a balancing game. If you don't infect enough, you won't infect your intended target. If you infect too much, you get collateral damage and potentially expose the worm to the public eye.
I abstain from buying because I don't think I can pay enough for so many games in good conscience. The games are decent, and the 20 USD I can afford now wouldn't do the games justice.
The whole "experiment" is useless without this option, in my opinion. They're going to see a bunch of people paying 1 cent going to EFF and conclude "what a bunch of cheapskates", when there is a good amount of people who either could buy later (after the offer limit), or refuse to buy that many games hands-down, because they actually *value* those games at 70-80 USD and think it's too much money to spend.
These kind of people won't show up in the statistics.
A lot - and I speak from experience - of prospective games developers get so wrapped up in tweaking their engines that they never actually get around to writing one game, let alone a series. And that's why the Intartubes are littered with the sad corpses of hundreds of open source game engines, some of them rather good, in various states of disrepair and abandonment, and so few really outstanding open source games.
Also, just because you can code, doesn't mean you know how to create the necessary artwork. In my experience, good artists who want to contribute to open source software in general are a rare breed. And even less artists want to help out open source games.
"Trust me. I know what I'm doing." -- Sledge Hammer