alanschu

The thing about Google is, according to copyright holders, they seem to cooperate with requests to remove links to copyrighted content.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/20...lion-a-year.ars

The Pirate Bay case showed that companies work with Google and Youtube, because they cooperate to remove copyrighted materials. If that holds up for the Pirate Bay case, I'm curious how it will for isoHunt and Mininova.

There's already a huge focus on the adult audience. Having said that, there's still lots of money to be made by making games for kids and teenagers. For the record, I wasn't a teenager when I was in University. The roommate of mine that hosted the FTP site, still hosts an FTP site, and he's 28 years old now. I think you're dreaming if you feel that making games with a focus on the adult audience will affect piracy in any significant ways. Just because you're an adult doesn't mean that the idea of maximizing your return on investment goes away.

I like how that quote is basically an admission that 20-30% of the the content is illegal, and he even verified it! Posting and ridiculing the letters from license holders asking to remove links is a pretty disingenuous thing to do as well.

This. After you finish it, there is really NO reason to replay it. None. Disagree! In fact immediately after finishing playing it (in one giant sitting no less), I played it again! Different strokes for different folks.

Based on a juror falling asleep?

Which is about as useful as saying "A grapefruit beat an orange in a zesty-fruit drink competition." Gladiators came from any number of backgrounds with a range of martial skills and abilities over a period of hundreds of years. How did they configure their 'typical' model gladiator, just out of interest? Mind you, an Apache armed with a Winchester rifle owns the average Gladiator wielding a cestus or trident, I suppose. Cheers MC They consulted some "experts" on gladiator fighting. It's mostly just for fun, and it's fun watching the two camps argue for their side and trash talk.

I was a hardcore pirate too. My cousin had the new fangled interwebs and would get access to all the cool warez sites. One of my roommates in University hosted a private FTP server to pirate games (he'd usually give access to the server by asking for games or CD Keys). It was around this time though, that I started to be against piracy, and was proud of myself for owning all the software I was using while my 3 roommates all used pirated versions.

/facepalm http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/20...s-are-legal.ars

Again I don't buy this analogy. This isn't just some bar where some people happen to deal drugs there without the proprietors knowing. This is a bar where the proprietors tell you where to get your drugs.

HAHAHA

That was a sweet play by Boyle to take it in for that shot. A few beat Hiller, but rang off the iron. Getzlaf's shot was just amazing though. So fast and so perfect, just off the inside of the post.

Yeah trash mobs are always AOE pulls for us too. A few heroics still have us using sap/frost trap/sheep though. At least they did until we became more epically geared.

I won't dispute that. I never did. Your statement is worthless though. If we're going to play the anecdotal evidence game, I can confirm to you that people do in fact casually pirate games by taking a disc from a friend, installing it from that disc with that CD key (usually single player games), and then get a No-CD Crack. They prefer to do it this way because your mileage may vary when using public torrent sites. Ironically, they prefer to not use public torrent sites because they have issues with trojans and viruses. He did NOT do this with Spore, because his friend didn't want to use an install. My example is just as worthless as yours though, and does little to support my position because I don't know how prevalent this course of action is.

Excellent game by Hiller and solid penalty killing by Anaheim. It's funny because I thought to myself "Hmmm, I could see Getzlaf being the type of guy to score coming out of the penalty box" and then he does Good game though.

Ooo I think that that was a pretty poor decision by Cheechoo to make that desperate dive for the puck so far away from your own zone. They got nipped for it too. I've been really impressed with San Jose's stick work though. They seem to do a good job of keeping the Anaheim players from doing much with it, especially when in the Anaheim defensive zone. Been a good game to watch for sure.

I disagree but can't really verify the claim one way or another, so I'll leave it at that. The only evidence I have is that the DRMs still do a good job of specifically targeting the casual copying.

Chicago wasting no time in the overtime period. Woo! Some chippiness at the end of the Boston Montreal game. Detroit is a pretty good team too I hear. Oh and Hurlshot, you'll be happy to know I am pulling for your Sharks

LOL. I'm working on a paper at the moment so can't watch much for sports

It clearly isn't all I needed to say, because you challenged my prediction from the get go. I didn't offer up some nonsense about past instances completely unrelated to the series for nothing. I brought them up in response to your points about hot finishes and regular season success, which you brought up first when you said: "not sure how you come up with that. they were 2-2 against each other during the season, and the blues are going in to this round on a serious hot streak." All I did was point out that the arguments you used to challenge my initial claim weren't solid. Had you never brought them up, I would have never bothered discussing the past. When you decided to state that there was "no evidence vancouver is capable of a 4-1 rout over st. louis after only going 2-2 in regular season play (the last time they played, the blues won 4-2). winning, yes, but 4-1, low probability, particularly given how hot the blues have been in the past two months," I provided examples of teams that done just that. So they played well in the regular season. Regular season is independent of the playoffs. If they only played the Vancouver Canucks during their hot streak it'd mean something, but they didn't. The fact that St. Louis beat Columbus (or any other team) down the stretch is independent of how well they may or may not do against the Vancouver Canucks. A poor one. All it means is during the regular season each team won two games. Given that there's random variance from the fact that, on any given night one team is (and without equal probability) able to beat another team in the NHL makes this indicator a weak one at best. I could cite several examples from the past, but you seem intent on ignoring history. I demonstrated that the indicators you used to predict post-season success are not particularly good ones. I used actual data to support my conclusion. You have nothing. You're grasping at straws if you think that I feel that fate drives the teams scores. I feel that St. Louis success down the stretch is irrelevant. My support for feeling this way is that it's not an uncommon occurrence in sports. I made a prediction. Could I be wrong? Yes. Of course the two teams are still going to have to play each other and my prediction can be entirely wrong. But my skepticism of the Blues' late season regular season success is substantiated. Does this guarantee that St. Louis will lose in 5. Of course not. If you thought I was saying this, then I don't know what to say. Stop! I cannot honestly believe you think I feel there's a CAUSAL relationship between other teams playing and two teams playing now. It has as much causal effect as St. Louis winning the last game 4-2, and as much causal effect as St. Louis playing well down the stretch. There fact that Vancouver lost 4-2 in their last game (you were pretty quick to ignore that just 10 days earlier, Vancouver won 3-0 btw) has little bearing on these playoff games. Lets look at what you said this post: "it is an indicator that they are playing well. the team that murray put together finally gelled" By my interpretation, you seem to be concluding that P(7 Game series | Strong Regular Season Finish) > P(Blues Losing in 5 | Strong Regular Season Finish). The only reason you can draw this conclusion is based on a belief that strong ends to regular seasons predict better playoff performance. Now imagine this hypothetical example: If I were to show you that 100% of the time prior to this series, of a large sample size, teams that finished strong in the regular season did poorly in the playoffs and lost in 4 or 5 games to their first round opponent, would you still sit there and go "well, those are independent events" when making your prediction? Sure, it's POSSIBLE that they'd do differently, because as you say there's no causal relationship and as I have said, at any given time one team can beat another team (with unequal probabilities). But I have a sneaking suspicion you'd be less willing to challenge my assertion that St. Louis would lose in 5 games, given that every other time this situation has happened has resulted in the team losing in 4 or 5 games. (To reiterate, hypothetical example, used to demonstrate how people can, and do, use past events to predict future ones). I'd be surprised if you didn't have more conviction if I showed that 100% of the time, teams with hot finishes did well in the playoffs. Because it's not the truth, unless you're misreading what I am saying. Quite frankly, you're wrong, but you're just being stubborn about it. Then take a look at Machine Learning and how it is used to predict independent events based on previously recorded data. You seem to be foolish enough to think that I was implying a causal relationship...that because Detroit lost to Edmonton in spite of a hot finish and a better regular season record, then therefore St. Louis MUST lose to Vancouver. I said no such thing. I cited such examples because they undermine the assertion that you made regarding the team playing well and the effect you feel that they will do better in the playoffs than I predict. I never went P(St. Louis Losing now | Detroit Losing in 2006) or P(St. Louis Losing now | Cleveland losing in 1989). Of course that's independent and of course that's abusrd. I went P(St. Louis Losing now | a hot regular season finish). If you truly believed that P(St. Louis losing now | a hot regular season finish) = P(St. Louis losing now) [i.e. that they are independent events], you would have never mentioned it. But if you're willing to claim that past events are meaningless, I'd love to see you argue that at a AAAI conference on Machine Learning. If you catch 1000 fish, 999 of them are Salmon and 1 of them are Cod, you can make a pretty solid prediction of what the next fish caught will be. Does it guarantee that you're prediction will be right? Of course not. I made no such claim that it would.

Are those of you getting the Trojan warning using ActiveX?

Yeah Sap is sooooo much more useful now haha.

I disagree that this group is small in size. It seems to me that the latest DRM methods specifically target this group, with limited installs and whatnot. Heck, even the CD Copy Protection was done primarily to combat this, as it prevented people from simply copying a CD to another CD. It's no coincidence that CD Copy Protection measures became more common when CD burners became more common.

These groups are not mutually exclusive. Seriously saying that everyone who hates DRM is pirate is same bull**** like syaing that every muslim is terrorist... I didn't say they overlapped perfectly, and hence didn't say that everyone who hates DRM is a pirate. You're kidding yourself if you don't think some people that are anti-DRM pirate a game that has DRM because they still want to play it.