The end-user is paying for the content of the digital goods: the very arrangements of the 1s and 0s that in turn make the content have value. Once this data is in a format they can digest, they do so.
Yes a service was rendered somewhere out there for the 1s and 0s to be arranged that way, but if I didn't buy this product - who did? Not me, and yet it exists without my payment of serviced rendered. Therefore when I do buy this product I am committing to a transaction money lost - item received; not money lost - service rendered.
Nobody bought a canvas with paint on it, they bought a canvas with paint on it that looks like *that*. Of course they might be the same person that contracted the painter to paint one like *that* but not always.
Really? There is more than one way to build and sell houses/apartments and my examples were to easily claim that the person buying one (including owners/realtor) are not always the original clients contracting construction. If I was to follow your logic then I'd have to consider everything I buy to be second-hand (possibly used even) by the original client.
So if I went out to buy Dead Space 3 today I would not be buying it from a shop? I would be somehow going back in time and paying EA and Visceral for the service of making it for me? Hold on. I reckon you might say yes to that.... I'm not allowed any more to buy Dead Space 3 as a game on the shelf in a shop? What if they all got fired before I bought it? What am I paying for then?
This is getting a bit overblown the way you're describing it. The creators of a game are making a product. Their workers are being paid for a service but at the end of the day they are putting out a product that I am paying money for. If you want to split hairs between downloading a game off steam vs going to Target and buying it off the shelf that's your prerogative, but my point is it used to be I could buy a game, slip it into the disc tray, and then just play the damn thing.
If they decide to go with this always on thing (the point of this thread originally) they had better be ready to blow me out of the damn water with awesome features to make it worth it, because if it's just "you need to touch our servers so we can market better ads based off games you play" I'm going to have to skip out on buying this console. That's what it really comes down to. If you're going to make it harder for me to play games I have spent my hard earned money on, you'd better make it worth my while.
A statue is a product, a painting is a product, because they are unique and singular in their existence. Data flowing over a network is not a product, it's actually a conversation. If a game is a product (i.e. discreet property), then a speech is a product, a conversation is a product, a dance is a product. Do you see what I'm getting at here? It's really a semantic misconception. It's a product in the sense that it is the result of work (everything you put in effort to create is a product), but the colloquial impression is that a product is a thing that is finite property. But expressions are not finite nor discreet. They overlap millions of other expressions. The idea of applying a property/product concept to an expression would be tantamount to claiming your yard is your property and so is part of your neighbors' yards, and part of your yard also is your neighbors' property. What a headache! Expressions are non-exclusive and non-rivalrous. Property is, by definition, exclusive and rivalrous. You have yours and I have mine. You and I having it means there is less for everyone else, but intangible expressions don't work that way. Expressions are unlimited in supply.
So, by the vendors imposing these always-online requirements and DRM, they are forcing a service into a rental of an expression. It's rent seeking at its worst. Every time you experience an expression, you take it into yourself and it becomes a part of you. When they pull the plug on those games, they are disconnecting a part of your own collective experiences and denying you access to your own culture. It's wrong on the fundamental level. The more distressing part of it is that they don't have to sell it as a product. They could sell it as a service, that is that they (i.e. developers) produce games directly for their audience and the audience directly patronizes the creation of that game. So long as enough people raise enough funds, it doesn't matter who else gets a copy. Therefore, no need for DRM, online authentication, activation keys, always-online requirements, etc. If you have an online game with server overhead, then you charge for that with subscription fees, play credits, whatever the hell you like. That's considered a premium service. The bottom line is, the product model isn't compatible with expressions. It worked for a while when publishers had the exclusive technical capability to make copies, but now everyone has that capability.
Anyway, this is really not going anywhere and I'm sick of talking about it. I hope this makes sense to at least some people.
I was about to make a huge rebuttal since I consider GIFing out of a discussion to be poor form, but having read that last post I realised that we were discussing like 3 different concepts using very confusing language to tie them together when they should not be. I don't recommend anybody to mix together:
-the nature of products/services
-the perception of consumer within a market
-the existential concept of intellectual property
-the posters own opinion of this thread topic
Basically, it seems like now the entire "On" feature indicates to the case of networks for your 'background' stuff, like Social apps, etc. Basically, the same stuff we currently have? Not actual DRM in itself?
I'm not sure I understand how that is 'always on' since I can very easily disable the access if I see fit if it's not related to the game.
Oh, also, this kinda confirms the digital nature of the console since it won't have Optical Playback from a DVD for a game, they will be installed on the HDD (hilarious to see the XBox becoming more like a PC in hardware for better performance reasons, installing/uninstalling games is going to go very well with the console market) and it will be a fairly large one as well.
Also, how the hell did you guys go from discussing the nature of an always connected infrastructure on a console or the console itself to 'used game sales and DLC are for survival of idiocy'? And why the hell are some of you discussing with with one line GIF's? What the hell happened? Did I fall in a black hole and wake up on r/Atheism on Reddit or something?
One of the things that kind of amazes me, is that everyone is up in arms over the always on connection, but not about the mandatory always on kinect.
I don't like the idea of kinect always watching me, combined with always on internet. Apparently, if kinect is not connected (or the eye is taped off) the xbox won't start (or maybe it will, but pause at a: connect kinect to continue). Logging in will happen by face/body recognition is being said. Also, kinect will check to see if people in the room have the proper rights to be viewing/playing content. (It recognizes if you have Xboxlive gold or not etc etc)
Ofcourse rumors for now, but well, just as substantial as the 'always on'rumor. Wonder how much of this turns out to be true, some of the sources on this stuff seem to be absolutely reliable.
I reckon they're gonna have to double back on this completely judging by the reaction; I assume they were hoping to be able to sweeten the news at launch. MS are in very real danger of losing a good chunk of business if they keep AO, just because of this mess.
They're really going to be gunning for Orth if that's the case. Do not want to be that guy right now.
Yeah, there is no f-ing way that I would let kinect staying on all the time. Some might say that they wouldn't use it illegally, but no way is it going to happen in my home.
Also, kinect will check to see if people in the room have the proper rights to be viewing/playing content. (It recognizes if you have Xboxlive gold or not etc etc)
This is a patent, not a rumor. I'm pretty sure every big company has a team of lawyers who's job is to file stupid patents all day, and I'm also pretty sure this one is the stupidest and will probably (hopefully) never be used.
Anyways, we are all discussing about what *may* happen. The biggest issue here is Microsoft's silence as pointed out by Edge yesterday. They won't spoil the surprise but at the same time, incidentally, they let rumors (true or false) spread.
I'm curious to see how they will address all that during the reveal.
One of the things that kind of amazes me, is that everyone is up in arms over the always on connection, but not about the mandatory always on kinect.
I don't like the idea of kinect always watching me, combined with always on internet. Apparently, if kinect is not connected (or the eye is taped off) the xbox won't start (or maybe it will, but pause at a: connect kinect to continue). Logging in will happen by face/body recognition is being said. Also, kinect will check to see if people in the room have the proper rights to be viewing/playing content. (It recognizes if you have Xboxlive gold or not etc etc)
Ofcourse rumors for now, but well, just as substantial as the 'always on'rumor. Wonder how much of this turns out to be true, some of the sources on this stuff seem to be absolutely reliable.
Wait, WAT!? I thought that was a joke?! It can't be true, the console is going to come bundled with a Kinect? What the hell? What's the point, shouldn't it be an extension IF I want it?
So how much is the console going to cost? Rumors are 300 to 500, that means the console itself is cheaper or something? Or the Kinect utter rubbish that they are giving it away free?
Holy balls, this is a mind-fuck, MS really needs to start putting out some PR control soon, because their silence isn't doing them any favors, especially since not all gamers read news (as they say, bad news travels far, good news travels short).
Wait, WAT!? I thought that was a joke?! It can't be true, the console is going to come bundled with a Kinect? What the hell? What's the point, shouldn't it be an extension IF I want it?
It is one of the more substantial rumors surrounding the next XBox. Supposedly the console won't run without an official Kinect hooked up to it.
From a development standpoint, this makes perfect sense. Peripheral devices always get less support. As popular as the Kinect has been, it is still severely limited by the fact that it isn't default hardware. The sales of the Kinect are far, far smaller than the number of 360s on the market. And that's always the way its going to be unless Microsoft makes it a default part of the system. Even the light-gun for the original Nintendo got a very small degree of developer support, despite the fact that it was bundled with the default system for years. Requiring a connected Kinect for the next XBox is the only way for Microsoft to insure developer support.
At the same time, this could come back to bite them. A required Kinect AND a required internet connection is seriously reaching into some Orson Wells 1984 territory. It's possible that this sort of control scheme really ought to remain an optional peripheral. Not everything can or needs to be a mega-blockbuster.
I'm also very worried by Microsoft dropping support for XNA, and the aggressive moves Sony and Nintendo have been making to appeal to the indie development scene. Small-scale development is growing, and becoming increasingly important in game design and development. Microsoft started the 360 with a lead in this area, with XNA and the opening of the 360 to indie development. But over the past few years they've been pissing away the good will they established early on. Now most small developers are avoiding XBLA like the plague.
It's more about cost and practicality. Sixaxis wasn't expensive, and Move wasn't either (heck, you can get the full Wonderbook setup for £30). Kinect was £130 and is now not much cheaper (£100). It's an expensive piece of hardware that a lot of people have no interest in, and therefore don't want to pay for.
PS3 shipped with sixaxis and the PS4 ships with move built into the controllers - bundled with Kinect doesn't mean every game is going to use it.
I think the real question here is why they would require the Kinect to be permanently attached. Current speculation is that it will tie into DRM. But I'm actually more concerned about the obvious marketing and advertising advantages that Microsoft probably wouldn't be able to resist. I'm worried that they would use an always-attached Kinect to gather information about their consumers. And I'm not really comfortable with that. I don't want Microsoft constantly scanning my physical living room, and potentially selling marketing information gathered from those scans to other companies.
It doesn't matter if they don't make it a requirement for developers to use it. Having it constantly connected gives Microsoft a wealth of options for practices that are a bit creepy.
i read the article you posted and he confirms it will be always on and connected to microsoft's servers updating data all the time behind your back and totally under microsofts control, which you will give them by signing there ula. its funny that this writer has such a low IQ that he thinks he can make the "its a feature not a bug" argument. is anyone really so dirt stupid they would be convinced by that? it just makes it even worse because there evading a serious issue and trying to cover it up with lies so stupid even a 5 year old would laugh at.
microsoft makes billions of dollars building surveillance systems for federal and state governments.
a few quotes from the article about the system microsoft has just built for new york.
will allow police to quickly collate and visualise vast amounts of data from cameras, licence plate readers, 911 calls, police databases and other sources
hello kinect, can you say "always on camera in you living room streaming data to microsoft". and what are "other sources", you could easily make the case that every piece of data from an xbox sent to a microsoft server is "other sources".
It will then display the information in real time, both visually and chronologically
they have already designed tested and implemented the systems and software to monitor and visualize all the data that comes into there servers from all sorts of sensors and devices including the xbox.
Part of the deal with Microsoft will result in the city of New York taking a 30% cut on any profits that the computer firm gets from selling the technology to other cities in america or around the world.
microsoft has partnered with state and federal government in a profit making business to build surveillance systems that utilize every piece of data they can get there hands on. they have a direct financial interest in building and selling surveillance devices that feed more and more data into those networks and make them more attractive to there potential customers who want those systems.
there are algorithms to analyze and identify your identity in video and detect what your doing. they also have statistical models that can identify you as a "risk" based on certain behaviour.
do you like to play the terrorist 99% of the time in game? have you been identified going into a muslim masque? that may indicate your a potential risk and you could be put in a database of "potential terrorists". do you like to smoke a joint on the weekend with your friends and play some games? they can detect smoking from video. and many other types of behaviour. do you like to use lots of stimulants to boost your strength ability in a game? maybe the correlation of smoking and buying lots of drugs in a game indicate a 70% chance you take illegal drugs and that puts you in a "potential drug user" database. they can then sell all that analytic data on you. the next time you go to apply for a job someone can pull that information and wow there is a 70% likelihood that your a drug user! looks like your not going to get that job. also lets say that one of the people that was smoking at your house and in your social network gets busted for selling drugs. knock, knock, its the pig squad at your door to search your house because they have probable cause you might be part of a drug dealing operation.
etc, etc the list of Orwellian police state uses for this go on for ever.
With all of the links that the octogenarian lawmakers are drawing between games and mass shootings, I don't think it would be too far off the mark to think they will be interested in the large amounts of data that microsoft is mining from its customers.
Ooh, teriyaki brings up an interesting point--you can argue whether or not the data mining would be put to some orwellian use all you want...
...but you can be CERTAIN someone will find a way to extract purchasing habits from the data and use it to target ads at you...even if it's something like: "This person stands and uses the kinect a lot, but is a bit pudgy...lets show them kinect-jazzercize game ads".
That orwellian conspiracy stuff is nonsense. They havent got the resources or the time to parse through all that data.
your talking about the largest bureaucratic state in history that has the time to grope little girls genitalia and confiscate cupcakes at the airport so they can "prevent terrorism". they print there own currency and that currency is the d-facto world currency. i think they can deal with running the entire xbox server pipe through a few keyword searches and image analysis algorithms and piping that data into a database that's connected with all the other information they have on you.
they already monitor xbox and use it in law enforcement. cameras microphones and always on live data collection are a logical next step.
well hey i hear EA is looking for a new CEO sounds like a perfect fit.
I can just imagine him, a la cartoon villain style from Gadget, being hired by the Gov't, working as a sleeper cell for EA and secretly managing MS from behind, sitting in his dark room infront of his laptop and clenching his iron fist while uttering the words "You shall all perish nerds, your neckbeards shall be the tendrils that darken your hearts as my shadows fall on all of you, and releases a blanket of miasma and suffering on your precious privacy".
Although it sucks that he lost his job, a simple sucking it up and apologizing would have been enough to solve the issue for him, I guess he expected MS to back him up on this?
OR MAYBE...he was a Samaritan that was trying to leak out information in such a way so people would be spared the problems and curb their expectation?!
Or, he wanted to get fired/leave the company? And wanted to go out in style?
Or I could be reading and hoping for more enticement then how it all went down.
It's not as much of a PR issue that MS wants it to look like as it is him spilling the corporate secrets about a console that hasn't even been announced yet.
Losing ones job is the easy way out when you think of the alternatives when doing something this fundamentally contract-breaching.
Ooh, teriyaki brings up an interesting point--you can argue whether or not the data mining would be put to some orwellian use all you want...
...but you can be CERTAIN someone will find a way to extract purchasing habits from the data and use it to target ads at you...even if it's something like: "This person stands and uses the kinect a lot, but is a bit pudgy...lets show them kinect-jazzercize game ads".
Yeah. I'm getting less of an Orwell vibe from that, and more of a Minority Report-esque eye-scan targeted marketing world.
Which is really no less creepy, when you stop and think about it. I can vote out a politician. I can't vote out a transnational corporation... :poly122:
I'm actually wondering how this will be received by other countries then the US, as it can be misused badly. Doubt that other governments would like that the US have some sort of surveillance in their country like that. (Yes, I know, only if there is something about this whole things, but roll with it).
If some hacker checks out the software and such in the system when it comes out, and discover that there actually is reason to be worried, there is going to be hell from other countries, which is also why I'm in a optimistically sure that they won't do it.
@Eld: Yeah, I know what you mean, I seem to recall some director over at MS wanted to do a Reddit AMA where people get to ask him anything (this was a few years ago??) and it got canceled last minute due to the amount of NDA that got thrown at him, making it virtually impossible to talk about anything at that point.
@Gray: I don't know, I think someone like Micheal Bay would be more fitting for such story, add in Xbots and Playstatiocoms and you got a summer block buster movie!
It's more about cost and practicality. Sixaxis wasn't expensive, and Move wasn't either (heck, you can get the full Wonderbook setup for £30). Kinect was £130 and is now not much cheaper (£100). It's an expensive piece of hardware that a lot of people have no interest in, and therefore don't want to pay for.
The R&D costs go down over time and units sold, as long as they are making decent sales figures. With it being built into every console on launch, the R&D costs are going to be very spread out.
Replies
A statue is a product, a painting is a product, because they are unique and singular in their existence. Data flowing over a network is not a product, it's actually a conversation. If a game is a product (i.e. discreet property), then a speech is a product, a conversation is a product, a dance is a product. Do you see what I'm getting at here? It's really a semantic misconception. It's a product in the sense that it is the result of work (everything you put in effort to create is a product), but the colloquial impression is that a product is a thing that is finite property. But expressions are not finite nor discreet. They overlap millions of other expressions. The idea of applying a property/product concept to an expression would be tantamount to claiming your yard is your property and so is part of your neighbors' yards, and part of your yard also is your neighbors' property. What a headache! Expressions are non-exclusive and non-rivalrous. Property is, by definition, exclusive and rivalrous. You have yours and I have mine. You and I having it means there is less for everyone else, but intangible expressions don't work that way. Expressions are unlimited in supply.
So, by the vendors imposing these always-online requirements and DRM, they are forcing a service into a rental of an expression. It's rent seeking at its worst. Every time you experience an expression, you take it into yourself and it becomes a part of you. When they pull the plug on those games, they are disconnecting a part of your own collective experiences and denying you access to your own culture. It's wrong on the fundamental level. The more distressing part of it is that they don't have to sell it as a product. They could sell it as a service, that is that they (i.e. developers) produce games directly for their audience and the audience directly patronizes the creation of that game. So long as enough people raise enough funds, it doesn't matter who else gets a copy. Therefore, no need for DRM, online authentication, activation keys, always-online requirements, etc. If you have an online game with server overhead, then you charge for that with subscription fees, play credits, whatever the hell you like. That's considered a premium service. The bottom line is, the product model isn't compatible with expressions. It worked for a while when publishers had the exclusive technical capability to make copies, but now everyone has that capability.
Anyway, this is really not going anywhere and I'm sick of talking about it. I hope this makes sense to at least some people.
-the nature of products/services
-the perception of consumer within a market
-the existential concept of intellectual property
-the posters own opinion of this thread topic
http://www.techspot.com/news/52004-fud-alert-always-connected-xbox-720-rumors-are-mostly-paranoia.html
Basically, it seems like now the entire "On" feature indicates to the case of networks for your 'background' stuff, like Social apps, etc. Basically, the same stuff we currently have? Not actual DRM in itself?
I'm not sure I understand how that is 'always on' since I can very easily disable the access if I see fit if it's not related to the game.
Oh, also, this kinda confirms the digital nature of the console since it won't have Optical Playback from a DVD for a game, they will be installed on the HDD (hilarious to see the XBox becoming more like a PC in hardware for better performance reasons, installing/uninstalling games is going to go very well with the console market) and it will be a fairly large one as well.
Also, how the hell did you guys go from discussing the nature of an always connected infrastructure on a console or the console itself to 'used game sales and DLC are for survival of idiocy'? And why the hell are some of you discussing with with one line GIF's? What the hell happened? Did I fall in a black hole and wake up on r/Atheism on Reddit or something?
I don't like the idea of kinect always watching me, combined with always on internet. Apparently, if kinect is not connected (or the eye is taped off) the xbox won't start (or maybe it will, but pause at a: connect kinect to continue). Logging in will happen by face/body recognition is being said. Also, kinect will check to see if people in the room have the proper rights to be viewing/playing content. (It recognizes if you have Xboxlive gold or not etc etc)
Ofcourse rumors for now, but well, just as substantial as the 'always on'rumor. Wonder how much of this turns out to be true, some of the sources on this stuff seem to be absolutely reliable.
Makes me realize how I can't live without internet...
They're really going to be gunning for Orth if that's the case. Do not want to be that guy right now.
This is a patent, not a rumor. I'm pretty sure every big company has a team of lawyers who's job is to file stupid patents all day, and I'm also pretty sure this one is the stupidest and will probably (hopefully) never be used.
Anyways, we are all discussing about what *may* happen. The biggest issue here is Microsoft's silence as pointed out by Edge yesterday. They won't spoil the surprise but at the same time, incidentally, they let rumors (true or false) spread.
I'm curious to see how they will address all that during the reveal.
So how much is the console going to cost? Rumors are 300 to 500, that means the console itself is cheaper or something? Or the Kinect utter rubbish that they are giving it away free?
Holy balls, this is a mind-fuck, MS really needs to start putting out some PR control soon, because their silence isn't doing them any favors, especially since not all gamers read news (as they say, bad news travels far, good news travels short).
Also, obligatory joke:
It is one of the more substantial rumors surrounding the next XBox. Supposedly the console won't run without an official Kinect hooked up to it.
From a development standpoint, this makes perfect sense. Peripheral devices always get less support. As popular as the Kinect has been, it is still severely limited by the fact that it isn't default hardware. The sales of the Kinect are far, far smaller than the number of 360s on the market. And that's always the way its going to be unless Microsoft makes it a default part of the system. Even the light-gun for the original Nintendo got a very small degree of developer support, despite the fact that it was bundled with the default system for years. Requiring a connected Kinect for the next XBox is the only way for Microsoft to insure developer support.
At the same time, this could come back to bite them. A required Kinect AND a required internet connection is seriously reaching into some Orson Wells 1984 territory. It's possible that this sort of control scheme really ought to remain an optional peripheral. Not everything can or needs to be a mega-blockbuster.
I'm also very worried by Microsoft dropping support for XNA, and the aggressive moves Sony and Nintendo have been making to appeal to the indie development scene. Small-scale development is growing, and becoming increasingly important in game design and development. Microsoft started the 360 with a lead in this area, with XNA and the opening of the 360 to indie development. But over the past few years they've been pissing away the good will they established early on. Now most small developers are avoiding XBLA like the plague.
I think the real question here is why they would require the Kinect to be permanently attached. Current speculation is that it will tie into DRM. But I'm actually more concerned about the obvious marketing and advertising advantages that Microsoft probably wouldn't be able to resist. I'm worried that they would use an always-attached Kinect to gather information about their consumers. And I'm not really comfortable with that. I don't want Microsoft constantly scanning my physical living room, and potentially selling marketing information gathered from those scans to other companies.
It doesn't matter if they don't make it a requirement for developers to use it. Having it constantly connected gives Microsoft a wealth of options for practices that are a bit creepy.
Even the current Kinect has the ability to test for depth using Infrared projection. That strategy wouldn't work.
So, just create a life like copy of Microsoft's CEO.
i read the article you posted and he confirms it will be always on and connected to microsoft's servers updating data all the time behind your back and totally under microsofts control, which you will give them by signing there ula. its funny that this writer has such a low IQ that he thinks he can make the "its a feature not a bug" argument. is anyone really so dirt stupid they would be convinced by that? it just makes it even worse because there evading a serious issue and trying to cover it up with lies so stupid even a 5 year old would laugh at.
microsoft makes billions of dollars building surveillance systems for federal and state governments.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/10897-paul-harris-nypd-and-microsoft-launch-advanced-citywide-surveillance-system
a few quotes from the article about the system microsoft has just built for new york.
hello kinect, can you say "always on camera in you living room streaming data to microsoft". and what are "other sources", you could easily make the case that every piece of data from an xbox sent to a microsoft server is "other sources".
they have already designed tested and implemented the systems and software to monitor and visualize all the data that comes into there servers from all sorts of sensors and devices including the xbox.
microsoft has partnered with state and federal government in a profit making business to build surveillance systems that utilize every piece of data they can get there hands on. they have a direct financial interest in building and selling surveillance devices that feed more and more data into those networks and make them more attractive to there potential customers who want those systems.
there are algorithms to analyze and identify your identity in video and detect what your doing. they also have statistical models that can identify you as a "risk" based on certain behaviour.
do you like to play the terrorist 99% of the time in game? have you been identified going into a muslim masque? that may indicate your a potential risk and you could be put in a database of "potential terrorists". do you like to smoke a joint on the weekend with your friends and play some games? they can detect smoking from video. and many other types of behaviour. do you like to use lots of stimulants to boost your strength ability in a game? maybe the correlation of smoking and buying lots of drugs in a game indicate a 70% chance you take illegal drugs and that puts you in a "potential drug user" database. they can then sell all that analytic data on you. the next time you go to apply for a job someone can pull that information and wow there is a 70% likelihood that your a drug user! looks like your not going to get that job. also lets say that one of the people that was smoking at your house and in your social network gets busted for selling drugs. knock, knock, its the pig squad at your door to search your house because they have probable cause you might be part of a drug dealing operation.
etc, etc the list of Orwellian police state uses for this go on for ever.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/big_data_press_release_final_2.pdf
With all of the links that the octogenarian lawmakers are drawing between games and mass shootings, I don't think it would be too far off the mark to think they will be interested in the large amounts of data that microsoft is mining from its customers.
...but you can be CERTAIN someone will find a way to extract purchasing habits from the data and use it to target ads at you...even if it's something like: "This person stands and uses the kinect a lot, but is a bit pudgy...lets show them kinect-jazzercize game ads".
your talking about the largest bureaucratic state in history that has the time to grope little girls genitalia and confiscate cupcakes at the airport so they can "prevent terrorism". they print there own currency and that currency is the d-facto world currency. i think they can deal with running the entire xbox server pipe through a few keyword searches and image analysis algorithms and piping that data into a database that's connected with all the other information they have on you.
they already monitor xbox and use it in law enforcement. cameras microphones and always on live data collection are a logical next step.
http://www.xbox360achievements.org/news/news-13344-Microsoft-Patent-Designed-to-Police-Unauthorised-Content-Use.html
http://blogs.findlaw.com/technologist/2012/01/police-target-xbox-users-for-stakeouts-console-searches.html
http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2012/02/do-cops-need-warrants-for-your-xbox-console.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/10/4209912/microsoft-creative-director-that-sparked-always-on-controversy-no
Although it sucks that he lost his job, a simple sucking it up and apologizing would have been enough to solve the issue for him, I guess he expected MS to back him up on this?
OR MAYBE...he was a Samaritan that was trying to leak out information in such a way so people would be spared the problems and curb their expectation?!
Or, he wanted to get fired/leave the company? And wanted to go out in style?
Or I could be reading and hoping for more enticement then how it all went down.
Losing ones job is the easy way out when you think of the alternatives when doing something this fundamentally contract-breaching.
i think you missed your calling as a screen writer, i would go see that. KickStarter maybe?
Yeah. I'm getting less of an Orwell vibe from that, and more of a Minority Report-esque eye-scan targeted marketing world.
Which is really no less creepy, when you stop and think about it. I can vote out a politician. I can't vote out a transnational corporation... :poly122:
If some hacker checks out the software and such in the system when it comes out, and discover that there actually is reason to be worried, there is going to be hell from other countries, which is also why I'm in a optimistically sure that they won't do it.
@Gray: I don't know, I think someone like Micheal Bay would be more fitting for such story, add in Xbots and Playstatiocoms and you got a summer block buster movie!
I'm sure when Microsoft told him that he is being forced to resign they were like #dealwithit and then punched him in the face.
Manufacturing cost of the Kinect is an estimated £34 or $50 USD http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-11-12-kinect-parts-cost-ms-around-GBP34
Now add assembly, distribution, and R&D costs on top of that.