I'm rather annoyed, by golly.

Remember I mentioned my POS PC? Yeah. Keeps resetting itself. Can't play Defcon until I get a new PC or convince a friend to let me use theirs. Damn, eh? Although installing it onto my zip drive does have a rather perverse appeal, I must say...

Anyway, unless I can get it working, put me down as horribly angry and be glad I'm sticking to my no-cusswords policy.

And on that note

2:16 until demo downloads, I've nearly finished listening to all the songs Tom Lehrer released on the subject of nuclear holocaust (halfway through we shall all go together when we go right now) and I've got me cd key sat here ready to copy into the game. Assuming I can get the damned thing ot run on this POS desktop, expect a review sometime tommorow.

And if not, I'll rant about the horrible injuries I'm no doubt going to have gained after the three-hour paintball session I'm booked in for in the morning.

And the download's finished. Time to nuke the US back to the stone-age.

STOP PRESS

No sooner have I clicked submit on my previous post, than my cd key arrives. Sent out at 1918 GMT, approximately one hour and eighteen minutes late. Yes.

Unfortunately everybody-dies.com is still down. So I continue getting the demo from fileshack.

And an update

There's a demo available. I'm currently downlaoding it, and it allows 2-player games. Which is better than nowt.

So, that's how they worked it out. Pretty smart idea really: you get it in demo form and use your cd key to unlock it. The problem? Seems they haven't yet sent out the cd keys yet. Certainly I can't find anyone that's recieved the damned thing. Still, I'm sure it'll sort itself.

I'd also like to draw another comparison to id software: they tried doing that with quake. First episode shareware, enter registration to get the rest. The result, unfortunately, was that people hacked the game and id lost a lot of cash. Especially after having given the discs away free in their shareware form. Ooh dear. Of course, I'm sure Introversion have a way to avoid that in this day and age. Online verification or something. With a game designed for multiplayer, that would of course be fatal.

Everybody dies

Well, Defcon is gonna be released in approximately 34 minutes from when I satrted typing this entry. As it satnds right now, it looks like so: the Introversion online store is down.

Due to unprecedented demand on our store web server. Unfortunately this has overloaded the system, so we have temporarily disabled the store.

DEFCON Keys will be emailed to you at 18:00 GMT which is 19:00 BST in London, UK.

We will be re-enabling the store shortly.

So, we get cd keys and then hopefully we can download. How is another matter. As it stands, someone over at PLN suggested p2p software, which I'm guessing is a possibility. I'm also kinda banking on a large number of mirrors popping up, although I don't really see that being feasible to be totally honest.

Funny really. this actually reminds me a bit of the Doom release back in December 93. Sorta. It got uplaoded to a filespace ready for distribution. There were 151 users allowed on the filespace, and 151 connected with the rather brilliant result that id couldn't connect. When they eventually did, and uplaoded it, so many gamers connected and downlaoded they crashed the server. Brilliant. Now, i aint saying that's what'll happen here by any means but it'd be pretty damned impressive if it did.

Makes you wonder really. Digital distribution's been around for years. Almost 13 years ago it was problematic, and today it still is. This is gonna be something special. Only question right now that I can see is how are they gonna handle it? Because evidently just making it direct download from the online store aint gonna work, as we've already seen. Maybe they'll email us a downlad url with the cd key or something, who knows?

And of course I'll be sure to make some sort of cynical comment if it isn't the msot revolutionary, mind-blowing idea ever. Like launching us all our own personal copy attached to a disarmed nuclear missile, say!

The conversations I have on MSN

Just thought I'd share this one. Too funny for words.

Seb DA MAN? - Nearly ready to format and reinstall Ubuntu - I am looking forward to trying the Suse Live DVD says (17:25):
and by the way in 5 years time most mobile phones that will be on sale will be running dum de dum Linux

Seb DA MAN? - Nearly ready to format and reinstall Ubuntu - I am looking forward to trying the Suse Live DVD says (17:25):
altough

Seb DA MAN? - Nearly ready to format and reinstall Ubuntu - I am looking forward to trying the Suse Live DVD says (17:25):
the mobile companies will lock it down and shit

Aratos says (17:25):
uhu

Aratos says (17:25):
sure they will


Aratos says (17:25):
and I'll stand outside PCWorld every christmas handing out graphics cards to little children

Seb DA MAN? - Nearly ready to format and reinstall Ubuntu - I am looking forward to trying the Suse Live DVD says (17:26):
what you on about now?

Seb DA MAN? - Nearly ready to format and reinstall Ubuntu - I am looking forward to trying the Suse Live DVD says (17:26):
Windows is only so popular, because of morons like you

I should really go into politics

So, mr Blair just made his last ever Labour Conference speech. Which is actually kinda difficult to believe, hmm?

Anyway, I was thinking whilst watching said speech on the TV. And I thought of two things in particular. The first was "they'll have a hard time winning future elections without him", mainly because I once again noticed that, regardless of what else you might think about him, he's a bloomin' good public speaker and Gordon Brown isn't. Neither be anyone else likely to take over. My second thought was "That Joh Prescott's a scary fellow, aint he?" And then I realised: that's it! Labour can win at the next election by using Prescott as a figurehead. I mean, think about it. The use of force could be vital. Take this little image I whipped up for instance: will you deny that seeing it above a polling station entrace would affect your choice of candidate?

Didn't think so. It'd scare the life out of anyone concidering voting tory or lib dem. Of course we need to go further than that to really make use of his talents. I suggest placing him in the home office, as some sort of minister of keeping the peace. Imagine it now: "Prescott is watching you!" I was gonna assemble some posters, but I can't get the right picture just now. Maybe later...

This entry will offend you. I don't care.

Ok. This is complicated.

Firstly I want to make one thing clear: I am not a racist. Not in any way, shape or form. I judge people completely on how they act, and even then... It's complicated. Leave it at that.I'

Anyway, I'm, ah, gonna be commenting on some pretty sensitive issues here, so if anyone takes offense I apologise. I'm not even sure this is really my view, so much as just some thoughts. Yeah.

As you're no doubt aware, pope benedict the umpteenth or whatever his name is recently made a speech which was, shall we say, a tad controversial. What his holiness was saying was that religeon should not be used as an excuse for violence, and he attempted to challenge people of all religeons to consider that, although his message was aimed primarily at muslims. Naturally a quote he made was taken completely out of context and thousands of muslims complained about his spreading religeous hatred whilst burning him in effigy. I'm sure the irony was not lost on most folk.

Anyway, it seems, from what I can gather, that the main problem here is a simple one. Islam isn't just a religeon- it's a nation. A community. In effect, if you make a comment about islam you insult them all. The muslim council of Britain makes it quite clear. In fact they've stated numerous times that they want to have islamic laws integrated into the british law. To turn Britain into a more islamic state. And that, to me anyway, is the problem. That's why British muslims are having such problems fitting in.

See, in some countries *coughcoughamericacoughcough* immigrants are citizens. The "melting pot" philosophy. You go to America, you're an American and it's a source of celebration. In Britainn it's not like that. Same as most of Europe in fact. We don't like immigrants. They're not part of our culture, and until they integrate they won't be. French culture has no religeon, thus they have such joys as banning religous icons and clothing in the workplace. Which is a far law, French culture being what it is. Those who don't agree with it don't have to be there, non? Well that's the theory anyway. Britain's similar. Unlike France, though, we're not an athiestic culture per say. British laws are based originally on christian teaching. Each country in Britain has an official church (the churches of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland all have slightly different philosophies, admitably. The COS is calvinist, the others are episcipaleon(SP), but that's a minor detail. The Queen, the offical British head of state (as well as the head of state in Australia, Canada and the rest of the commonwealth iirc) is also the head of the Church of England. Part of the main result of that is that in britain we expect certain civil liberties. A certain way of doing things. Admitably many British people nowadays are athiests, but the church is still a part of the political process (there're church representatives in the house of lords, you know). Islam doesn't want to integrate, and that's what causes problems. The nation of Islam is seperate from britain, and thus from British culture. They want Britain to change to suit them.

There's also the little fact of politics. It seems that a large majority of muslims, british and otherwise, see the war in iraq as an attack on Islam. Same as insulting an islamic country is an insult to islam. That's a big problem. If someone attacks a christian, buddhist, hindu, jewish or siekh country, the people following that religeon won't take it as an attack on their religeon. Unless it is. If you make a comment against a religeon, or draw an insulting cartoon, it's freedom of speech. It's not an attack that demands an apology (on contraire, open any newspaper and you're likely to find a columnist insulting someone or other.) It's funny really.

Those of you who read this one on my tokyopop blog will notice this bit wasn't there. Well I did say I'd extend it. So here's the thing, and I understand this could be seen as a tad offensive, but here goes.
I think Islam as a religeon feels threatened. One of the main goals of Islam is to spread itself, force other people to follow their laws. Laws which, by the way, state that anyone who isn't a muslim and won't convert should be treated pretty badly. Christians and Jews in particular, although they at least get to be classed as citizens if they pay a ridiculous tax and acknowledge islam to be a superior religeon. And get marked as christians/jews.

Now there's an idea! Make people where identification so you know what religeon they are! Christians could have a cross, and Jews a star and... wait, that sounds somehow familiar.

Now here's the "feels threatened" part. If you say or do anything that is somehow percieved as a threat, they demand you be dealt with. According to Islamic law, natch. They wanted to kill those cartoonists, you know. The pope had to apologise, although admitably it wasn't what they wanted. He apologised for causing offense, but not for what he said. Which is surely all that was neccesary.

Acording to the president of Iran, and islamic, the holocaust did not happen. According to a gallery exhibit currently running in Iran, aaprently the jews are monsters, devil, hung-up over their holocaust whilst committing worse atrocities on muslims and more. It goes on. As it stands I can't find any of that artwork online. I guess no-one wants to make it available on english-language websites. I, ah probably wouldn't have stuck any up anyway. I'd rather keep this blog from containing voerly-racist content. Reagrdless, anyone spot the hypocrisy here? So, if you draw cartoons of mohammed you're an evil heretic and must die. But it's perfectly fine to draw horrendously racist and insulting pictures about jews? Why so defensive, guys? Why so anti everyone elses religeon? Is there something we should know?
How glad I am Islam only allows violence in self defense.

Incidently, I hear mohammeds sword can be seen in a museum in some arab country or other. In the interests of seeing such relics from all peaceful religeons, anyone know where I can go to see christ, buddha or guru nanek's sword?

A modest, if controversial, proposal.

I've been thinking. Oh yes. Thinking about many things, and nothing at all. Things both simplistic and philosophical, worldy and spiritual, pointless and worthless and, in some cases, actually pretty damned brilliant. But enough of the nonsesne: I have no idea why I wrote all that bullshit and to be honest can't remember what it was I wrote. Terrible.

Anyway, as we all know, the internet is probably the one place where true anonymity may reign supreme if given the chance. The internet is the true home of freedom of just about everything, whether for good or for ill. And thus the internet is the home of piracy, for it is just so easy to get at stuff which isn't yours. And what's wrong with that, I say?

Now bear with me, I'm not gonna go start suggesting that piracy is always right. It's not. But surely a still greater evil is charging people for that which does not physically exist, hmm? No? Maybe? I'll let you think about that one. Regardless, an economy of sorts is needed for any great civilisation, and the internet needs an economy. To be quite frank, I see money as being irrelevant here. Someone once said that money is the root of all evil. I'm inclined to agree. The supply of digital data needs something better. Something more logical. Something that isn't a material possesion. I've heard suggestion of the trading of currency from video games, for instance. But that's daft. We don't all play MMOs, now, do we? How about the feudal system? A trade of equal value. Well, who's to state the value of something? What is The Anarchist`s Handbook worth in relation to, say, The Complete Works of Shakespeare? And indeed, how does Shakespeare compare to marlowe, or Bacon? What of the works of Freud? What value would we place on artwork? On stolen goods? On services? I say we keep it simple. I say there is a better way. Free sharing for all, but within limits.

What we desire most is simple: Knowledge. And thus should all knowledge be available to all, hmm? Problem is, wikipedia won't give you it. Neither will books. Random websites? Those that aren't biased are hard to find, and even then won't have the full story. For such a thing does not exist. But yet it is a neccesity. But a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. And that, my friends, is where meritocracy comes into play.

Knowledge should be available to all, yes, but it should not just be handed out! It should be given only to those who seek it, who actively request! Those who ask. to quote from the bible for a moment, "ask and it shall be given unto thee. Seek and thou shalt find. Knock and the door shall be opened." Might've been meant in a different context, but the words are right. those who can rule, will, and those who cannot, will not. And how is merit defined? Not only on ability but on knowledge! Knowledge that may be shared freely with others.

So how does this tie in with copyright theft? Simple. IT'S NOT BLOODY COPRIGHT THEFT IF YOU DON'T MAKE ANY CASH FROM IT! It's a tad immoral, maybe, but that's where ethics come in. I propose that the "fansub ethic" be taken to heart: that by downloading ontent, y'agree that if y'like it y'll buy the real thing where appropriate. Assuming said real thing is available in a physical form, of course. Like I say, charging people for access to anything online is a crime of the highest order. For it judges not on merit, but on ability and, more importantly, on means. Those without disposable income are screwed. And that just goes against the base principles of basic human rights.

And that's why I'll be making the Woodsman rulebook available as a free download on release, as well as selling it in both harback end ebook formats (I fully expect folk to distribute ilegally copies fo the ebook version, and will be dissapointed if you don't, by the way. Just ignore the legal blurb.) Admitably if you go for the free option you won't get any of the artwork or fiction we made up for the commercial release, but is that really such a bad thing?