pouët.net

mjz information 71 glöps

• general:
• level: user
• personal:
• first name: Martin
• last name: Z
• cdcs:
• cdc #1: _ by $

• 64b MS-Dos fr-0.1: constant evolution by Farbrausch [web]
• Really nice code!
  But the effect is not interesting at all...
  Looking forward to seeing some 256byte effects by farb-rausch (or should I say ryg?) some day.
• rulezadded on the 2004-05-16 21:14:29
• 4k Windows 99 Beers
• This is ranked above "Etherium"? Seems like many people did not know MS-Sam...
  
  Don't forget to thumb down the AND intro then
  That, however, is wrong. There is a lot of good stuff in "Zoom3", whereas this product has absolutely nothing to offer beyond a simple joke.
• sucksadded on the 2004-05-13 17:41:39
• musicdisk Windows Emerald Box by Conspiracy [web]
• A few gems, but all in all way beyond expectations...
• sucksadded on the 2004-05-12 21:40:44
• demo Windows Negative by Sense Amok
• Removing the clipping and making the bass stronger would help nonetheless.
• isokadded on the 2004-05-10 01:09:28
• demo Windows Negative by Sense Amok
• The second last scene does not appear (Radeon 8500)
  - Some interesting effects
  - Not much design
  - Music needs some mastering/remixing, but is otherwise ok
• isokadded on the 2004-05-10 00:42:10
• demo Windows Still Sucking Nature by Federation Against Nature [web]
• Some scenes look very impressive. I think that this is already some kind of good design in itself.
  The music is also rather good.
• rulezadded on the 2004-05-06 01:01:49
• demo Windows STALINUX by Proletarkollektivet Edwercom
• Yes, I think it symbolizes... something.
• rulezadded on the 2004-05-02 04:18:17
• demo Windows Panjabmoore meets 007 again by Calodox
• Really, not everything that has no 3D has no code either. Although I wish they had used some acceleration since some scenes could have used more than just 20-25 FPS. Still, technically well done.
  The design ... is ... very interesting!
  But, what is the definition of "joke demo", if this is most likely meant to be funny yet no joke prod?
• rulezadded on the 2004-04-25 22:10:23
• intro Windows The End (endtro) by Class
• Ok, here is my opinion on software piracy in general. It is so long since I tried to bring in some new arguments and clear up some things:
  First of all, it is not possible to find a clear, abstract rule to define what is legal or not. Clearly, it would be too hard to condemn "borrowing a cd" or sth, and it would also be too hard to completely allow any kind of copying on any information whatsoever, because no programmer would be able to make a living anymore and there would be a lot less inventions, because it would not be possible to get a patent.
  So what is good and what is bad? Since everything you do has always both a positive as well as a negative effect on something, everyone tries to do as much good and as little bad as possible. Since a hole book could be written alone on how people weigh certain benefits to themselves in comparison to other people, or other life-forms, I am going to cut short here to simply say, that to most people, oneself or family/friends is more important than other people. That is why competing exist, because if everyone would respect everyone else to be as important as oneself, noone would care who actually is the best, or wins, or whatever.
  And the connection with software copying/piracy? The main question is, of course, how much copying a program benefits yourself and harms someone else. It is very important to see two cases here: If you copied the program, the person who originally made it has not lost something, but if you would have bought it otherwise, that person did indeed lose something, even though it never had it. This sounds bizarre at first, but has to be understood because otherwise the hole conversation about software piracy makes no sense.
  So, if you copied a program, you actually steal the amount of money you do not pay. Is that bad? Basically it is, because if noone would pay for their software, companies would not have enough money to create new software. So, the more intersting question is, whether you would buy the software, if could not copy it? I know it sounds strange, but copying something you would not be able to buy is, logically, a lot less bad than copying something you could pay for. Let's assume that when you were 15 years old, you enjoyed playing around with "3D studio max" and the skills you gain in that age are the ones which make you become a really good professional animator later, of course using legal versions of this software by then. Then the copying was "ok", because summed up, there is gain, which are your creations many people enjoy, using this software you learned to use when you could not legally have had it.
  Still, if that child would not have had this software, it would have done something else and could have gotten another job where it could have been equally successful or even more successful. One could even go so far as to say that repeatedly copying software prevents people to get strong principles which in turn prevents them from devoting their lives on seriously improving aspects of this world. Instead they just live their lives, doing what everybody else does and without ever achieving anything really great.
  It can be seen that really evaluating the positive and negative aspects of pirating software can become very complex. But I hope I also made clear that whenever you copy a program, you gain yourself an advantage on the cost of someone else. And as I also said, every action you do, does that.
  So you have to find a balance. And this is mine:
  - Copying expensive software which is made to help you make money (like Delphi, Visual Studio, etc...) is ok, if you use to create freeware, etc.. That is especially true if you already have a different version, e.g. a Visual-C-author-edition out of a Visual C++ book.
  - Copying for your personal enjoyment, like computer games or music CDs, is a lot worse, because you are using the data for what it was really made for, and the "benefit-in-the-future"-argument I gave above does not apply. In general, this is a bit like sneaking on an empty rollercoaster seat without paying for it... If only a few do it, it will not cause a lot of harm, but if too many do it, the person owning the rollercoaster will have to close it because they do not get enough money. Besides, there is a lot of freeware games and music on the radio. So the right would be, of course, to pay for the rollercoaster, as well as for the games or the music. If you do not agree, try find a really objective argument against it.
  - Copying the aforementioned expensive software to make money is already very close to simply making copies of original CDs and selling them. And here is the rollercoaster comparison again: This is like creating your own entrance to it, with an attached fee that is lower than the regular fee. The rollercoaster owner clearly has the right to attempt to prevent and punish this!
• isokadded on the 2004-04-23 18:29:37
• intro Windows The End (endtro) by Class
• Interesting discussion.
  Too bad I do not know what about since the download does not work...
  
• isokadded on the 2004-04-23 15:46:45