The Illusionary Illusionbreaker
[Most Recent Entries]
[Calendar View]
[Friends]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
Nightshadow's LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
| Friday, January 1st, 2010 | | 12:00 am |
A permament pinup: Where you can find all the current records of all my written work.
For most part, I've just noticed that the story has become large enough to confuse people, and digging away at 9 months or more wouldn't make things any easier. If this works, you'll be able to always see where the story is, even if the earlier sections go into the distant past.
For now, I'll just update in here all my fictional work that have been posted as they are to date. They will be updated sporadically, although chances are it'll have a few days inbetween. Be advised though, my actual POSTS will be one below this at all times, if you're more interested in my life. (I'll just keep bumping up the year if this thing lasts until 2010. :P)
Oh and just a warning. This notice is to indicate that the stories contained therein are in fact copyrighted by the author (who owns this journal) 2005 and 2006. I don't mind people READING them, I just mind people stealing them outright and claiming it as their own.
Any reproduction of the story requires the above notice, and a link to the journal itself to be attached to it. In short? Don't expect to pass this to your school teacher and expect to get away with it. That and the fact that I'd be impressed if you got anything above 50% for it, given the nature of the story.
Please be advised that as of the 5th December 2007, the stories will be findable at http://www.fictionpress.com/~Illusionbreaker which will eventually supersede this archive, as more sections are updated to continue on. Feel free to comment there, as feedback will help craft the final versions - It'd be interesting to compare this archive with the final result.
( Command Module Logs. )
( Open Commission Requests - Command Module Logs )
( Chronicles of the Silver Millennium )
| | Thursday, December 3rd, 2009 | | 5:56 pm |
| | 11:16 am |
For those who wonder what the big deal's about.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/02/pseudoscience-cesspool/Or more accurately, the consequences of it. Long story short - When you cook the books in the name of a good cause (and let's face it, we're not in a position to say that we can do absolutely anything we want including expending every resource whatsoever without consequences, that's really a simple fact) you damage the cause, and this is why I've been so sceptical about the whole deal. I've KNOWN for a while that the science didn't add up. I'm somewhere down the middle - Sure, we can't expect to abuse the environment wholesale and not expect something to happen, but we've only got so much power and let's face it, there's also things out there far more powerful than we ever will be. You know, like the sun. At the same time, you should go visit China at some point, if you want to see how much environmental damage we can do in short order. Screw the global warming, there's more obvious reasons why we need to cut down, like I dunno, mass destruction of the environment? It means that we need to prove the damage we're doing, and lying through your teeth to get a reaction, any reaction is going to eventually backfire in your face if you keep at it long enough. Why? Because people don't appreciate being lied to, at least not if there's huge stakes involved, and yes, there's a huge amount of money involved which is why it's such a concern. And unfortunately, people who actually care about the environment are stuck in the middle, being played by both sides. | | Thursday, November 26th, 2009 | | 6:02 pm |
And in a bit of good news...
They're paying me out assuming I worked until the 9th of December, my original date. I wasn't going to make it otherwise... | | Wednesday, November 25th, 2009 | | 6:28 pm |
... And to be honest, I don't think I have time for anything else.
Right now... Wrapping up work at Australia Council. Planning to lodge a complaint against it soon enough due to how they're handling the wrapup process. This will involve HERIOC. Dealing with medical issues which require me to rest 10-12 hours a day, while still working. Visiting uncle who apparently DIDN'T go through with corrective surgery after a stroke. The wheeling and dealing game with the will begins again. I hate leaving at odd hours. Stuff I'm going to have to abandon: ANN.au work barring a couple of quick ins and outs. Writing Everything else barring this blog because it's the only thing keeping me sane right now. Considering I don't generally get very many people to talk to, you get the idea. And right now? Leaving to the hospital. Uncle. | | Tuesday, November 24th, 2009 | | 9:57 pm |
Well, I would say this is the worst of it but...
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/11/atkinson-to-appeal-modern-warfare-2-ma15-classification/#more-367946Um, I don't suppose anyone wants to mention the other elephant in the room? You know, how Valve is going to be found guilty of the same thing Rockstar got found guilty of when the hot coffee mod surfaced? For those who don't know, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is actually a banned game in Australia - Its classification was actually revoked after the hot coffee mod showed up. Why is this? The data was ON the disc, and even though it's 'inaccessible' it's not enough of an excuse. ... And the fact that I know that the Classifcations board got sounded over that one too. I promise, it'll be a FUN six months, because we know the version of Left for Dead 2 is the uncensored version - It's just got a set of console presets which remove a lot of the blood and gore among other things. I take it Valve didn't learn from Take Two... And I really doubt Akinson is going to go 'Well, a digital import can't be prevented' considering he IS a politican... | | Sunday, November 22nd, 2009 | | 2:24 am |
And hammering out the problems, one step at a time...
It's days like this where I wonder what I actually do, apart from everything. One day I put on a writing hat, another day I end up putting on my technical hat... For those who don't know, I sometimes stream games that I'm playing just cause I can. http://www.justin.tv/illusionbreaker/ although I really should be more strict about announcing when I play. Now, no one in Australia will be able to watch this, short of iinet deciding to enable peering and someone else who wants to steal FME server and somehow manage to be able to stream out the 100kb/s required PER connection to watch. You'd be clocking up GBs in an hour, and given Australia's almost overreaching metering policy (There might be ONE ISP that still allows any sort of real 'unlimited' downloading out there, who knows), most people would have to cease watching in the space of at most, 6 hours of play. (I'm fairly sure 24GB would dent your cap quite quickly.) Oh, and before I forget, does anyone have any sort of recommendation for a program that can monitor total in/out data via network? I'm vaguely curious about the sorts of bandwidth I output, just on the grounds that what I push up is what someone has to pull back down. Anyway, one of the problems I've been having revolves around the fact that the sound will go out of sync from the video after a short amount of time of HD play when working with Adobe Flash Media Encoder. This is compounded by the fact that the card I have (A Blackmagic Intensity Pro) can't seem to take BOTH the audio and visual through the card - The sound isn't recognised by the codecs. Essentially, I'm forced to loop the sound through the sound card via a line in, then have it mux in the video. This in turn (I've noticed) sends the processes through the roof at 100% all the time on all 4 cores. After a day of research and hunting around forums, I've discovered the reasons behind it... and better yet, I've fixed it to the point where I can get the card to be read - Apparently the card works at 48khz, which is outside the mp3 and Nosy codecs. I have to find a codec that works with media encoder which will see the setting, then compress accordingly. This also has the nice side effect of bringing it down to 70%, which means the 30 frames per second it's actually outputting will stay that way. It's not perfect, but I've yet to see a computer that could compress in h.264 in real time 60 fps and not die a horrible death or at the very least, give up. Now, this is half my problem solved. Believe me, I'm happier than God knows what at the moment. The other half is the question of trying to deal with the sticky issue that's known as the 480p quandry. This is mostly addressed to the Wii (although, you can play games in 480i so for streaming this isn't such a great deal) and the PSP (Where the sony executive that recently decided (PSP firmware 5.5 to be precise) that blocking games to be output in anything but 480p should be punted out of their office via the nearest window.) For those who don't know, the 480p format is a special format. Even though it's been long since techically obsoleted, 480p is protected by US law. Namely the DMCA. Why's this? Blame the MPAA for this one, because this is considered the 'premium' SD that DVDs used. Well, technically it's high definition, if you consider progressive to be high definition. What does this mean for someone like me? Well, it's actually nearly impossible to capture a 480p signal in one go (The best solution I've seen requires THREE passes, and that's not happening in a live environment.) because no company will make anything that can capture the signal, even though from a technical standpoint, there's no protection on it. My best solution? Escape the 480p by upscaling,and moving to the next format - 720p. I found a couple of nice items which may be able to do it. http://www.gefen.com/kvm/dproduct.jsp?prod_id=5283 is one, and at about 600 AU, it's looking REALLY tempting. Thing is though, my recording and streaming so far has all been through component, not the Blackmagic's HDMI port. (Edit - I was half asleep. Mixing up composite and component is not a good thing...) In theory, I could sit this device between the splicer and the capture card, and have all games run at whatever resolution it damn pleases, while I tell the scaler to upscale or to downscale to 720p for recording and screen capture. (Useful for the PS2 due to the fact interlacing kills about 50% of the screenshots we do, and streaming for anything in 480p. It also means that the PS3 which doesn't upscale or downscale games can't play havoc if it decides that the only formats it'll play in are SD NTSC/PAL, 480/576p and 1080p.) Which leaves me one more test to do for this weekend - I need to test if I can stream through HDMI. This will require me to do some voodoo to 'trick' the HDCP from the Xbox's side to send a signal to the Blackmagic Intensity's HDMI HDCP compliant slot. It's actually fairly simple, but it's also 2am, and I'll save that when I can get the 360 in the right spot among other things. If it works... It promises to be a little scary, because if I can get it all working, I can stream any game I want and record anything any way I want to, and no one, not even AFACT, can stop me from doing so. If it wasn't so difficult, I don't think I would have tried nearly as hard to get it all working though. And people thought that gaming was such a brain numbing exercise... ( In other related news, for those who remembered what the 1080p60 setup from hell looked like... ) | | Friday, November 20th, 2009 | | 7:09 pm |
| | Thursday, November 19th, 2009 | | 11:58 pm |
Atelier Annie...
Well, let's put it this way, they got it right. It's a lot of fun and it's basically a refined version of Atelier Marie/Elie based around a resort. It's just that wide open 'Oh hey, I wonder what I should do next?' fun. The fact it's handheld means I play it anywhere with the addictive underlying current that the main line Ateliers carry. There's nothing quite like watching a town conspire nicely on your lazy protaganist. Once again, the fact the town's so lively proves that they CAN make mainstream Ateliers. The sad part is I don't see the likelyhood of the game flying off the shelves - I mean, who's HEARD of the series outside Japan anyway? In short, I can't put the damn thing down. Even though I've got a review to write. Okay, two reviews and a research report. But I'm working on one of them at least. | | Wednesday, November 18th, 2009 | | 8:36 pm |
For those curious...
Most of my awake time is spent at work at the moment. Most of my non work time is spent in recovery. In short, I've got work and sleep, because my recovery needs it. Too bad that it's marginal due to the fact I get 12 hours of rest, but maybe 2 hours of sleep. | | Tuesday, November 10th, 2009 | | 2:35 am |
... everything hits you all at once, while being unable to sleep.
It's not quite a Eureka moment, since I'm mostly working off nothing but intuition. I've been lying down, as you can guess, but the ringing in my ears means I can only lie down there flat. The pain's subsided, so I'm going to make the most of it, I guess. Given that my latest problems have been ear related, it's safe to say that sound may be a possible reason for it right? There's a particular room in my workplace that's pretty bad. As in so bad, we've been trying to locate some way to test it to determine if it's bad enough to force the owner of the building to fix the problem. If you're wondering, the baseline decibel reading set to slow A (If you've used a meter before, you'd know that these are the settings to measure baseline) is 56. This is due to a design issue when the building was being set up 10 years ago. An air conditioning plant is next to (as in seperated by a single concrete wall) the room in question. It might be coincidence, but my tinnis/dizzyness happened today an hour and a half after I left that room. I distinctly recall this, because I brought two sound specialists TO the said room, to discuss the sound issues in the said room. Namely if we could get a report to prove that the room is a OH&S hazard. We would have gotten the report generated sooner except: a) I was in the process of arranging for that about five weeks ago... when I went down so hard that it took me until now to get back up. b) Due to government diligence, we're supposed to get value for money, and I was in the process of getting a second and third quote. (I had one, these guys were quote number two.) Thing is, before I found myself falling around due to a lack of balance, I was IN the same meeting room fixing something up. I then went back to my desk, found myself unable to concentrate an hour later, then went to the doctor for pain issues. Fast forward about a day, and I find myself with huge issues walking. ... In hindsight, I wish I realised that BEFORE I walked into the room. Ironically, the reason why I ended up walking in the room is the reason I suspect that I've got the problem now - I inflicted the problem I was trying to get fixed on myself. Now, I don't believe my supervisor takes me very seriously, because I believe she has the handle she wants on me, and that handle is 'incompetitant'. I lie, I don't think that tag is correct - I think she doesn't like how I work my way through things. Namely, I actually listen in, try to figure out what someone is actually needing, as opposed to what they WANT by asking further questions. It means my response times are slower and I can sometimes wander around due to this, but I like having a higher quality work rate because when I complete something, I don't generally have to revisit it because I generally account for things that might happen. It also means because I ask a lot of questions I naturally break what they had in mind initially - A lot of the time, particularly if they're unsure about WHAT they want to achieve, what they're asking for and what they actually need don't actually match, and the solution I suggest doesn't (from an outsider's point of view listening in) seem to address their request. All I have is a lot of antidotal evidence to back that one up. It's days like this where I wish I recorded every conversation I had though. I'd be happy to sign a court affidit to testify that though. On the other side, I find my supervisor to be the sort of person who's quite... shallow when fielding requests. Methodical? Sure. Jumps the gun often enough without actually diagnosing the problem? Yeah, I can prove that one too. It's usually me who has to go "Well, that didn't quite work, so what are you actually after?" when I get asked after I turn around and get told a certain fix didn't actually work. It's ironic, but I suspect staff find ME more reliable, even though I believe she doesn't believe it. As well, I have trouble explaining to her that free access to materials means lower accountablity. In short, she's trying to get it both ways. She doesn't trust staff, but she wants staff to not bother us and help themselves as much as possible. Or let's be accurate, I've explained to her that you either restrict access and get higher control rates, or you leave it as user friendly as possible, but you pay the higher loss rates, and she's outright said that's not acceptable. For those who don't understand why this is an impossiblity, it's a security concept, and it's a very much baseline one. Anyone who doesn't understand this baseline security concept has NO business in working in any sort of security environment. (I don't suppose it's a bad time to mention Property Services deals with security as well? Oh, sorry.) The more restricted you make something, the more inherently secure it is from unexpected circumstances, but it means more maintainence. For example, if you force all staff members to sign equipment out, it means we have to do more work - She doesn't want our two person section to be bogged down, and I respect that. It also means we can track stuff down, because (Surprise, surprise) we know where it went. You know, signing stuff off and all? If we make as much of it as self service as possible, it means that people will have to use their OWN judgement - In short, you MUST trust the user. Problem is, the difference between knowing what you're doing, thinking you know what you're doing, and knowing that you need help is if you're willing to admit certain things to yourself or someone else. You're also trusting people you only somewhat know, who might believe it's fine to borrow a knife and not put it back, or leave a piece of equipment around by accident because they didn't pack up properly down all the way to five finger discounts. Thing is, she's established that we don't, because our loss rates are unacceptably high, or otherwise she'd not be attempting to get it both ways. She wants me to get out of the way and be able to track the equipment as much as possible. I'm guessing short of a GPS tracking system, it's more or less impossible without comprimising one of the two arms of the scale. You can cheapen the items which reduces the quality of the service to reduce losses, or you can lock everything up tight which makes it inaccessible (and not one of her stated aims). Now, the only way to fix that would be to introduce further parameters to our little problem, which we don't mind losing (Easiest one is expense, by making said items unbreakable/unstealable like I suggested, but government agency remember). Of course, that one's not going to happen. I don't expect to win that fight (or a few others), but because of this, I don't actually expect her to take me seriously when I explain by process of elimination that the room may be the cause of all my problems to this point. As much as I'm loathe to admit it, incompetitence and protecting your backside prevail, and it's unreasonable to expect her to do anything else as quoted by a few people I know. Of course, this doesn't address the actual problem (Bet you didn't see that one coming) but she's my manager. I don't find myself trusting the management structure far enough to throw, let alone address the actual issue right now, although I'm unsure if I should go to a third party so early on. I'm deliberately not going to friend only this entry, before you ask. I'll say what I need to say, and I don't fear of what I actually think is being said is told to her. It's up to her (and to the management) to understand my opinions on the matter if they find it. I'll stick with the story if asked as well, because if nothing else, I rather be consistent. Fortunately, confidentiality wise, I don't declare who the person is, where the organisation is, or anything about it apart from the fact the said room exists. If it gets me fired because I tell the truth, then so be it, although given what I've concluded, I personally think that it would be quite a... dangerous tactical point to take up, since you'd be risking further damages. | | Monday, November 9th, 2009 | | 7:15 pm |
... And being taken off again.
It's not one thing, it's another. I've been instructed after ONE day, to stay off for two more days, see him tomorrow, and to get referred to the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital's vertigo unit. I was mostly fine until about 1pm, and was good on the weekend and Friday, which left the doctor and I to persume that the worst of it's gone, and I should be okay for Monday, with a visit after work just to monitor and just follow up. If you're wondering, after about 1pm, with a resurface at 3pm, random muscle cramps, typing to feel like my fingers are chasms over the keyboard even at rest, and just dizzyness, fever and an all round ickyness. I'm almost convinced my body is deciding to develop an allergic reaction to work. | | 7:33 am |
Nothing new, but I think it's worth mentioning...
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/common-sense-has-no-place-in-our-burgeoning-bureaucracy-20091108-i3fk.htmlAll I have to add to this is the fact we're a place where we rely more and more on 'hard' laws, because we seem to think that they work better than having someone actually judge. Australians have this outdated idea of themselves as easy-going pragmatists, but we are becoming a nation of petty laws and fearful citizens, too gutless to confront this creeping, productivity-killing, initiative-destroying, community-sapping tide of compulsion and constriction, much of it driven by a corrosive ideology of the need for government control and intervention.And even though I understand both sides of the argument, I think that describes better than anything why we are where we are - We're too involved in trying to make sure we don't get into trouble to pay attention to what's up ahead. I'm all for making sure things are done properly. I'm worried like all hell that that the only way to do this isn't by people thinking things through, but having some body do it for them. If people are starting to outsource their guidance for behaviour, I think we've got more problems as a society than having terrorists attack, or even a foreign country invading. We'll destroy ourselves well before either of those come up. | | Sunday, November 8th, 2009 | | 9:32 pm |
AFACT vs iinet - Confusion between compliance in civil and criminal cases.
For those who aren't aware, iinet and AFACT are having it out in court over the fact that they allege that iinet haven't been doing enough to protect against piracy. Among other things, there's something which concerns me much more than anything else... How do they deal with places like youtube and the like? Now, it's one thing to say 'Sure, we want copyright notices to be issued automatically and that all people breaking the code are to be disconnected via their ISPs automatically without us doing anything.' and apply that to say torrents. It's technically difficult, sure but it's actually in the realm of possible. Well, for various definitons of possible. If I pirate say Japanese or Korean content, the chances of me being caught are next to none, only on the simple grounds that you'd need to hire a small team of people to understand what I'm doing, WHILE trying to figure out exactly what all the transmitted data was. Unless Japan (or wherever I'm swiping the material from) is giving an extensive and up to date list, an 'on the fly' idenfitication on a technical level is nearly impossible without someone actively deciding to listen in and tap my connection to see what's going on and having to make a guess. And considering that realistically, I'm one of a few million connections to the internet, the odds go from 'significantly small' to 'near impossible'. If I DO get caught, they'd then have to prove that what I'm doing is actually illegal. How do they know that I don't own the item in question, or that I don't already have permission to do it? That's a due diligence note, and it's an important one - you can only act when someone's guilty, not because you think they are, at least if AFACT's claim that it is considered a criminal matter is correct - If it is REALLY a crime, you're subject to the rules of the criminal justice process - prove guilty beyond REASONABLE DOUBT. Granted, if this is the case, the police are obliged to bring the case forward and request compliance, which is the crux of iinet's argument. If AFACT want the easier proof, namely the proof on balance, which is from a court perspective a hell lot easier, but it also means that it's up to the grevienced party to bring the party to court. It's awfully expensive, (and it's partly compensated because burden of proof is easier) and court cases are risky, which is why AFACT is gunning the line it is - Otherwise they'd have to do it the hard expensive way. But that's just one aspect, and that's actually not the thought that came to mind. For those who don't know, I carry a 720p/1080i capable broadcasting system. Nothing too fancy, although it's a definite hop and step above what's out there on consumer level, and I also have a very high end consumer grade/low business end internet connection. I'm sure it's a bit dated but it still serves its purpose. I hope to upgrade this to a 1080p capable system in a couple of years, or when my projects get justification to be funded externally. So if I was to stream something live, for people to watch, where people can connect an ip bank and watch a high quality stream (A good example of this would be Gom.TV which streams starcraft games live), how would you be able to determine if something was legal to transmit? This is a big, big thing. My setup can transmit legal stuff (Gameplay of Starcraft is an example, or say a stream of Atelier Rorona) but if I grabbed a DVD player and changed three settings and hopped to the local store, I could easily, in real time no less, broadcast a perfect version of titanic via streaming. Just to make things even muddier, I could also grab a high end or even low end digital camera and tramsit pictures live via my hookup, which means I can transmit HD quality video live. Now, from the ISP's perspective if AFACT gets their request, my ISP (iinet, no less) would HAVE to be able to idenitify in REAL TIME what I'm sending up to the server, and determine the image I'm sending to the server, to be replayed via flash, media player classic, VLC or any OTHER medium you like is a permissible image to transmit. Remember, although I CAN do illegal forms of transmittion under Australian Law with my equipment, it doesn't mean I WILL. And ironically, I don't need to. I have enough fun recording gaming for my own purposes. Doing this via any sort of automation? Sure, if you believe you can code up a program that can think it's human. If you believe that's possible, please refer me onto them. Otherwise, in all realism, you're stuck with people as being the first point of detection. You can't actually prevent me (without the passing of new laws) from using my equipment, remember? The question becomes, whose responsiblity is it to ensure I comply? As I've proven, the ISP is a carrier, but they can only do so much to check on me, due to the fact they have me, and a few hundred thousand OTHER subscribers to monitor at any given time. If it's a criminal case, the police would request iinet to co-operate, and persumably, I would have a data tap applied to my line to view what I do with the connection most of the time. If it's a civil case, the aggreviated party would have to prove that the civil act being breeched took place. They'd have to gain the technical data to prove I broke civil law, then arrange to sue the hell out of me. This would require them to contact the ISP to determine who the person is. The ISP then would (most likely) refer them on to the person in question, or if they believe its in their best interest, assist with the party in any questions in regards with the breech. Neither or allows AFACT to just disconnect people on basis of an accusation. You either have to get the police involved to make ISPs forcibly act since it's a criminal matter, or you have to get your hands dirty since it's a civil. AFACT sound like they want to get the best of both worlds, which is... well, kinda cheating, isn't it? Us normal civilians don't get that sort of choice. ... It makes you wonder what would happen if I decided to make myself known to iinet, and ask to speak as a supplementry expert at the court room. My notes above are VERY relevant, given that it's part of AFACT's core arguments, and to make things even more fun, I can even provide a technical demonstration. | | 4:22 am |
Tactical Command Module Nightshadow: Log 20032903 - Scenario 013: Cat out of the Bag part 2
What, you didn't think I'd just stop completely, did you? Yes, we're 11 months late, (Considering the last section was posted on January 1 this year) but I'm not going to let it die. I'm not going to let my creative ability die on me or if nothing else, if it dies, I'm going to go with it. Given how my last month in particular has been, well, sometimes the things that break you will also remake you. Besides, when political reality trumps even the most absurd fictional scenarios, you can't help but laugh. I don't think there's money in it, and I don't believe that there's someone out there watching my back helping me from the shadows. I do believe that there's someone out there who'll look at all of this one day and go 'Oh hey, that person's really weird, being able to talk about a huge variety of topics.' Then will promptly shoot me. Anyway, shall we go? I make no promises, considering that it's short, and I need to transit over back to our other lead, the more important one. If you've forgot, please use the archive listing for 2010 (The very top post of my blog) to figure out what's happened piror. ( Tactical Command Module Nightshadow: Log 20032903 - Scenario 013: Cat out of the Bag part 2 ) | | 1:11 am |
Japan vs the US - Outside bullying?
Recently (About two weeks ago now?) Hobby Search pulled the sale of all its adult materials from its store. However, this only applies to OUTSIDE JAPAN. Go to the Japanese side, and if you don't find adult material on sale by the time you count to three, you're probably trying your best to avoid it. Now, I don't actually care either way, because of the fact I don't generally have much interest in it. In all reality, it shouldn't concern me one bit if they do or they don't, because I don't buy any of the stuff. Granted, sometimes I like talking about some of the more absurd things that I find out (One of the more amusing items was the Ride of the Valkryie 2 figures which was... interesting to say the least being TO SCALE, for one), but that's just me. http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10100211Although with stuff like this 'making it past' it makes me wonder if they noticed that one. Oops? What does interest me is the reasoning behind the move - It's an external pressure, put on by Paypal's policies, that dictated the move. I asked about it and inquired about if this was just a Paypal thing (namely, if anyone purchased something with a credit card on the Japanese side, they'd be allowed to) but they confirmed that even though that would conform with the rules as set out by PayPal, they had to block any access to any outside parties as per PayPal's demands. Essentially, PayPal threatened a lot if they didn't get their way. Now, I'm all for compliance (I wouldn't be working in government otherwise) but what bothers me is more the fact that they feel that they have to comply with a country's laws that (for whatever reason) don't actually apply to them. I'm not really one for morality, since I don't make a living getting up on a podium and telling people how they should live. Yes, Japan's rules apply to Japanese companies that operate within Japan. US law has about as much bearing, barring treaties which are signed in agreement of the two countries, as much as Ugandian law, the Torah, Scientology or anything else out there inside Japan. If the US REALLY has a problem with how Japanese society functions and how laws aren't there, or how their society has different management mechanisms, it'll just have to invade the country again, just like everyone else. Sounds harsh? Pretty much, but that's how the balance of power works. It's why for all the moaning and mockery that people make fun of OUR classification rules, that places like Activision, Take Two or Valve can't really do much to the Australian Market that would risk them getting fined due to criminal negligence since they have to operate locally here. It's why they didn't just declare themselves a force onto themselves and just say 'You can shove your rules where the sun doesn't shine, I'm releasing the game how we want and you're not going to stop me'. if only because the Australian Government could turn around tomorrow and arrest their employees in the offices here for breaking the law. By the same token, the Australian Government can't turn around and try to arrest Valve employees in the US for making a game that's ultimately banned in Australia - Short of sending their own strike force to do so and hoping like all hell the US doesn't retaliate. The Australian Government will have to work with the laws of the US and/or lobby the government there to share the same view, just like everyone else. It's also why the military are the only way to prevent say drug harvestting - You know, Poppies in Afganistan and stuff like that. Frankly, the Afghans don't care, they cultivate drugs because a) they can and b) because the general population can't (or won't) stop them via the use of force, politics, or economics. If you're wondering, the US isn't doing so crash hot on that one either, which goes to show how effective invading a place can really be if it's an objective of yours. Japan and its Japanese population are entitled to vote or adjust their society in the way they see fit. If it means that they don't need a hard law which specifically states something, and would rather deal with a lot of things using social norms, that's how Japan's going to work. If you don't like it, that's your problem - Unless you live in the country, in which case, your best bet would be to make a political platform and try to push for change. If you're an outsider, you can suggest and lobby, but your moral highground's only as good as everyone else's - In short, line up and good luck pushing your ideology onto a far away place. Now, any place can choose to not serve a customer (Barring some exceptions, such as Israel if you're a US company, which is the most famous of the exceptions. Asking the question 'Are you Israeli?' can get you fined a LOT if you're asking on business for the purposes of say divesting or boycotting.) although from how they make it sound, apparently they ran into some issues trying to go for a middle ground because of outside 'compliance'. Now, Japan has some of the most lax laws in regards with pornography out of the G20. (There's a lot of places where there just aren't any, but out of the G20, it's the most vague.) However, the Audult industry is NOT illegal in Japan, at least until such time as Japan's government makes it illegal. If someone's importing it, they have to make sure that the import of the item is legal. If it's not, that's between the importer, the customs department of the country in question, and the police most likely. Japan's commerical responsiblity stops at making sure the item is paid for and has been dispatched. Reasonably, advising if an item is legal to import would be a good curtesy, but if the importer didn't check, that's not the company's problem. As far as the company's concerned, if they did all the checks they were supposed to (Sale of firearms to a third party would be a good example where you'd have to check by the law of the country you're in) and they pass, they clear Japanese law. The transit service would be responsible for making sure the item arrives from point A to point B. It's their job, however, they're not held responsible if customs pulls them up on a package. It's the person who BOUGHT the item who is responsible. Now in both cases, either transit or the Japanese Company can refuse to, if they know or suspect there's a problem. I'm sure the importer could then talk with the affected party and argue it out like good adults in a business transaction. However, when you have a third party (namely a company that faciliates in money transfers) who doesn't really have much business in knowing apart from the rules IT has to comply with making demands which don't apply to the parent company? That's when things start to get silly, and I can't help but wonder if it's a case of morality pushing via the use of threats. It's actually kind of sad, because of how the only solution we have for all our current problems is banning, which immediately generates the opposite effect to anyone who doesn't agree with the ban. | | Saturday, November 7th, 2009 | | 3:56 pm |
Oh hey, why can't I do that?
He left Geithner with two documents. One was a fact sheet that listed all the attributes of AIG FP [the division run by Joe Cassano that blew the company up] and argued why it should be given status as a primary dealer. The other–a bombshell that Willumstad was confident would draw Geithner’s attention–was a report on AIG’s counterparty exposure around the world, which included “2.7 trillion of notional derivative exposures, with 12,000 individual contracts.” About halfway down the page, in bold, was the detail that Willumstad hoped would strike Geithner as startling: “$1 trillion of exposures concentrated with 12 major financial institutions.” http://blogs.reuters.com/rolfe-winkler/2009/11/05/legislation-coming-to-break-up-big-banks/If I try to do that, I'd be shot on sight. Seriously, I don't think I'd even get a court trial for this one. Essentially, it's a naked threat of destroying the entire planet if you don't give in to my demands. ... I want in on this scam already. It sounds like too much fun. | | Thursday, November 5th, 2009 | | 12:57 pm |
Unavailable - Family medical emergency.
For most part, I'll be going back and forth, at random because of how other people are fretting since one of my uncles (Uncle in law, oldest sister in my family, so if you know Asian families, you'll have an idea just how she ranks up there.) and essentially, I've been told not to have a life due to various decisions being made and the usual. I don't get any say in this one, and being woken up at odd hours of the morning to be dragged there sucks. Yes, I know I sound rather irreverant, but there's nothing I'm able to do about it. It's between him, the doctors and the hospital, and I'm not really a person of faith. Thank you for your time. | | Wednesday, November 4th, 2009 | | 8:31 pm |
Ever wonder what would happen if you threw two 'brick wall' emotional arguments against each other?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1221111/Nude-X-ray-scans-scuppered-child-porn-fears.htmlThe spectres of both 'Child Protection at all Cost' and 'Protect against Terrorism at all cost' had to intersect at some point. Of course, it was a no win situation - Now, since terrorists (And other people who desire to beat security at airports) know kids won't be so intensively searched, there's no question of using children as runners. They're pretty obedient if you give them simple instructions, or directives, like 'Meet that man over on the other side'. The alternative was to make seeing naked boys or girls under 18 viewable by an unknown third party. The question of 'Do you trust them enough?' really comes to mind. Or maybe we need to accept that we need to address the causes of these actions, rather than try to counter the symptoms. But hey, that's asking just a little too much... | | 8:15 pm |
Oddities on the PAL front...
It's gaming related news, but not the sort many people would care much for - I mean, who plays RPGs these days, really? Argaest - Generations of War Collector's Edition is a bit strange. More accurately, the PAL UK version, which was a step short of being cancelled entirely, ended up having a MA 15+ rating PRINTED on the cover. Yes, not a sticker, but as part of the artwork for the game itself. It means that they either a) expected to release the game in Australia, but decided against it or b) Like complying with the maybe of people importing from PAL to Australia, like Game and its UK parent. The other note is the OTHER game which showed up - Atelier Annie. My premium box artwork's the JAPANESE one. It looks kinda cool actually, but it's one of those 'wait a second, really?' moments since I had to double check if the game was really the US release. It's a nice touch, and it'll confuse people a bit. It's a keeper, if nothing else. |
[ << Previous 20 ]
|