Leon

I am just curious, what is the difference between dumping a rom using a program like iso buster of a game you own, and getting the digital copy of a DVD from the DVD itself, (which many dvds provide these days.)

Even if contacted by Nintendo. the ISP's server is covered by a contract, and logs and the like are actually protected information. the ONLY way to get them is with a sepena(don't know how to spell it). Even then, without concrete proof, they cannot go on a phishing expedition for the information. So, the only way is to catch an uploader, and get THEIR logs, but even then, with IP addresses leading to the ISPs, they cannot access the logs without knowing specifically who.

Means they need the file RGSS102E.dll. Have them place it in c:/windows/system32 folder. You should have one in that folder, as well, that you can copy and send.

Wow... no posts in 3 days. I nominate isaacsol. For being kindness, and helpfulness. Apparently, I cannot nominate admins... :angry: So, I'll nominate White Rabbit for kindness, activeness, and contributing.

Lol. reminds me of the hacks for the PSP. Few know this, but DarkAlex was actually ENDORSED by Sony, and was given PSPs to hack. This was before the PSN. Companies actually see these thigns as a plus, because they learn about security, and what people like. (ie. Downloadable games onto the systems [wii, ps3, psp, dsi, 360] and how to better secure their technology). But that is besides the point... Back on track: Whether wrong or not; roms have given us much. the Nintendo shop channel, the playstation network, the 360's shop. But still, the debate is whether or not owning a rom is, or should be, illegal.

Again.. I must agree with Kage. Clinton had Osama on a silver platter, but instead sent him back to the Mid-East; even after Osama swore he'd get the US in the future.

Well, illegal or no; loophole or not; it seems as though Kage makes a good point. It would cost more for the companies to seek out the d/lers (because it is a lot more difficult) and bring them to court, rather than ignore it. Of course, going after the uploaders would be a lot easier, and is infringement, rather than possession of 'stolen property'.

I can top that story. I have a copy of Brigandine that my brothers, who are idiots, left on a shelf one day (disk only, mind you) and scooted it across there, effectively destroying the game. Are you telling me I cannot d/l the rom for my own personal use, when I, in fact, still actually OWN the game? Before you say 'repair' it, it is beyond repair... some of the data-foil on the label side is missing due to the 'scooting of the disk'.

I think everyone is looking at this too linear. First, I would like to see proof that Bush did have knowledge of the attack. I don't mean circumstantial, but actual hard proof. Second, the only talk here is about the towers in NYC. Only one person brought up the pentagon plane, and nobody talked about the one out in PA. Third, I heard it mentioned that '9 of the hi-jackers' were living in the Mid-east. There is a flaw to this; as it is the organizers of the plot who are living there. Imagine Al-Qaeda as a military structure. Do you REALLY think the organizers of the plot would actually pull it off? That'd be idiotic. Next, the way the twin towers fell... Fire spread throughout the couple of floors in which the planes hit, plus the planes themselves knocked out many of the structural supports of the floors. It took 56 minutes for the first tower to fall after impact, and the other 102 minutes. Don't you think that it would be wiser to detonate very soon after the planes hit, rather than wait? Further, after that time passes, those beams will buckle and fail, and the weight of the above floors would come down. It would cause the rest of the towers to fall just because of gravity + weight. It's like building a tower of cards, adding a ton of weight to the top, then removing 3-4 key-cards 3/4s the way up. Now, let's look at the pentagon plane. Hardly anybody talks about it, only because it wasn't as devastating. It hardly seems likely that anyone who would want to cause a conspiracy would actually add this to the cause. Not to divert suspicion, but because it would INCREASE suspicion. It would be more likely the hi-jackers bodies wouldn't be burned up, lost, or destroyed in the fire. In addition, what about the plane in PA? Something few talk about, when all the passengers overpowered their hi-jackers. Now, I have seen a lot of speculation on how the cell-phone calls wouldn't be able to reach the towers and all that, but few negate to look at is the plane was flying at a lower altitude than it should have. It was even listed in the black box. Finally, I've heard this was a preface to invade Iraq for the US's own private reasons... hogwash. It wasn't just the US. in 2002, the British government also concluded it was for the better to invade Iraq due to WMDs. If 9/11 is such a conspiracy, how the HELL did we get the British in on it?! Yes, Tony Blair, the idiot, said some rather idiotic things. And I'm not saying the not-finding of WMDs is a good thing. What I am saying is, if you have a known murderer asking for a rifle and ammo, you don't assume he's going hunting. Now, to conclude, I already know pointing all this out, even with facts, that everyone will still believe the conspiracy for 3 reasons: First: Conspiracies are always cool, and people love conspiracies. (Watergate, JFK assassination, CIA, Area 51's aliens, etc) Second: Conspiracy theory 'nuts' (I am one too, i love em) will always dismiss a fact that can prove them wrong as a 'government cover-up' Third: Everyone here already has their mind made up on something that happened almost 10 years ago; when most of us were around the age of 12 or younger; and or memories are both skewed, and affected by everyone around us in the last 10 years.

This is why this particular debate is fun. On one hand, the company whom sells the copy says you are buying a license to the product, but you cannot multiply it, or get a soft-copy of the product for a back-up. hardly makes any sense. Don't get me wrong, I abhor piracy, but it is no different than backing up your cd, and allowing others who have the cd to obtain a soft-copy as well. It is up to the downloader, in my opinion, as to their honesty if they actually own the game. However, if uploading is the illegal side, that doesn't make the downloading automatically illegal. It just means the downloader must find someone, like on the black market, selling the product. It's sort of like being given a back-door gun and having it registered. You legally own it, but the seller illegally gave it to you.

Okay, to everyone who is following this: I haven't posted a blog in a while, mainly due to being busy. My g/f lost her job, so I've been keeping her occupied so she doesn't go insane. That is no joke. At any rate, progress update: Still on that first map, the doozy, as I call it. I am close to 30% or so. I have also hired a friend of mine as a graphical artist on this project. Our goal is 100% custom project... so wish us luck! With what I have done, I am almost ready to quit, but I must push on, for the sake of the project...

I must beg to differ, all the creators of roms do is back up their games, and then for anyone who has the game, give a link to the d/l; with a disclaimer saying not to keep it if you don't own it, because THAT is illegal.

No, i am making an honest debate. How can downloading something you own the license to be illegal? That is my question. I mean, I own the license to around 50 NES games, but not the know-how to put them on the computer. So why can I not download them?

Okay, since the dawn of emulators, roms have been around. Question is, is it illegal to own the rom of a game, if you own the game? I mean, from a moral standpoint, it is wrong, because you didn't buy it. However, from the legal point of view, when you purchase something such as music, movies, games, etc. it states specifically, you are buying a LICENSE to the product, but not the actual product. Okay, shoot!

Although the truth is a good thing, Crimson, sometimes it is better not to come out with it. Ignorance is bliss, unfortunately.

Darn.. ah well. Guess it is up to us Americans. xD

I don't know. I mean, this is a tragic accident, but maybe you'll have a great schoolyear after it. I mean, once soemthign that bad happens, it can only go up!

lol. I like this.

Okay, I know Country is the underdog of music, but I need a little help. I just heard Taylor Swift's new song, and I must say, I'm sick of her. Every song of hers sounds the same, and I want to knock her down a peg or two. However, I need help in doing this, and am asking all of you. CMT (watch it at work) has a top 5 music videos listing every day, and my goal is to knock Taylor Swift out of the top-spot. To do this, I just implore you all watch this video which is sitting in the 2nd place spot. Spam it as much as you can. Get everyone you can to! This song is actually really good, and has an excellent video. It just needs that little push... If you are on board, please, let me know! thanks!

I can add to this conspiracy. Watch the first episode of the Lone Gunmen. It is about a chip that can fly a plane by somebody on the ground, effectively hijacking a plane w/o being ON the plane. Funny thing is, if I remember right, they were testing it on a REAL plane, attempting to crash it into the WTC in the episode... It aired March 4th, 2001...

I agree, if you don't have enough of your project to post a screenshot, then why are you making a thread?

In my opinion, the reason for dating is more or less a courtship thing, to see if you can match in compatibility. Granted, this doesn't always work out, as people are constantly changing. Dating is in place just to see if you can get along with the person, but even dating alone isn't enough to test it. In my experience, you cannot really know if you are compatible with someone until you are living with them, spending 95% of the time with them, and have enough in common to keep things interesting. Now, a couple things I don't understand include: Why don't guys pay attention to a girl's needs? Why do guys find girls 'complex'? Why do girls try to change guys? I mean, honestly, both guys and girls are simple. Humans are creatures of habit, so why try to change someone? They may turn into someone you didn't start dating in the first place. And as for paying attention, well, all a girl wants is someone to talk to and listen to them. All and all, dating is just a way of checking compatibility, as stated in the beginning. Now, why people date 'casually' beats me. Probably them being insecure and just looking for some companionship. Either that or they want someone to f***. My own personal opinion, dating should just be if you are really looking for that one. It shouldn't be some 'pass time'.

I'm glad to see it back. Perhaps we should have a 'donation' option, so members, if they want, can contribute to ensure the site remains up?

Welcome to the site. I know some of the mods and admins here personally... of course, I kinda hope so. No worries, we seldom have any incidents here, so feel free to ask pretty much any q.