Xbox One could be forced to sell without kinect in USA

[MashBot]

Don't forget Mexico. Not sure the numbers but over time as the price go down most people in poorer place opt Xbox because of the mass product is cheaper. But this Internet thing is gonna f'in them over. My ex girl was Mexican and she got alot of her famliy xbox360 and wiis. I think like she spent 400us for 3 Xbox and 4 wiis with bunch of games. Things over there is hella cheap. Point is with all m$ doing all this is cutting out the less furtunate.

 

[Saint Op Omen]

Saint Op Omen, post: 955878 said: <br />What's sad is I think the US is the only place it will sell good...<br /> <br />Sent under duress.

<br /> <br /> <br />Microsoft won America 40m to 25m and UK 8m to 5m.<br /> <br />Sony had the rest of the world. And sony will have the rest of the world again because most of the world can't even play xbox one games.<br /> <br />Polls all show American and the UK swapping sides. At worst, I think it will be 50/50 in america, with everywhere else Sony.

From what I have seen online that seems about right...
I personally only know 1 person who wants a Xbone and he just said he may change his mind due to everyone else on PS4 and this bill...it makes him uneasy knowing the sales may be blocked or have some other complication now...

Sent under duress.

 

[RomeoBravoDelta]

So the NSA/Verizon thing was okay but even congress is like "nah son" to Kinect.

 

[ColdBoreMK23]

I was hype for the Xbox one because some of my most "memorable" gaming moments were on the 360 with Gears, Forza, Halo, etc.

I still pre-ordered one along with the PS4 (I actually pre-ordered six so far from different places to give as gifts for Christmas to my less fortunate friends/family) but I am considering selling the Xbox one or cancelling my Pre-order all together. The only thing that interests me with this system is the next Gears "triology". Every other game that comes out for both systems I will be getting for PS4.


Seems like you get less of an actual video game console for more money and more bullshit.

 

[MashBot]

So the NSA/Verizon thing was okay but even congress is like "nah son" to Kinect.

No to both the bill that's trying to get pass say dvr/Kinect can't sell with out the buyer siding to opt in/out. In you spy on me or out "naw son hold that" . And clearly know when it's recording if opt'ed in with A WE'RE WATCHING YOU visible on the screen and must be able to be seen from the next room

 

[MorbidAltruism]

I am surprised people are so jumpy when it comes to the Kinect. I mean it is a little humorous. If you don't like it don't buy it. I am not the first one to say it... but having a cellphone is worse.

I guess at least a cell phone doesn't watch you jerk it to video game characters.

 

[Saint Op Omen]

I am surprised people are so jumpy when it comes to the Kinect. I mean it is a little humorous. If you don't like it don't buy it. I am not the first one to say it... but having a cellphone is worse.

I guess at least a cell phone doesn't watch you jerk it to video game characters.

Maybe the military and the government have more info and stuffs about it then we do...maybe they know the truth ...maybe they secretly all game share and play GTA in the senate lair and can't get internet there...

Sent under duress.

 

[MashBot]

I been saying that for the longest. Alot of people don't know alot of watch dogs hacking is possible this day in age. Trust me I know. Just by having your wifi visible I can trace your ip all the way to the providing company. which then if you have a credit card tied to your account I can trace to your back account. And so on with phones. I know some guys that's looking to have a ball day it this always online stuff.

 

[TheSpore]

This bill is not about the Kinect mainly, the privacy laws in the country are very outdated and barely scratch the surface when it comes to the internet and digital software, or software in general. This could essentially get the ball rolling into further legislation that could update the privacy laws and finally cripple corporations from further being able to violate rights. Think about it, right now an ISP, Yahoo, Google, and other web-sites including Facebook claim to have ownership over anything posted on their sites and sent through their emails. Currently Facebook can take a picture of your children from your page and give it to an advertiser to use and they don't even need your permission. Currently Law enforcement agencies can simply seize your email without you even knowing, because the privacy laws are out of date. This can even be a small step in the direction of further hardening these privacy laws.

 

[MashBot]

^ lol speaking about Facebook I'm apart of a $9mil settlement over this. A pic of me and some old classmates was used in some kind of marketing AD. Kappa

 

[TheSpore]

^ lol speaking about Facebook I'm apart of a $9mil settlement over this. A pic of me and some old classmates was used in some kind of marketing AD. Kappa

My point above exactly

 

[Konqrr]

If you don't like it don't buy it.

I getting pretty sick of seeing that sentence.

I don't like Kinect. However, if I want to buy an X1, I have to buy Kinect too... well, maybe not if this bill gets passed ^_^

 

[TheSpore]

I getting pretty sick of seeing that sentence.

I am too my friend.

The next XB may even start raising more eyebrows soon though, because right now if there is to be an all digital future, there will be a need for a governmental regulation, mainly due to the concept of ownership rights as well.

The issue of the Kinect is definitely an issue lately with the military and the military is not very keen knowing their people may potentially have spying device inside their homes off base.

 

[fookdagook]

I'll admit, I'm also a tad apprehensive about the Kinect's big brother potential. Even leaving my Windows PC webcam on overnight has been keeping me on edge lately. I mean, similar to what they say about the Kinect, if I turn it off, how can I know if it's really off? The government clearly has the desire and wherewithal to circumvent my right for privacy... what I would like to know is when and how "they" plan on using the information against me or my loved ones.

So I've taken a few minor steps to protect myself: destroying my smartphone, tin foil helmets, and duct tape over my camera--because you never know how many of their employees spies might be watching your every keystroke. Even worse, Microsoft could be making fun of how we look or dance and we would have no idea. Did you know that the Kinect even has the power to thermally detect your heartbeat? YOUR HEARTBEAT FOR CHRIST'S SAKE. I don't want them to know that I have a heartbeat! I didn't sign up for this, M$.

God forbid they discover that my couch is beige polyester... I'll be ruined.

 

[Ilthuain]

This bill has no chance of becoming law. Printing "WE ARE WATCHING YOU" on a device? So silly.

 

[JaredL]

This bill has no chance of becoming law. Printing "WE ARE WATCHING YOU" on a device? So silly.

Its not on the device, its on the screen when its on.
And it has by-partisan support supposedly.

 

[TheSpore]

This bill has no chance of becoming law. Printing "WE ARE WATCHING YOU" on a device? So silly.

How is this trully silly, the bill isn't focused on the Kinect alone, also is it a stretch to see Congress beginning to take notice in the idea that US citizens are possibly being spyed on. My next question have you look at privacy laws recently, you do realize how outdated they are.

Corporatioins have been getting way too bold lately and they are further trying to overstep boundries that even the government cannot legally do and well that is a problem.

 

[Ilthuain]

How is this trully silly, the bill isn't focused on the Kinect alone, also is it a stretch to see Congress beginning to take notice in the idea that US citizens are possibly being spyed on.

The execution of the bill is silly. "WE ARE WATCHING YOU". Can you think of any other similar government-imposed messages on a product? Cigarette packs don't have a message reading, "THESE ARE CANCER STICKS, BRO" scrawled on the side. Seat belts don't have "USE YOUR HEAD OR LOSE YOUR HEAD" written in 58 point helvetica on the strap. It's just so ham-fisted.

Also, as you probably know, this bill doesn't actually target the XB1. Saying that the Kinect meets the requirements of this bill is a pretty big stretch. The news agencies (that I have read thus far) reporting the connection between the bill and the Kinect are not reliable sources. Perhaps the congressmen will clarify the connection.

As for the theory behind the bill, I support it.

Its not on the device, its on the screen when its on.
And it has by-partisan support supposedly.

First, the word is "bipartisan". Second, there are two dudes in the house supporting this thing. That's less than 1%. Both of the reps supporting the bill are nobodies, one of them has a single committee seat and the other is probably leaving next term. The bill has no chance of becoming law.

 

[TheSpore]

The execution of the bill is silly. "WE ARE WATCHING YOU". Can you think of any other similar government-imposed messages on a product? Cigarette packs don't have a message reading, "THESE ARE CANCER STICKS, BRO" scrawled on the side. Seat belts don't have "USE YOUR HEAD OR LOSE YOUR HEAD" written in 58 point helvetica on the strap. It's just so ham-fisted.

Actually on tobacco products it does say they can give you Cancer, just gonna point that out and there is warnings on seatbelts as well.

Also, as you probably know, this bill doesn't actually target the XB1. Saying that the Kinect meets the requirements of this bill is a pretty big stretch. The news agencies (that I have read thus far) reporting the connection between the bill and the Kinect are not reliable sources. Perhaps the congressmen will clarify the connection.

As for the theory behind the bill, I support it.

I do realize this bill doesn't target it directly, but your statement about the Kinect 2 not meeting the requirements is false, I'm sure I don't even have to cite a single source that doesn't refute exactly what the thing can do, we both know what it can do it has been plain and simple since reveal. I agree this has nothing to completely do with that device, but anyway it does point to further concerns that the public is beginning to have andyears this bill can very easily get picked up by other members of the Congress, not too mention since privacy and security is a big topic currently this could even allow COngress the ability to get back some voters they have lost over the years.

As for the theory yeah I am in full suport too, the privacy laws in the country are need of an updating and lately it seems corporation more authority tahn the government seems too, which is really bad, because in theory(I stress in theory) the governement's concern is teh people, a corporation's concern is money.

 

[MorbidAltruism]

The execution of the bill is silly. "WE ARE WATCHING YOU". Can you think of any other similar government-imposed messages on a product? Cigarette packs don't have a message reading, "THESE ARE CANCER STICKS, BRO" scrawled on the side. Seat belts don't have "USE YOUR HEAD OR LOSE YOUR HEAD" written in 58 point helvetica on the strap. It's just so ham-fisted.

Also, as you probably know, this bill doesn't actually target the XB1. Saying that the Kinect meets the requirements of this bill is a pretty big stretch. The news agencies (that I have read thus far) reporting the connection between the bill and the Kinect are not reliable sources. Perhaps the congressmen will clarify the connection.

As for the theory behind the bill, I support it.



First, the word is "bipartisan". Second, there are two dudes in the house supporting this thing. That's less than 1%. Both of the reps supporting the bill are nobodies, one of them has a single committee seat and the other is probably leaving next term. The bill has no chance of becoming law.

It is funny because Cigarettes do have "these are cancer sticks, bro" written on the side/back. I mean obviously it is not phrased that way. Essentially that is what they are getting at though.

 

[TheSpore]

It is funny because Cigarettes do have "these are cancer sticks, bro" written on the side/back. I mean obviously it is not phrased that way. Essentially that is what they are getting at though.

If you go over seas they in big black and white letters SMOKING KILLS

 

[Ilthuain]

If you go over seas they in big black and white letters SMOKING KILLS

We're not talking about other countries, we're talking about the United States.

It is funny because Cigarettes do have "these are cancer sticks, bro" written on the side/back. I mean obviously it is not phrased that way. Essentially that is what they are getting at though.

That's exactly my point. The phrasing makes me believe this is not a serious bill. It's also not an informative message for the consumer. "WE ARE WATCHING YOU." Who is "WE"? Is "WE" the device manufacturer, is "WE" the software distributor, is "WE" the government, it "WE" 4chan?

 

[TheSpore]

We're not talking about other countries, we're talking about the United States.
Why So serious?