I've not taken any interest in Blu-Ray, but is it more than just a quality boost?
With the resolution you'd get on an in-car system I wouldn't have thought there would be a lot of drive to do that apart from cost, as you said, but I wouldn't have thought that would drop any time soon. Would there really be a point from a consumers point of view?
It's a very large quality boost, and well worth it if you have a very high-quality display. For non-HD displays though, you won't notice.
I have noticed the Blu-Ray presentation getting better though. DVD was all about fancy, time-wasting menus and hoops to jump through because the producers got so excited about the technology. Almost every Blu-Ray disc I've put in has started the movie immediately -- the menu is something it will draw on top of the movie if you push the menu button.
The only time I've noticed blocky artifacts on my HD Tivo is on shows like So You Think You Can Dance when they have strobe lights on. Yeah, strobe isn't handled very well since almost every frame is completely different information from the frame before it. Otherwise, it looks pretty good.
They could have used a better trilogy then that to pass time...STAR WARS comes to mind in the most hours passed behind a TV! I myself would have maybe done the Band of brothers.....oh wait a minute...!
Hmmm, didn't the evil Emperor come to ultimate power through fraudulent elections or something close? Deceitful at the least.
On the other hand, it does reinforce the notion that brown people are a fallen race of brutes that are incapable of even the most basic language, let alone organized self-government. If the Iranians start believing that canard, then there goes the revolution.
I can't wait until they screen the adaptation of the last book in the Chronicles of Narnia series, The Last Battle.
"You see, every time you were doing good in the name of Allah, you were really doing it in the name of Christ without realizing it. And whenever you were deceitfully doing evil works in the name of Christ, you were unwillingly doing it in the name of Allah. This is because Chist is pure good and Allah is pure evil, and you can't do a good deed in the name of an evil god. See how easy that is?
Whoops, did I say Chist and Allah? I meant to say Aslan and Tash. Sorry."
But they don't have elves in Iran. Achmandinnerjacket said so at the university talk. It was elves, right? Something like that.
No, they have elves, they're just not the twinking fey elves that Achmandinnerjacket wouldn't like. Their elves are pretty manly with stubbly chins and rippling muscles that they cultivate by working out in the gym all the time. Those manly elves are definitely straight.
This wasn't really the topic of discussion. The topic was whether Apple is likely to fall off a cliff immediately when Jobs dies, and I see no reason for that to be the case.
Would it fall off a cliff immediately? I'm not sure. Its stock would certainly crash -- to much of the world, Apple's current success can be credited directly to Jobs. So Apple would fall pretty hard immediately. Could it get back up and dust itself off? At that point I'd certainly take a leap and purchase some Apple stock.
There was actually speculation on Buzz Out Loud that the leak about Jobs' transplant was a very strategic and deliberate leak. What it boiled down to is the fact that the WSJ got a report from an unnamed source that Jobs had a transplant, and broke the story after the markets had closed on friday and iPhone 3GS sales had gone well on release day.
The leak itself may not have been planned, but Apple may have been able to cut a deal with the WSJ to time it to do the least amount of damage possible. IE, "We know that you know about the transplant. We know you're doing to print the story. If you delay it 24 hours, we'll give you top access during the next MacWorld." Or.. you know, something to that effect.
A lie of omission is still a lie. When you state "he is in the hospital because of a horomonal imbalance" then the real reason for him being in the hospital had better be a horomonal imbalance.
I don't see how withholding private medical information can be construed as misleading shareholders. It's perfectly likely that he DID have a hormonal imbalance, in addition to whatever was causing it.
It really depends on the exact nature of the wording, I suppose. "He has a horomonal imbalance. Move along" may be.. a little misleading, but it's certainly less misleading than "he is not here because of a horomonal imbalance. We expect him to return soon." The latter is misleading enough to possibly get them into trouble.
Most I ever paid was $120 for 16K (actually, $240 for 32K - I wanted to max out my memory). It was a lot cheaper than the Radio Shack price of $300 per 16K. (Of course, this was dynamic memory, but the Z80 had provisions to refresh dynamic memory.)
Mmmm, but how much is that worth in 2009 dollars?
Wait, bad comparison. How much is that worth in 2008 dollars?
That's like saying "see, my car just went on this straight road fine while I had my hands off the wheel for 5 seconds!". That doesn't mean that it'll also work in tight turns.
Yes, car analogies just work for any fucking thing. I wonder how people did before we had cars...
Especially since with any company that has a long design-to-release period, effects of a leadership change may not really be felt for months or years down the line.
Ah, I see your point now. I think we're using different meanings for the same term. Earning a median income, I am certainly better off than someone earning a median income 50 years ago. But I was using 'rich' to mean, 'earning well above the median' not 'what you can do with the money you have.' By my definition it's impossible for everyone to earn well above the median.;-)
Mmmm, I would argue against MacOS in the very early days. Its problem was that it was way ahead of its time and the early Mac hardware wasn't really enough to support it. It took a few hardware revisions (at the very least beyond the Mac 512k) for it to be truly useful. Until then it was a bit too heavy.
Yes, life is not fair, but honestly this is not a case of someone being rich and privileged because he was born into the right family. Steve Jobs as much as anyone has earned his money. He's worked hard and he's added a lot to society. If we tried to cut him down so things were more fair, then it would be a loss to all of us.
Everybody knows about Steve Jobs, but no one knows about Steve Wozniak, who was the actual technology innovator.
The history of Silicon Valley is full of people with technical brilliance who could never get anywhere. Business acumen is at least as important, and I think it's a skill that many Slashdotters undervalue.
Things will never be completely fair, but the way to make them more fair is to help everyone become more rich and powerful
But... that's not really possible to achieve. I mean, "everyone is rich" just results in inflation, until everyone is a millionaire, but a loaf of bread costs $500. For some people to be rich, others must be poor.
...when you can just go smash 168 expensive security cameras. Maybe even send some volts down the wires to fry the gear on the other end. Maybe just destroy and vandalize the hell out of the private businesses who support this and allow the cameras on their property.
No, we'll need someone to protect us from the really dangerous people when all of us are in prison! In fact, we might as well just declare the whole country to be "prison" and maybe declare Hawaii to be "out", so we can occasionally get day-parole there.
Until North Korea starts launching missiles at Hawaii; then it might have less value as a tourist spot.
'the innocent have nothing to fear'.... What the hell is that crap? When did that become the rally flag for the loss of freedoms?
Next they will tell us that if they don't get these cameras, the terrorist win....
Oh wait!
Would you abolish the police then?
Nope, but then, the police are required to have warrents for arrests and searches, as per the Fourth Amendment. Now why was that pesky amendment added to the Bill of Rights? Don't we have nothing to fear?
What you are describing is David Brin's Transparent Society, an idea that I personally considered to be morally repugnant, given the subtle ways that people will persecute each other for being different from them.
I hear some campuses here in california are banning smoking while standing, you have to be walking, so students walk around the building. And of course they're working on banning it completely on campus.
Awesome! So you get exercise too! How enlightened.
Actually exercise while smoking is pretty bad for you -- you enhale more smoke, but less oxygen can be absorbed. I sometimes see some crazy people around where I live smoking and biking at the same time. Doesn't make much sense. Then again, smoking never made any sense either.
I might take up chewing tobacco as well.
Ugh. Don't even consider it. The health effects of chewing tobacco are even less pleasant than that of smoking.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, I like I like the idea of free orange juice... Oh, wait.
I'm thirsty.
I agree.
I've not taken any interest in Blu-Ray, but is it more than just a quality boost?
With the resolution you'd get on an in-car system I wouldn't have thought there would be a lot of drive to do that apart from cost, as you said, but I wouldn't have thought that would drop any time soon. Would there really be a point from a consumers point of view?
It's a very large quality boost, and well worth it if you have a very high-quality display. For non-HD displays though, you won't notice.
I have noticed the Blu-Ray presentation getting better though. DVD was all about fancy, time-wasting menus and hoops to jump through because the producers got so excited about the technology. Almost every Blu-Ray disc I've put in has started the movie immediately -- the menu is something it will draw on top of the movie if you push the menu button.
The only time I've noticed blocky artifacts on my HD Tivo is on shows like So You Think You Can Dance when they have strobe lights on. Yeah, strobe isn't handled very well since almost every frame is completely different information from the frame before it. Otherwise, it looks pretty good.
They could have used a better trilogy then that to pass time...STAR WARS comes to mind in the most hours passed behind a TV!
I myself would have maybe done the Band of brothers.....oh wait a minute...!
Hmmm, didn't the evil Emperor come to ultimate power through fraudulent elections or something close? Deceitful at the least.
On the other hand, it does reinforce the notion that brown people are a fallen race of brutes that are incapable of even the most basic language, let alone organized self-government. If the Iranians start believing that canard, then there goes the revolution.
I can't wait until they screen the adaptation of the last book in the Chronicles of Narnia series, The Last Battle.
"You see, every time you were doing good in the name of Allah, you were really doing it in the name of Christ without realizing it. And whenever you were deceitfully doing evil works in the name of Christ, you were unwillingly doing it in the name of Allah. This is because Chist is pure good and Allah is pure evil, and you can't do a good deed in the name of an evil god. See how easy that is?
Whoops, did I say Chist and Allah? I meant to say Aslan and Tash. Sorry."
Perl Harbor was not a terrible movie when most of the plot is cut out and you just have the attack.
That version (the only one I've seen) was about half an hour long and was quite exciting! It still had too much Affleck, but it was still ok.
That would explain why it looks like ass on Firefox in Fedora and Ubuntu, then.
It looks fine to me in Firefox on Fedora.
It's just f@#$%!ing slow.
But they don't have elves in Iran. Achmandinnerjacket said so at the university talk. It was elves, right? Something like that.
No, they have elves, they're just not the twinking fey elves that Achmandinnerjacket wouldn't like. Their elves are pretty manly with stubbly chins and rippling muscles that they cultivate by working out in the gym all the time. Those manly elves are definitely straight.
Who rated this funny? Its the oldest god damn joke around. "Hey look! Its a different culture.. lets mock it! a hahahhaha".
Fuck.
Someone with both a sense of humor and a realization that the religiously arch-conservative culture deserves the deep mocking that it gets.
This wasn't really the topic of discussion. The topic was whether Apple is likely to fall off a cliff immediately when Jobs dies, and I see no reason for that to be the case.
Would it fall off a cliff immediately? I'm not sure. Its stock would certainly crash -- to much of the world, Apple's current success can be credited directly to Jobs. So Apple would fall pretty hard immediately. Could it get back up and dust itself off? At that point I'd certainly take a leap and purchase some Apple stock.
There was actually speculation on Buzz Out Loud that the leak about Jobs' transplant was a very strategic and deliberate leak. What it boiled down to is the fact that the WSJ got a report from an unnamed source that Jobs had a transplant, and broke the story after the markets had closed on friday and iPhone 3GS sales had gone well on release day.
The leak itself may not have been planned, but Apple may have been able to cut a deal with the WSJ to time it to do the least amount of damage possible. IE, "We know that you know about the transplant. We know you're doing to print the story. If you delay it 24 hours, we'll give you top access during the next MacWorld." Or.. you know, something to that effect.
A lie of omission is still a lie. When you state "he is in the hospital because of a horomonal imbalance" then the real reason for him being in the hospital had better be a horomonal imbalance.
I don't see how withholding private medical information can be construed as misleading shareholders. It's perfectly likely that he DID have a hormonal imbalance, in addition to whatever was causing it.
It really depends on the exact nature of the wording, I suppose. "He has a horomonal imbalance. Move along" may be.. a little misleading, but it's certainly less misleading than "he is not here because of a horomonal imbalance. We expect him to return soon." The latter is misleading enough to possibly get them into trouble.
Most I ever paid was $120 for 16K (actually, $240 for 32K - I wanted to max out my memory). It was a lot cheaper than the Radio Shack price of $300 per 16K. (Of course, this was dynamic memory, but the Z80 had provisions to refresh dynamic memory.)
Mmmm, but how much is that worth in 2009 dollars?
Wait, bad comparison. How much is that worth in 2008 dollars?
That's like saying "see, my car just went on this straight road fine while I had my hands off the wheel for 5 seconds!". That doesn't mean that it'll also work in tight turns.
Yes, car analogies just work for any fucking thing. I wonder how people did before we had cars...
Especially since with any company that has a long design-to-release period, effects of a leadership change may not really be felt for months or years down the line.
Ah, I see your point now. I think we're using different meanings for the same term. Earning a median income, I am certainly better off than someone earning a median income 50 years ago. But I was using 'rich' to mean, 'earning well above the median' not 'what you can do with the money you have.' By my definition it's impossible for everyone to earn well above the median. ;-)
Mmmm, I would argue against MacOS in the very early days. Its problem was that it was way ahead of its time and the early Mac hardware wasn't really enough to support it. It took a few hardware revisions (at the very least beyond the Mac 512k) for it to be truly useful. Until then it was a bit too heavy.
Yes, life is not fair, but honestly this is not a case of someone being rich and privileged because he was born into the right family. Steve Jobs as much as anyone has earned his money. He's worked hard and he's added a lot to society. If we tried to cut him down so things were more fair, then it would be a loss to all of us.
Everybody knows about Steve Jobs, but no one knows about Steve Wozniak, who was the actual technology innovator.
The history of Silicon Valley is full of people with technical brilliance who could never get anywhere. Business acumen is at least as important, and I think it's a skill that many Slashdotters undervalue.
Things will never be completely fair, but the way to make them more fair is to help everyone become more rich and powerful
But... that's not really possible to achieve. I mean, "everyone is rich" just results in inflation, until everyone is a millionaire, but a loaf of bread costs $500. For some people to be rich, others must be poor.
...when you can just go smash 168 expensive security cameras. Maybe even send some volts down the wires to fry the gear on the other end. Maybe just destroy and vandalize the hell out of the private businesses who support this and allow the cameras on their property.
Or, you could just get a bunch of crows to do that for you.
"Would you abolish the police then?"
No, we'll need someone to protect us from the really dangerous people when all of us are in prison! In fact, we might as well just declare the whole country to be "prison" and maybe declare Hawaii to be "out", so we can occasionally get day-parole there.
Until North Korea starts launching missiles at Hawaii; then it might have less value as a tourist spot.
'the innocent have nothing to fear'.... What the hell is that crap? When did that become the rally flag for the loss of freedoms?
Next they will tell us that if they don't get these cameras, the terrorist win....
Oh wait!
Would you abolish the police then?
Nope, but then, the police are required to have warrents for arrests and searches, as per the Fourth Amendment. Now why was that pesky amendment added to the Bill of Rights? Don't we have nothing to fear?
What you are describing is David Brin's Transparent Society, an idea that I personally considered to be morally repugnant, given the subtle ways that people will persecute each other for being different from them.
I hear some campuses here in california are banning smoking while standing, you have to be walking, so students walk around the building. And of course they're working on banning it completely on campus.
Awesome! So you get exercise too! How enlightened.
Actually exercise while smoking is pretty bad for you -- you enhale more smoke, but less oxygen can be absorbed. I sometimes see some crazy people around where I live smoking and biking at the same time. Doesn't make much sense. Then again, smoking never made any sense either.
I might take up chewing tobacco as well.
Ugh. Don't even consider it. The health effects of chewing tobacco are even less pleasant than that of smoking.
Probably because when you voluntarily give up information it's not considered an invasion of privacy.
It is when it's used as a condition for a job which has nothing to do with the sites you'd be required to open up access to.