Sorry, but the situation is this: the Republicans are funded by one set of large companies, mainly those that produce tangible goods (the most vile being tobacco companies and firearms manufacturers). The Democrats are funded by another set of large companies, most of which do not produce tangible goods (law firms and RIAA/MPAA members). In this case, the Democrats are in the pocket of the big media companies, and we can only hope that the Republicans are in the pocket of Intel and IBM, and will therefore squash this.
As for the DMCA, remeber that the objectionable portion is just a small portion of the overall law, so most Congressmen who don't have a special interest in copyrights probably didn't even read that part. That being said, Orrin Hatch has voiced strong concerns, though I'm not sure if he's actually opposed or not.
Hmm, maybe have them fill in a box to show who it's from? That would make it seem less like spam, and also, I'm now really curious who would send that to me...
First of all, wrt the Ultima series, are you sure it was the good graphics that ruined it? After all, very few series stay good over long periods of time, they have a tendancy to get worse with each successive game/movie/book/whatever. There are notable exceptions, but claiming that Ultima XXII would kick ass today if they had just kept making games for the C64 seems pretty silly.
The point of game graphics indistinguishable from real life is to make your escape from reality more complete. Just because it LOOKS like real life doesn't mean it has to PLAY like real life. Just look at ID Software's games (from Wolf 3D to Q3A) for an example of games that have gotten progressively more realistic looking without becoming anything more like real life.
Right, but if the person's property rights are not recognized under British law, thaen the law does not apply. Again, as the parent said, the British did not recognize native americans or africans as having property rights.
Actually, the best part of the stupid happy ending was how the entire movie has flying cars, and then all of a sudden they're driving what looks like a new Lexus down a well-maintained highway! Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there another ending where he takes her out into the snow and shoots her?
I've heard that Harrison Ford was really against the voiceovers, and there has been some suggestion that he intentionally read them in a dull monotone to try to influence them not to put them in. He failed for the theatrical version, but succeeded for the director's cut, I guess.
That being said, I tended to like the voiceovers too. They were cheesy in a sort of detective movie way (sort of like Tracer Bullet in those Calvin and Hobbes comics), and they made you feel more like you were inside Deckard's head, rather than just watching a movie about a Blade Runner. Still, in a dvd, there's no reason why they can't have two language tracks, one of which throws in the voiceovers. They even ought to be able to make the multiple endings a menu option:)
Huh. Here's what I remember from when I took my scuba diving class, feel free to tell me why I'm wrong: I was told that people judge distance by automatically detecting the difference in time it took for the sound to reach the left vs. the right ear. Therefore, you'd be able to judge whether a sound was coming from the left or right, but NOT front or back.
The application for scuba diving is that because sound waves travel 3 times as fast underwater, it's almost impossible to tell what direction sounds are coming from.
Yes, copyrights and patents are narrow monoplies, granted by the government. But just because you're given a monopoly over redistribution of, say, Stayin' Alive, by the Beegees, it doesn't mean you're allowed to use that to gain a monopoly over all the music in the world.
PAC money only goes towards re-elections. You can't hold off on taking PAC money to build up a reputation for being honest, then take a huge load and retire to the Carribean. Say what you will about our system, but it does at least limit some types of corruption.
Sorry, I should have been more clear. What I meant was, if the opperating system availability were the same for both PowerPC and x86, would you still shell out for an Apple-built PowerPC? So, regardless of which you choose, you must run Windows (or Linux, or OS X, or whatever), the only difference is the hardware.
Price is not the last thing consumers think about. Price is generally the first thing consumers think about, and try to maximize quality and satisfaction based on a limited budget.
It's not apples and oranges. They're both personal computers. By every benchmark I have ever seen (except a half dozen Photoshop-based benchmarks), Macs provide less power and capability for eacy dollar spent. The architecture doesn't matter. Just because it happens to be PowerPC doesn't make it reasonably priced.
Why are they so deadset on being a hardware company? Their hardware is overpriced. They are not competitive in the hardware field. Their software, on the other hand, is both reasonably priced and superior to most other offerings. So why in God's name are they sacrificing their best division's profitablitity to prop up their weak hardware?
Before you all come back with "but macs are so well built," admit that if there were no mac OS, if Windows were ported to the G3/4, would you have bought a mac? I didn't think so.
Finally, it's not like there's some enormous future reward to being a hardware company. Think about it, who would you rather be: Microsoft or Intel? I've just never understood Apple's strategy...
I agree that laptops are a poor way to read books, but what about handhelds? There are many advantages: ability to store multiple books, being able to set it down without losing your place, and built in reading light. Reading books while walking around was one of the primary reasons I started building a wearable computer, actually.
Except of course, their installer is not GPL'ed. Why escape one proprietary OS for another? Red Hat, Mandrake, and Debian for me, thanks (laptop, desktop, and wearable, respectively).
How's that different from how things work now? The lasers would need LOS to your retina for this to work, and if they have LOS to your retina, then you would still be able to see a bilboard placed in the same spot.
I guess they might be able to make the ad look BIGGER then they could otherwise.
But it really bit ass. No one in that movie could sing (Nicole Kidman tried every bad singer's trick in the book, using a lot of breath in her voice and so forth, but still sounded like shit), the modern references were really annoying, the plot was derivative of Caberet (though significantly more predictable), and, christ, what else can I say?
Anyway, both my girlfriend and I hated it, and she loves musicals (I'm more indifferent).
Does anyone remember what Prodigy used to be like before they were an ISP? It was a totally different service, and may be infringing on BT's patent. It seems that the patent has something to do with keyed in hyperlinks, rather than clicked, exactly as Prodigy used to work.
While BT may be trying to set up a precedent to collect from other ISPs, this case is NOT about web links.
Right, but that would require a national law, an the nation, as a whole, is pro abortion. Hell California has some 55 Representatives, and the whole state is pro-abortion. So they wouldn't make such a law.
This is likely to be an expensive operation (a more complex surgery than a standard abortion procedure, which as stated above, leaves little more than a bloody pulp, plus an expensive piece of equipment). Who would pay for it? Furthermore, if ALL the unwanted pregnancies were put up for adoption, who would adopt them all?
The abortion debate is dead and buried, the pro-choice movement has won. Even if Roe vs. Wade were overturned tomorrow, few states would pass anti-abortion laws, meaning that all anyone has to do to get an abortion is cross over to a state where it's legal.
So, whether this technology overturns Roe vs. Wade or not (and quite frankly, Roe vs. Wade was a horrible butchery of justice, flagrantly beyond the scope of the constitution), the effect on the social landscape will be minimal.
Slashdot Mirror
As for the DMCA, remeber that the objectionable portion is just a small portion of the overall law, so most Congressmen who don't have a special interest in copyrights probably didn't even read that part. That being said, Orrin Hatch has voiced strong concerns, though I'm not sure if he's actually opposed or not.
Hmm, maybe have them fill in a box to show who it's from? That would make it seem less like spam, and also, I'm now really curious who would send that to me...
I just got spam from you yesterday!
The point of game graphics indistinguishable from real life is to make your escape from reality more complete. Just because it LOOKS like real life doesn't mean it has to PLAY like real life. Just look at ID Software's games (from Wolf 3D to Q3A) for an example of games that have gotten progressively more realistic looking without becoming anything more like real life.
Right, but if the person's property rights are not recognized under British law, thaen the law does not apply. Again, as the parent said, the British did not recognize native americans or africans as having property rights.
Actually, the best part of the stupid happy ending was how the entire movie has flying cars, and then all of a sudden they're driving what looks like a new Lexus down a well-maintained highway! Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there another ending where he takes her out into the snow and shoots her?
That being said, I tended to like the voiceovers too. They were cheesy in a sort of detective movie way (sort of like Tracer Bullet in those Calvin and Hobbes comics), and they made you feel more like you were inside Deckard's head, rather than just watching a movie about a Blade Runner. Still, in a dvd, there's no reason why they can't have two language tracks, one of which throws in the voiceovers. They even ought to be able to make the multiple endings a menu option
The application for scuba diving is that because sound waves travel 3 times as fast underwater, it's almost impossible to tell what direction sounds are coming from.
Yes, copyrights and patents are narrow monoplies, granted by the government. But just because you're given a monopoly over redistribution of, say, Stayin' Alive, by the Beegees, it doesn't mean you're allowed to use that to gain a monopoly over all the music in the world.
Assuming he knew that. I didn't know that :) Still, how about a cell phone, paid for by a credit card with a mail drop listed as the billing address?
Yes. There are some in San Francisco, at the very least.
Huh? He couldn't have given you a payphone number? I guess you'd probably know what region he lives in, but that's it.
PAC money only goes towards re-elections. You can't hold off on taking PAC money to build up a reputation for being honest, then take a huge load and retire to the Carribean. Say what you will about our system, but it does at least limit some types of corruption.
Price is not the last thing consumers think about. Price is generally the first thing consumers think about, and try to maximize quality and satisfaction based on a limited budget.
It's not apples and oranges. They're both personal computers. By every benchmark I have ever seen (except a half dozen Photoshop-based benchmarks), Macs provide less power and capability for eacy dollar spent. The architecture doesn't matter. Just because it happens to be PowerPC doesn't make it reasonably priced.
Before you all come back with "but macs are so well built," admit that if there were no mac OS, if Windows were ported to the G3/4, would you have bought a mac? I didn't think so.
Finally, it's not like there's some enormous future reward to being a hardware company. Think about it, who would you rather be: Microsoft or Intel? I've just never understood Apple's strategy...
I agree that laptops are a poor way to read books, but what about handhelds? There are many advantages: ability to store multiple books, being able to set it down without losing your place, and built in reading light. Reading books while walking around was one of the primary reasons I started building a wearable computer, actually.
Except of course, their installer is not GPL'ed. Why escape one proprietary OS for another? Red Hat, Mandrake, and Debian for me, thanks (laptop, desktop, and wearable, respectively).
I guess they might be able to make the ad look BIGGER then they could otherwise.
Dude, I think you misspelled "Tolkein."
Anyway, both my girlfriend and I hated it, and she loves musicals (I'm more indifferent).
While BT may be trying to set up a precedent to collect from other ISPs, this case is NOT about web links.
Right, but that would require a national law, an the nation, as a whole, is pro abortion. Hell California has some 55 Representatives, and the whole state is pro-abortion. So they wouldn't make such a law.
This is likely to be an expensive operation (a more complex surgery than a standard abortion procedure, which as stated above, leaves little more than a bloody pulp, plus an expensive piece of equipment). Who would pay for it? Furthermore, if ALL the unwanted pregnancies were put up for adoption, who would adopt them all?
So, whether this technology overturns Roe vs. Wade or not (and quite frankly, Roe vs. Wade was a horrible butchery of justice, flagrantly beyond the scope of the constitution), the effect on the social landscape will be minimal.