At $10 a gb, that would still cost $10 million for a petabyte.
I don't think people quite understand how much data a petabyte is. I see some 4TB drives on Amazon running around $300 each (consumer grade drives - go with me on this). How long does it take the average user to fill up 4TB with stuff they are pulling over the internet? Many ISPs cap you at 200 gig of data a month, some are lower, so 20 months if you were capping out your bandwidth cap every month to fill one of these drives. A Petabyte is 250 of these drives.
Even for corporations, a Petabyte is a considerable amount of data, unless you are someone like Google or Netflix or something. A non-profit I volunteer at has a considerable amount of HD video we toss around to the different campuses over a fiber network, and the video we generate from an event can easily be over a terabyte as we archive each camera. it wouldn't surprise me that between simulcasting and moving files around if we don't hit 20 terabytes of data a week - on a LANDLINE FIBER network. That would take us a year to hit a Petabyte.
This carrier is offering a Petabyte of data on a MOBILE network. That is a considerable amount of data, especially considering its 4G - I doubt a hundred users using 4G to constntly stream HD or even UHD video could even come close to, say, 50 terabytes a month. Shoot, on 4G, if a single user is constantly maxing out his bandwidth, they might hit 400-500 gig a month.
A petabyte of 4G data is a considerable amount of data, and is going to take a LONG time, even with hundreds of users, to hit this cap. I truthfully only seeing a plan like this being useful to people like BBC (since its in Britain) with field reporters piping in reports back to the home office, and this would be considerably cheaper than launching a satelite and considerably easier and cheaper to send out a reporter with a camera and 4g hotspot as opposed to a newsvan with a satelite truck or antenna truck. The cost savings would be huge.
Also if they are spreading this data across multiple 4G devices, this may be a cost savings for connecting remote users and offices in rural areas. I mean, think if you had a company with 1000 offices in rural areas (sounds a bit much for a country the size of Britain, but its an arbitrary number) that needed constant access to data and apps at corporate's data center - then think about the cost of running fiber, T1s or whatever out to them - as they are rural it is going to be incredibly expensive for each branch.
8 Million GBP may sound like a ton of money, but they are offering a ton of data in exchange. This may be very attractive to a few large corporations with tons of users using mobile data, corporations with tons of field users or rural offices, and news agencies.
My big question is if EE is going to use these fees to help them build up their network. I am not sure how efficient EE is, but if they sale a few of these packages, I am sure that those users will be expecting exceptional service, and if you get a few of those users all clustered together in a place like London, you are going to have a pretty congested network, and if I am outside of London, I better hope I am in a 4G coverage area. So if I am any of the customers I have mentioned above, than I am hoping that EE would be using this to help finance the building out of their network infastructure.
So you can only do this if you have Android 4 or newer? That doesn't help users on prepaid networks that have never recieved OTA updates to their devices, and my Galaxy model does NOT have a Cyanogenmod build, and rooting the device would kill support for some of my apps.
I would love to get rid of some of the MetroPCS crapware - that is killing my device worse than anything else.
If anyone can find a way to disable crapware on 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 without rooting, please let me know!
TubeMate is no longer in the Play store and you have to install by an alternative media site or downloading the apk. The YouTube downloaders I have seen in the Play store are either virus infected or just simply do not work - which may be why they are still there.
YouTube downloaders are disappearing from the Chrome site, and you have to download the extensions from the developers sites and manually install them. The extensions that still do appear in the Chrome store mostly do not work with current Chrome builds (or rather, out of the half-dozen ones I have tried, none worked - I didn't bother checking more because I found one on a developers site that worked).
If Chrome disables YouTube downloaders all together, I just won't use Chrome. There are many perfectly legal reasons for wanting to download videos from YouTube, the main reason be for showing videos in places that might not have Internet (ie some churches, lecture halls, my non-smart television, etc). And 99% of the time, it is not copyrighted (ie music videos, movie clips) that I am downloading.
I also sometimes use YouTube's tools (such as video stabilizer) on my personal videos, and download them when it finishes processing. Google's war on YouTube downloaders has lead me to pretty much using Firefox with extensions or stand-alone programs to download videos.
This was my thought. I have already gone to Firefox when viewing YouTube because the extensions don't work half of the time anymore under Chrome, and installing them is a pain in the butt.
I agree that 10% sounds low, but its better than nothing. Why would a store want to sell a product that affects their business model? Now if said store got a kickback from it....
It also keeps bookstores from having to stock as many physical books. I am not sure what the percentage rate a store gets from selling a physical book, but I can certainly see this being an attractive offer for many B&M stores.
Google apps doesn't want to support obsolete software. Microsoft doesn't want to support obsolete software. Run Firefox or Opera (I think Chrome still supports XP as well).
When Firefox and others stop supporting XP, and people find that XP no longer meets their needs, they will upgrade.
Tough shit, XP is 12 years old. Get over it.
Your corporation still runs XP as many of your apps are not compatable with newer versions and you also use Google Apps in the workplace? Sucks to be you - you have known for years that Microsoft was EOLing XP. You should have suspected that others would stop supporting it as well. Looks like you are going to have to roll out Windows 7, and setup a Citrix enviornment to run your legacy apps - or setup virtual machines.
Seriously, corporations, learn about Citrix.App virtualization
Um, are you refering to GAS drilling, which did start around 2006-2010, or OIL drilling, which is what the article is refering to. OIL drilling has been taking place in Texas for about 100 years.
TFA also says that these earthquakes started in 2006, although it peaked in 2009 to 2011.
The article also says
The data suggest that there is a previously unidentified fault running through the area, and that the CO2 injections effectively lubricate that fault, enabling slippage. (Scientists documented a series of earthquakes in the area from 1975 through 1982, but those tremors were linked to water injections, also intended to boost oil production.)
What the article seems to suggest isn't that drilling causes earthquakes, but rather there was an unidentified fault in this area that seems to be set off from injecting water and / or CO2 into the drill site.
There have been several tremors in North Texas over the recent years that seem to be related to fracking, but many of the tremors reported on the news are under a 3.0. Most people don't even notice, and there is a known fault in the area
So, to summerize, what I am gathering from the original article is NOT that drilling is the issue, or drilling on a fault line is an issue, or injecting water / CO2 is an issue - what seems to be an issue is drilling with the injection of CO2 / water on a fault line. Truthfully, this sounds like a DUH study to me.
The World Bank will fund clean energy plants. Countries can build whatever they want - but if they choose to build coal, they won't get money from the World Bank.
Sounds reasonable. Your country can pay for whatever it wants, but if you want money from us, you have to use it for a specific purpose.
I can't pull up the Google Plus link at work (it's blocked) but it does say San Diego law enforcement. So, there are roads with 75mph speed limits inside of the San Diego city limits? I find that hard to believe - California may be different, but most of the country limits you to speeds of 60 or 65 inside of the city (some toll roads may go up to 70), but you really only see speeds higher than that on straight roads outside of the city.
The California Department of Motor Vehicle website says this:
The maximum speed limit on most California highways is 65 mph. You may drive 70 mph where posted. Unless otherwise posted, the maximum speed limit is 55 mph on two-lane undivided highways and for vehicles towing trailers.
It seems to me that the poorest, most underdeveloped nations that contribute the least to global emissions are the ones getting the short end of the stick from this policy
So the World Bank provides money for wind, solar and hydro-electric. The only thing this really hurts is coal miners. Yes, I feel sorry for miners who may loose jobs because of decreased demand, but if a country's economy is based on coal-mining, then they got serious issues (of course, if they are the poorest, most undeveloped nations, they have economic problems anyways, so I guess that is a circular argument).
This sounds pretty reasonable to me - the World Bank will fund power plants around the world, but they have to meet certain enviornmental standards? How does that hurt anyone?
That would still leave tens of millions of usernames that do not have access. Any half-way decent security software should see failed login attempts from a certain range of IPs and blacklist it - or at least flag that server's admin and Adobe's Information Security team.Source code should also not be kept on a server in the DMZ. So either 1) Adobe was a complete idiot and had zero security 2) Adobe's VPN system got compromised and the internal network has little security (possible) 3) it was an inside job (my guess)
Two of the planets closer in are a bit bigger than earth, but at orbital periods of 58 and 8 days, they're a bit too hot for my taste.
If I am reading the chart right, there are two planets that are about 3x larger than earth, with orbital times of 121 days and one at 91 days. I can't tell from the chart if the planets are gas or rock, but given that the star is about the same size.... The one orbiting at 121 days would be around the same orbit as Mercury. Given that Mercury does have a thin atmosphere, it is possible that a planet of this size at this distance could support life, although if it does, I am sure they would look nothing like us (we would probably still cook).
The planets futher out have orbits of 210 and 331 Earth days, but are 8.1 and 11.3x larger than Earth. However, if they had moons....
Actually, that could be a possibility. As this is the most extensive exoplanetary system discovered to date, we do not have enough data to really determine what is "normal". However, quite a few of the exoplanets I have been reading about do orbit their star pretty closely (although I would say I haven't even looked at 5% of the 1000 exoplanets out there).
It is a feasable theory to say that our planetary system is unusually loose, however, until we have more data on more systems, its impossible to say.
A bit more serious - does anyone know if the habitable zone is the same regardless of star size (ie the futher you are from the star, the more heat disipates, regardless of star size?). Just wondering. It seems logical that planets in a smaller star would be more tightly packed together and planets around a larger star are more loosly packed together, but I do not know enough about that. Can someone shed some light on that?
Most manufacturers would give their eye teeth to have a product that their customers love as much as our users love Wincows XP. It does everything that our people need done, it is stable and secure and simple and they know it well
More like 3.5. Remember - Windows 8.1 was recently released.
Seriously, what if I came up and said "Dos works just fine for me, and I refuse to upgrade, therefore everyone must make products for DOS so that I can continue to use it"
It's a stupid argument - if software doesn't support your operating system, than apparently your operating system is NOT working for you.
What if someone was running a version 1.0 of Linux? It works. Wait, it doesn't support USB or UDF or 64 bit hardware and so forth and so on? No, I don't want to recompile my kernel - you should just support what I am using.
Look, if people don't want to upgrade, that is their perogative (sp?), but they shouldn't be thick-headed enough to expect that they will still be supported and protected.
Disaster recovery was already part of our operations. When Sandy hit, it took out a couple of branches for a few days, but operations were just DRed over to other geographic areas. We have fiber cuts all the time, and traffic just gets rerouted or DRed to another area.
Pretty much when Sandy hit, everything happened exactly as it was supposed to.
You know, this baffles me. No offense to people who are hungry, but I don't get it. It is not all that difficult to get on Food Stamps (if you make, say, less than $1200 a month). WIC is available for many families. But let's say you don't qualify for food stamps....
There are churches in practically every city in the US - many have food pantries. Many counties and communities across the US have food banks. About the only way I could see there being an issue is if you lived out in the sticks with no transportation to get to one of these places.
As for kids, practically all (or all?) public schools in the US offer free lunch programs (sometimes (all the time?)breakfast as well), and many community centers and churches offer summer lunch programs.
My experience with people I know who have kids who are hungry isn't from lack of support - it is from pride. People WILL go hungry before they humble themselves enough to say they need help. I've seen it - I've had neighbors who send their kids to me a couple of times a week because they know I will feed them, but who won't accept any themselves even though they may not have eaten in several days. Most I will finally be able to talk the mothers into eventually going down to the food stamp office and - guess what - they qualify!
So I don't buy at all the argument that people are going hungry in the US because we are exporting food that would mean that store shelves and food banks would have to be empty, and that is just not true.
Once again, this may not be true in rural areas, but in urban and suburban enviornments, the argument doesn't hold up. The problem isn't that there isn't enough food in the US because we are exporting it, as you imply. And the problem isn't that there isn't options for people who are hungry to get food - there is. The issue is that people are either too proud or too mentally incapable of understanding how to ask for help.
Once the entire movie had been edited, an Edit Decision List of marked frames was turned over to a film laboratory where the actual pieces of film were spliced together in the correct order.
So the raw footage was placed across multiple laserdiscs, the editor would then go through and decide how the movie was cut, then they would take the edit list and send it over to the film labs where they would splice the actual film together following the edits they made in EditDroid
Slashdot Mirror
At $10 a gb, that would still cost $10 million for a petabyte.
I don't think people quite understand how much data a petabyte is. I see some 4TB drives on Amazon running around $300 each (consumer grade drives - go with me on this). How long does it take the average user to fill up 4TB with stuff they are pulling over the internet? Many ISPs cap you at 200 gig of data a month, some are lower, so 20 months if you were capping out your bandwidth cap every month to fill one of these drives. A Petabyte is 250 of these drives.
Even for corporations, a Petabyte is a considerable amount of data, unless you are someone like Google or Netflix or something. A non-profit I volunteer at has a considerable amount of HD video we toss around to the different campuses over a fiber network, and the video we generate from an event can easily be over a terabyte as we archive each camera. it wouldn't surprise me that between simulcasting and moving files around if we don't hit 20 terabytes of data a week - on a LANDLINE FIBER network. That would take us a year to hit a Petabyte.
This carrier is offering a Petabyte of data on a MOBILE network. That is a considerable amount of data, especially considering its 4G - I doubt a hundred users using 4G to constntly stream HD or even UHD video could even come close to, say, 50 terabytes a month. Shoot, on 4G, if a single user is constantly maxing out his bandwidth, they might hit 400-500 gig a month.
A petabyte of 4G data is a considerable amount of data, and is going to take a LONG time, even with hundreds of users, to hit this cap. I truthfully only seeing a plan like this being useful to people like BBC (since its in Britain) with field reporters piping in reports back to the home office, and this would be considerably cheaper than launching a satelite and considerably easier and cheaper to send out a reporter with a camera and 4g hotspot as opposed to a newsvan with a satelite truck or antenna truck. The cost savings would be huge.
Also if they are spreading this data across multiple 4G devices, this may be a cost savings for connecting remote users and offices in rural areas. I mean, think if you had a company with 1000 offices in rural areas (sounds a bit much for a country the size of Britain, but its an arbitrary number) that needed constant access to data and apps at corporate's data center - then think about the cost of running fiber, T1s or whatever out to them - as they are rural it is going to be incredibly expensive for each branch.
8 Million GBP may sound like a ton of money, but they are offering a ton of data in exchange. This may be very attractive to a few large corporations with tons of users using mobile data, corporations with tons of field users or rural offices, and news agencies.
My big question is if EE is going to use these fees to help them build up their network. I am not sure how efficient EE is, but if they sale a few of these packages, I am sure that those users will be expecting exceptional service, and if you get a few of those users all clustered together in a place like London, you are going to have a pretty congested network, and if I am outside of London, I better hope I am in a 4G coverage area. So if I am any of the customers I have mentioned above, than I am hoping that EE would be using this to help finance the building out of their network infastructure.
So you can only do this if you have Android 4 or newer? That doesn't help users on prepaid networks that have never recieved OTA updates to their devices, and my Galaxy model does NOT have a Cyanogenmod build, and rooting the device would kill support for some of my apps.
I would love to get rid of some of the MetroPCS crapware - that is killing my device worse than anything else.
If anyone can find a way to disable crapware on 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 without rooting, please let me know!
TubeMate is no longer in the Play store and you have to install by an alternative media site or downloading the apk. The YouTube downloaders I have seen in the Play store are either virus infected or just simply do not work - which may be why they are still there.
YouTube downloaders are disappearing from the Chrome site, and you have to download the extensions from the developers sites and manually install them. The extensions that still do appear in the Chrome store mostly do not work with current Chrome builds (or rather, out of the half-dozen ones I have tried, none worked - I didn't bother checking more because I found one on a developers site that worked).
If Chrome disables YouTube downloaders all together, I just won't use Chrome. There are many perfectly legal reasons for wanting to download videos from YouTube, the main reason be for showing videos in places that might not have Internet (ie some churches, lecture halls, my non-smart television, etc). And 99% of the time, it is not copyrighted (ie music videos, movie clips) that I am downloading.
I also sometimes use YouTube's tools (such as video stabilizer) on my personal videos, and download them when it finishes processing. Google's war on YouTube downloaders has lead me to pretty much using Firefox with extensions or stand-alone programs to download videos.
This was my thought. I have already gone to Firefox when viewing YouTube because the extensions don't work half of the time anymore under Chrome, and installing them is a pain in the butt.
I agree that 10% sounds low, but its better than nothing. Why would a store want to sell a product that affects their business model? Now if said store got a kickback from it....
It also keeps bookstores from having to stock as many physical books. I am not sure what the percentage rate a store gets from selling a physical book, but I can certainly see this being an attractive offer for many B&M stores.
Google apps doesn't want to support obsolete software. Microsoft doesn't want to support obsolete software. Run Firefox or Opera (I think Chrome still supports XP as well).
When Firefox and others stop supporting XP, and people find that XP no longer meets their needs, they will upgrade.
Tough shit, XP is 12 years old. Get over it.
Your corporation still runs XP as many of your apps are not compatable with newer versions and you also use Google Apps in the workplace? Sucks to be you - you have known for years that Microsoft was EOLing XP. You should have suspected that others would stop supporting it as well. Looks like you are going to have to roll out Windows 7, and setup a Citrix enviornment to run your legacy apps - or setup virtual machines.
Seriously, corporations, learn about Citrix.App virtualization
Since Texas is far away from any fault lines that I know of I don’t think this is the case.
http://legendsofgreenisle.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/texasfaultlines.gif
Um, are you refering to GAS drilling, which did start around 2006-2010, or OIL drilling, which is what the article is refering to. OIL drilling has been taking place in Texas for about 100 years.
http://www.texasalmanac.com/topics/business/oil-and-texas-cultural-history
TFA also says that these earthquakes started in 2006, although it peaked in 2009 to 2011.
The article also says
The data suggest that there is a previously unidentified fault running through the area, and that the CO2 injections effectively lubricate that fault, enabling slippage. (Scientists documented a series of earthquakes in the area from 1975 through 1982, but those tremors were linked to water injections, also intended to boost oil production.)
What the article seems to suggest isn't that drilling causes earthquakes, but rather there was an unidentified fault in this area that seems to be set off from injecting water and / or CO2 into the drill site.
There have been several tremors in North Texas over the recent years that seem to be related to fracking, but many of the tremors reported on the news are under a 3.0. Most people don't even notice, and there is a known fault in the area
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message121527/pg1
So, to summerize, what I am gathering from the original article is NOT that drilling is the issue, or drilling on a fault line is an issue, or injecting water / CO2 is an issue - what seems to be an issue is drilling with the injection of CO2 / water on a fault line. Truthfully, this sounds like a DUH study to me.
Your own question is the answer.
The World Bank will fund clean energy plants. Countries can build whatever they want - but if they choose to build coal, they won't get money from the World Bank.
Sounds reasonable. Your country can pay for whatever it wants, but if you want money from us, you have to use it for a specific purpose.
I can't pull up the Google Plus link at work (it's blocked) but it does say San Diego law enforcement. So, there are roads with 75mph speed limits inside of the San Diego city limits? I find that hard to believe - California may be different, but most of the country limits you to speeds of 60 or 65 inside of the city (some toll roads may go up to 70), but you really only see speeds higher than that on straight roads outside of the city.
The California Department of Motor Vehicle website says this:
The maximum speed limit on most California highways is 65 mph. You may drive 70 mph where posted. Unless otherwise posted, the maximum speed limit is 55 mph on two-lane undivided highways and for vehicles towing trailers.
http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/speed_limits.htm
75mph zone my foot! And inside of city limits? She was speeding - that is why she was pulled over.
It seems to me that the poorest, most underdeveloped nations that contribute the least to global emissions are the ones getting the short end of the stick from this policy
So the World Bank provides money for wind, solar and hydro-electric. The only thing this really hurts is coal miners. Yes, I feel sorry for miners who may loose jobs because of decreased demand, but if a country's economy is based on coal-mining, then they got serious issues (of course, if they are the poorest, most undeveloped nations, they have economic problems anyways, so I guess that is a circular argument).
This sounds pretty reasonable to me - the World Bank will fund power plants around the world, but they have to meet certain enviornmental standards? How does that hurt anyone?
Mod parent up
That would still leave tens of millions of usernames that do not have access. Any half-way decent security software should see failed login attempts from a certain range of IPs and blacklist it - or at least flag that server's admin and Adobe's Information Security team.Source code should also not be kept on a server in the DMZ. So either
1) Adobe was a complete idiot and had zero security
2) Adobe's VPN system got compromised and the internal network has little security (possible)
3) it was an inside job (my guess)
For Photoshop? Why? There is already a lens flair filter included
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG9fRbZLqEs
Two of the planets closer in are a bit bigger than earth, but at orbital periods of 58 and 8 days, they're a bit too hot for my taste.
If I am reading the chart right, there are two planets that are about 3x larger than earth, with orbital times of 121 days and one at 91 days. I can't tell from the chart if the planets are gas or rock, but given that the star is about the same size.... The one orbiting at 121 days would be around the same orbit as Mercury. Given that Mercury does have a thin atmosphere, it is possible that a planet of this size at this distance could support life, although if it does, I am sure they would look nothing like us (we would probably still cook).
The planets futher out have orbits of 210 and 331 Earth days, but are 8.1 and 11.3x larger than Earth. However, if they had moons....
Are you saying there is something in America OTHER than the USA? Whoa, you need to get that commie mindset out of here! Go back to Japan, you commie!
(Yes, I know Japan is not communist, you would just be surprised how many people are out there who thing anything that is not "America" is communist)
Actually, that could be a possibility. As this is the most extensive exoplanetary system discovered to date, we do not have enough data to really determine what is "normal". However, quite a few of the exoplanets I have been reading about do orbit their star pretty closely (although I would say I haven't even looked at 5% of the 1000 exoplanets out there).
It is a feasable theory to say that our planetary system is unusually loose, however, until we have more data on more systems, its impossible to say.
A bit more serious - does anyone know if the habitable zone is the same regardless of star size (ie the futher you are from the star, the more heat disipates, regardless of star size?). Just wondering. It seems logical that planets in a smaller star would be more tightly packed together and planets around a larger star are more loosly packed together, but I do not know enough about that. Can someone shed some light on that?
if you are using those machines in a lab enviornment, they should not be connected to the internet anyways.
Most manufacturers would give their eye teeth to have a product that their customers love as much as our users love Wincows XP. It does everything that our people need done, it is stable and secure and simple and they know it well
Something like.... Windows 7?
More like 3.5. Remember - Windows 8.1 was recently released.
Seriously, what if I came up and said "Dos works just fine for me, and I refuse to upgrade, therefore everyone must make products for DOS so that I can continue to use it"
It's a stupid argument - if software doesn't support your operating system, than apparently your operating system is NOT working for you.
What if someone was running a version 1.0 of Linux? It works. Wait, it doesn't support USB or UDF or 64 bit hardware and so forth and so on? No, I don't want to recompile my kernel - you should just support what I am using.
Look, if people don't want to upgrade, that is their perogative (sp?), but they shouldn't be thick-headed enough to expect that they will still be supported and protected.
Disaster recovery was already part of our operations. When Sandy hit, it took out a couple of branches for a few days, but operations were just DRed over to other geographic areas. We have fiber cuts all the time, and traffic just gets rerouted or DRed to another area.
Pretty much when Sandy hit, everything happened exactly as it was supposed to.
Yes, but your argument is that these people starve because the US exports food, which is just plane stupid. The issue is NOT a lack of food in the US.
Where are you getting your information from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaserDisc#DVD
LaserDisc is analog. Something doesn't become digital simply because it's read with a laser. Look at laser turntables.
http://www.elpj.com/
On top of that people in US starve
You know, this baffles me. No offense to people who are hungry, but I don't get it. It is not all that difficult to get on Food Stamps (if you make, say, less than $1200 a month). WIC is available for many families. But let's say you don't qualify for food stamps....
There are churches in practically every city in the US - many have food pantries. Many counties and communities across the US have food banks. About the only way I could see there being an issue is if you lived out in the sticks with no transportation to get to one of these places.
As for kids, practically all (or all?) public schools in the US offer free lunch programs (sometimes (all the time?)breakfast as well), and many community centers and churches offer summer lunch programs.
My experience with people I know who have kids who are hungry isn't from lack of support - it is from pride. People WILL go hungry before they humble themselves enough to say they need help. I've seen it - I've had neighbors who send their kids to me a couple of times a week because they know I will feed them, but who won't accept any themselves even though they may not have eaten in several days. Most I will finally be able to talk the mothers into eventually going down to the food stamp office and - guess what - they qualify!
So I don't buy at all the argument that people are going hungry in the US because we are exporting food that would mean that store shelves and food banks would have to be empty, and that is just not true.
Once again, this may not be true in rural areas, but in urban and suburban enviornments, the argument doesn't hold up. The problem isn't that there isn't enough food in the US because we are exporting it, as you imply. And the problem isn't that there isn't options for people who are hungry to get food - there is. The issue is that people are either too proud or too mentally incapable of understanding how to ask for help.
From Wikipedia:
Once the entire movie had been edited, an Edit Decision List of marked frames was turned over to a film laboratory where the actual pieces of film were spliced together in the correct order.
So the raw footage was placed across multiple laserdiscs, the editor would then go through and decide how the movie was cut, then they would take the edit list and send it over to the film labs where they would splice the actual film together following the edits they made in EditDroid