but there is no DRM on the iTunes Music Store music anymore - they are regular AAC files that are just tagged with your Apple ID. They will play in anything that supports AAC.
While I'm glad they went to DRM-free, I still don't buy from iTunes because 1) they do tag them and 2) they do AAC and not mp3. I'll stick with buying cd's and ripping them myself.
We have so many bullshit "safety" regulations that add unnecessary weight that it's not even funny (those 25 airbags in your new car that you never use because most people aren't in a major accident).
Bullshit son, safety regulations are far more stricter in europe and we manage to keep our cars light and fast, hell you (ford etc) manage to sell car fast and light here as well, regulations are only the problem if you're fixated on a "government is the problem" dogma
No, it wasn't until the US government "got tough" (meaning, bought off by companies producing the "safety" features, such as airbags, stability control, ABS, etc) about safety that car weights shot up during the 90's / early 2000's. I highly doubt that the average new car in Europe has as many airbags as the average new car in the US. Also, I never said that was the ONLY reason - I also noted that the increase in size was another reason. Compare the new Ford Taurus to the Taurus from 10 years ago - it's ridiculously large now, as are most vehicles sold in the US. It's quite common for a vehicle to be redesigned just for the US market to be a few inches longer and wider than the model sold in the rest of the world - all of that is pure dead weight that kills mpg.
I'd say that, at least for European my make/model, your arguments of ballooning and 'bullshit' safety measures don't fly.
But that's the problem, companies sell different products in Europe than in the US. The bottom of the line S40 in the US has a 2.4 liter engine and weighs 3,238 lbs, - so 458 lbs more. Granted, the 2.4 liter engine will weigh more than the 1.8, but not anywhere near 458 lbs more - so that's a good 300 lbs (or more) of extra weight that has no purpose. They don't have mpg numbers on the US Volvo site, but I'm willing to bet that they're much lower than they are in Europe.
Increased weight always increases the amount of power required to travel at a given speed. Also, regenerative breaking isn't even close to providing that kind of electricity. Then there's the fact that we're still probably at least a decade away from a truly usable electric car (and that's still ignoring the issue of long charge times / nowhere to pull over and charge).
I'm a big car guy, so I find it amusing that you put in an advertisement for the Tesla, when every test review I've read / seen has shown it to not even get half of it's stated range when it's actually driven like you would drive a normal car.
You're partially correct. Yes, it has gotten ridiculous that people think they "need" a 300hp mid-size sedan just to go to work and the store. However, an even more important issue in why mpg hasn't improved more is WEIGHT. We have so many bullshit "safety" regulations that add unnecessary weight that it's not even funny (those 25 airbags in your new car that you never use because most people aren't in a major accident) -then there's the fact that car sizes have ballooned over the last decade to where a BMW 5 series is now the same size as a 7 series used to be and a Nissan Altima is now the size that the Maxima used to be, and you completely murder mpg. It's ridiculous that it's normal now for a mid-size car to weight 4,000 lbs - it shouldn't weigh more than about 3,300 lb, tops.
We need to cut weight first, which will increase mpg / acceleration right there, then we can cut engine size too and have the same power / weight ratio, yet MUCH better mpg. Mazda has already stated that they're planning on cutting weight on their vehicles - I believe their first target was 10% reduction in weight by 2012 (maybe 2014) and then shave 10% off that within 4-6 years later.
I've been saying for years that there's no reason that American car companies can't sell the same cars they sell in Europe in the US - in the last couple of years, they've finally started listening (at least Ford has). Starting later this year, there will be one Focus for the entire world again!
Also, I'm pretty sure you're looking at imperial gallons, not US gallons - imperial gallons are bigger, so they skew mpg numbers when trying to compare cars.
...Or we could just stop sticking our noses where they don't belong and quit interfering with internal issues in the Middle East, then we wouldn't have pissed off Muslims wanting to blow us up.
As for these highly immoral scanners, I can't wait for someone in the US to sue over child-porn after their kid goes through one. I sure as hell would if I was a parent (not that I'd ever go to an airport using one of these).
There have been controversial rules passed recently requiring anyone who has regular, official contact with children to register, yes - so a football coach teaching minors would indeed be affected.
I see people on here who try to claim that the UK isn't rapidly running to being a dictatorship, but bullshit laws like this are exactly what I'm talking about. Every time the US walks a yard towards totalitarianism, the UK sprints 100 yards closer to it.
50 years ago the different countries were racing to see who could be the best - now they're racing to see who can be the worst.
I am a forensic investigator and it terrifies me that most people I meet in my field don't seem to care who goes to jail as long as somebody goes to jail.
And that is why I have virtually no respect for anyone in the "justice" system. They don't give a damn about justice, they only care about their own ego.
The fact that they let a government (and therefore extremely biased) group decide this severely harms the credibility of the decision. The fact that they only gave one day to hearing debate on it only further damages their credibility. When we're talking things that will have massive impacts on people's lives and countries economies all over the world, it's worth being as close to 100% sure as you can before making a decision.
Exactly. Especially in mediums that are only (or at least primarily) going to be read by educated people, there's no reason to prevent debate - the facts will speak for themselves.
Honestly? I buy dozens of movies every year. However, I do download stuff to preview movies that look "ok" but I'd never pay for without seeing (and would never pay to see). I've bought many movies that way, as well as seasons of tv shows. So from me, movie companies make a lot of money from my occasional downloading - because if I never got to see it for free, I'd never have seen it at all and wouldn't have enjoyed it and purchased it on dvd.
No, they didn't act irresponsibly. It's bad business for a bank to give out a loan to someone who's unlikely to pay it off - hence why those people were denied loans and the government created the CRA to strong-arm banks into making those loans. What's good for the bank (meaning increasing profits) is to NOT give out loans to people unlikely to pay it off.
I beg you, learn something about economics, finance, or banking in general (as in read a textbook). All you're doing is making yourself look ridiculous by spouting off irrelevant crap and insults instead of learning how the industry actually works.
they're introducing new (same as the old) REG-U-LA-TIONS
so it doesn't happen again. because REG-U-LA-TIONS will fix the problem. DUH
If you knew anything about the history of our economy, you'd know that every time the economy is good regulations are loosened, then after people get greedy and make mistakes, regulations are tightened because people want someone to blame and by having more regulations, they can pretend that things will be different next time. It's a cycle that happens endlessly.
The banks were deregulated, however, it was the CRA efforts that lead to the out of control housing bubble. There are plenty of articles online if you feel like looking it up (you don't). You're the one being partisan by screaming "OMFG CAPITALISM KILLS!!"
I never blamed Carter, I simply said that he was the one who signed the bill for the CRA but Clinton was the one who strengthened it. If you look at home prices, you'll see that they started shooting up at roughly the same time that Clinton enhanced the CRA. Bush did plenty of stupid shit (Patriot Act for one), but he didn't do anything to affect the housing bubble one way or another. I despise Republicans and Democrats for being horribly irresponsible financially, but if you can't scream "you're just an evil Republican", then you lose your only "debate" tactic.
You provide no facts, cited or not, just mindless bashing of anyone who acknowledges that irresponsible person finance on a nation-wide scale leads to economic problems. Take an economics class, read some news, and quit foaming at the mouth when someone tells you to be responsible for your actions.
I don't know enough about McCarthy to make a solid statement on him one way or another, however, the Venona Project (released to the public in 1995) proved that McCarthy was at least partially right, by showing that there were communist spies in the US government.
when your economy is trashed by greedy speculation then fear and hysteria. that's what sent germany to the dogs: the great depression, the collapse of the financial world
Germany went downhill because of the brutal raping it received in the peace treaty after WWI. That is also what caused the overwhelming resentment of the rest of the world (or at least the rest of Europe and the US) which resulted in Hitler's rise to power.
we need strong government regulation in the financial sector
We need regulation - however, once you hit a certain point, regulation turns into control, which then harms the economy due to government officials not having the slightest clue about how to run a company, let alone an entire industry.
the assholes (greenspan and co) who dismantled the 1930s era (irony) protections need to be grilled a la congressional hearings and roundly castigated for their dangerous irresponsibility
Actually it was the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) that lead to the housing bubble / slew of bad mortgages. The CRA was started by Carter and strengthened by Clinton and it existed to put pressure on banks to give loans to people (specifically mortgages) who would normally be turned away by banks (due to the high risk of them defaulting) because the government thought everyone should own a home, even if they can't afford it. That resulted in millions of people getting mortgages when they never should have had one as well as ballooning home prices. Add on top of that the fact that the average American spends way more than they earn each year (usually on crap they don't need) and you have a recipe for financial disaster. If the banks had been left alone and the CRA never existed, then home prices would have stayed in check (look at historical averages, home prices always adjusted for inflation but in real dollars, they stayed essentially constant - once the CRA was strengthened, all of the sudden home prices started going up way faster than inflation) and there wouldn't be anywhere near as many people defaulting on mortgages. The current recession is about 60% the fault of average citizens racking up way too much debt (mainly on credit cards) and about 40% the government naively pushing banks to give risky mortgages (which exacerbated the problem of people racking up too much debt).
I find it amusing that you demonize the Tea Partiers (who have no official group, it's a generic term given to anyone upset about government control of our lives and government taking away our freedom) for being "fascists" when the whole reason they're upset is because they don't want fascism.
Speeding has very little to do with unsafe driving. Unsafe driving is caused by tailgating, not using your turn signals, not looking before changing lanes, swerving through traffic to try and get ahead - things like that. You can drive fast and still drive safely (as is shown in many European countries where it's legal to drive significantly faster than the US, yet the number of accidents are fewer). I say we take a page out of Germany's book and start issuing tickets for tailgating and not speeding, unless it's insanely excessive speeding (like 90 in a 45 zone).
What/b did with Boxxy was pure bullshit (she never did anything, it was the people posting her everywhere that annoyed them), but I'd be more than glad if/b did that with these guys. You totally deserve it if you want an internship as a Certified Asshole.
So Qzukk, by your (lack of) reasoning, since you were mean to me here, I can go kill myself and my family can sue you. Do you think that's fair? Didn't think so.
She chose herself because she wanted to. Bullying had just as much to do with it as having acne or her parents not being interested in her did. I actually did RTFA and what she had going on was so minor compared to what a lot of kids (who don't kill themselves) go through that it's not even funny.
but if you honestly can't sympathize with her situation, then you've forgotten how difficult it can all seem to be, to a teenager.
No, I don't sympathize and no, I haven't forgotten what it was like at all. I had similar stuff happen to me, did I kill myself? No. Hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of kids experience this every day, yet only a handful kill themselves - that pretty clearly shows that bullying has nothing to do with suicide, it's just a scapegoat for the family / friends to use instead of accepting that they failed to make the girl realize that she had people who cared about her and wanted her around.
By you claiming that someone forced her to do this and that they should be punished just for not liking her, you are not only promoting irresponsibility, but promoting people being weak and not ignoring / standing up to bullies.
Slashdot Mirror
but there is no DRM on the iTunes Music Store music anymore - they are regular AAC files that are just tagged with your Apple ID. They will play in anything that supports AAC.
While I'm glad they went to DRM-free, I still don't buy from iTunes because 1) they do tag them and 2) they do AAC and not mp3. I'll stick with buying cd's and ripping them myself.
We have so many bullshit "safety" regulations that add unnecessary weight that it's not even funny (those 25 airbags in your new car that you never use because most people aren't in a major accident) .
Bullshit son, safety regulations are far more stricter in europe and we manage to keep our cars light and fast, hell you (ford etc) manage to sell car fast and light here as well, regulations are only the problem if you're fixated on a "government is the problem" dogma
No, it wasn't until the US government "got tough" (meaning, bought off by companies producing the "safety" features, such as airbags, stability control, ABS, etc) about safety that car weights shot up during the 90's / early 2000's. I highly doubt that the average new car in Europe has as many airbags as the average new car in the US. Also, I never said that was the ONLY reason - I also noted that the increase in size was another reason. Compare the new Ford Taurus to the Taurus from 10 years ago - it's ridiculously large now, as are most vehicles sold in the US. It's quite common for a vehicle to be redesigned just for the US market to be a few inches longer and wider than the model sold in the rest of the world - all of that is pure dead weight that kills mpg.
I'd say that, at least for European my make/model, your arguments of ballooning and 'bullshit' safety measures don't fly.
But that's the problem, companies sell different products in Europe than in the US. The bottom of the line S40 in the US has a 2.4 liter engine and weighs 3,238 lbs, - so 458 lbs more. Granted, the 2.4 liter engine will weigh more than the 1.8, but not anywhere near 458 lbs more - so that's a good 300 lbs (or more) of extra weight that has no purpose. They don't have mpg numbers on the US Volvo site, but I'm willing to bet that they're much lower than they are in Europe.
Increased weight always increases the amount of power required to travel at a given speed. Also, regenerative breaking isn't even close to providing that kind of electricity. Then there's the fact that we're still probably at least a decade away from a truly usable electric car (and that's still ignoring the issue of long charge times / nowhere to pull over and charge).
I'm a big car guy, so I find it amusing that you put in an advertisement for the Tesla, when every test review I've read / seen has shown it to not even get half of it's stated range when it's actually driven like you would drive a normal car.
You're partially correct. Yes, it has gotten ridiculous that people think they "need" a 300hp mid-size sedan just to go to work and the store. However, an even more important issue in why mpg hasn't improved more is WEIGHT. We have so many bullshit "safety" regulations that add unnecessary weight that it's not even funny (those 25 airbags in your new car that you never use because most people aren't in a major accident) -then there's the fact that car sizes have ballooned over the last decade to where a BMW 5 series is now the same size as a 7 series used to be and a Nissan Altima is now the size that the Maxima used to be, and you completely murder mpg. It's ridiculous that it's normal now for a mid-size car to weight 4,000 lbs - it shouldn't weigh more than about 3,300 lb, tops.
We need to cut weight first, which will increase mpg / acceleration right there, then we can cut engine size too and have the same power / weight ratio, yet MUCH better mpg. Mazda has already stated that they're planning on cutting weight on their vehicles - I believe their first target was 10% reduction in weight by 2012 (maybe 2014) and then shave 10% off that within 4-6 years later.
I've been saying for years that there's no reason that American car companies can't sell the same cars they sell in Europe in the US - in the last couple of years, they've finally started listening (at least Ford has). Starting later this year, there will be one Focus for the entire world again!
Also, I'm pretty sure you're looking at imperial gallons, not US gallons - imperial gallons are bigger, so they skew mpg numbers when trying to compare cars.
...Or we could just stop sticking our noses where they don't belong and quit interfering with internal issues in the Middle East, then we wouldn't have pissed off Muslims wanting to blow us up.
As for these highly immoral scanners, I can't wait for someone in the US to sue over child-porn after their kid goes through one. I sure as hell would if I was a parent (not that I'd ever go to an airport using one of these).
There have been controversial rules passed recently requiring anyone who has regular, official contact with children to register, yes - so a football coach teaching minors would indeed be affected.
I see people on here who try to claim that the UK isn't rapidly running to being a dictatorship, but bullshit laws like this are exactly what I'm talking about. Every time the US walks a yard towards totalitarianism, the UK sprints 100 yards closer to it.
50 years ago the different countries were racing to see who could be the best - now they're racing to see who can be the worst.
I am a forensic investigator and it terrifies me that most people I meet in my field don't seem to care who goes to jail as long as somebody goes to jail.
And that is why I have virtually no respect for anyone in the "justice" system. They don't give a damn about justice, they only care about their own ego.
The fact that they let a government (and therefore extremely biased) group decide this severely harms the credibility of the decision. The fact that they only gave one day to hearing debate on it only further damages their credibility. When we're talking things that will have massive impacts on people's lives and countries economies all over the world, it's worth being as close to 100% sure as you can before making a decision.
Exactly. Especially in mediums that are only (or at least primarily) going to be read by educated people, there's no reason to prevent debate - the facts will speak for themselves.
Honestly? I buy dozens of movies every year. However, I do download stuff to preview movies that look "ok" but I'd never pay for without seeing (and would never pay to see). I've bought many movies that way, as well as seasons of tv shows. So from me, movie companies make a lot of money from my occasional downloading - because if I never got to see it for free, I'd never have seen it at all and wouldn't have enjoyed it and purchased it on dvd.
No, they didn't act irresponsibly. It's bad business for a bank to give out a loan to someone who's unlikely to pay it off - hence why those people were denied loans and the government created the CRA to strong-arm banks into making those loans. What's good for the bank (meaning increasing profits) is to NOT give out loans to people unlikely to pay it off.
I beg you, learn something about economics, finance, or banking in general (as in read a textbook). All you're doing is making yourself look ridiculous by spouting off irrelevant crap and insults instead of learning how the industry actually works.
they're introducing new (same as the old) REG-U-LA-TIONS so it doesn't happen again. because REG-U-LA-TIONS will fix the problem. DUH
If you knew anything about the history of our economy, you'd know that every time the economy is good regulations are loosened, then after people get greedy and make mistakes, regulations are tightened because people want someone to blame and by having more regulations, they can pretend that things will be different next time. It's a cycle that happens endlessly.
The banks were deregulated, however, it was the CRA efforts that lead to the out of control housing bubble. There are plenty of articles online if you feel like looking it up (you don't). You're the one being partisan by screaming "OMFG CAPITALISM KILLS!!"
I never blamed Carter, I simply said that he was the one who signed the bill for the CRA but Clinton was the one who strengthened it. If you look at home prices, you'll see that they started shooting up at roughly the same time that Clinton enhanced the CRA. Bush did plenty of stupid shit (Patriot Act for one), but he didn't do anything to affect the housing bubble one way or another. I despise Republicans and Democrats for being horribly irresponsible financially, but if you can't scream "you're just an evil Republican", then you lose your only "debate" tactic.
You provide no facts, cited or not, just mindless bashing of anyone who acknowledges that irresponsible person finance on a nation-wide scale leads to economic problems. Take an economics class, read some news, and quit foaming at the mouth when someone tells you to be responsible for your actions.
I don't know enough about McCarthy to make a solid statement on him one way or another, however, the Venona Project (released to the public in 1995) proved that McCarthy was at least partially right, by showing that there were communist spies in the US government.
when your economy is trashed by greedy speculation then fear and hysteria. that's what sent germany to the dogs: the great depression, the collapse of the financial world
Germany went downhill because of the brutal raping it received in the peace treaty after WWI. That is also what caused the overwhelming resentment of the rest of the world (or at least the rest of Europe and the US) which resulted in Hitler's rise to power.
we need strong government regulation in the financial sector
We need regulation - however, once you hit a certain point, regulation turns into control, which then harms the economy due to government officials not having the slightest clue about how to run a company, let alone an entire industry.
the assholes (greenspan and co) who dismantled the 1930s era (irony) protections need to be grilled a la congressional hearings and roundly castigated for their dangerous irresponsibility
Actually it was the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) that lead to the housing bubble / slew of bad mortgages. The CRA was started by Carter and strengthened by Clinton and it existed to put pressure on banks to give loans to people (specifically mortgages) who would normally be turned away by banks (due to the high risk of them defaulting) because the government thought everyone should own a home, even if they can't afford it. That resulted in millions of people getting mortgages when they never should have had one as well as ballooning home prices. Add on top of that the fact that the average American spends way more than they earn each year (usually on crap they don't need) and you have a recipe for financial disaster. If the banks had been left alone and the CRA never existed, then home prices would have stayed in check (look at historical averages, home prices always adjusted for inflation but in real dollars, they stayed essentially constant - once the CRA was strengthened, all of the sudden home prices started going up way faster than inflation) and there wouldn't be anywhere near as many people defaulting on mortgages. The current recession is about 60% the fault of average citizens racking up way too much debt (mainly on credit cards) and about 40% the government naively pushing banks to give risky mortgages (which exacerbated the problem of people racking up too much debt).
I find it amusing that you demonize the Tea Partiers (who have no official group, it's a generic term given to anyone upset about government control of our lives and government taking away our freedom) for being "fascists" when the whole reason they're upset is because they don't want fascism.
Speeding has very little to do with unsafe driving. Unsafe driving is caused by tailgating, not using your turn signals, not looking before changing lanes, swerving through traffic to try and get ahead - things like that. You can drive fast and still drive safely (as is shown in many European countries where it's legal to drive significantly faster than the US, yet the number of accidents are fewer). I say we take a page out of Germany's book and start issuing tickets for tailgating and not speeding, unless it's insanely excessive speeding (like 90 in a 45 zone).
You're forgetting that a much higher percentage of people drive in the US, where in the UK they take the bus / train / subway (sorry, "underground").
Yup, just like anti-sodomy laws too.
What /b did with Boxxy was pure bullshit (she never did anything, it was the people posting her everywhere that annoyed them), but I'd be more than glad if /b did that with these guys. You totally deserve it if you want an internship as a Certified Asshole.
So Qzukk, by your (lack of) reasoning, since you were mean to me here, I can go kill myself and my family can sue you. Do you think that's fair? Didn't think so.
For someone whining about screwing someone out of an entry-level job and scolding them to "be nice" you sure are an asshole.
I know you're just trolling, but just because I hold people responsible for their actions instead of blaming a scapegoat doesn't make me an asshole.
She chose herself because she wanted to. Bullying had just as much to do with it as having acne or her parents not being interested in her did. I actually did RTFA and what she had going on was so minor compared to what a lot of kids (who don't kill themselves) go through that it's not even funny.
but if you honestly can't sympathize with her situation, then you've forgotten how difficult it can all seem to be, to a teenager.
No, I don't sympathize and no, I haven't forgotten what it was like at all. I had similar stuff happen to me, did I kill myself? No. Hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of kids experience this every day, yet only a handful kill themselves - that pretty clearly shows that bullying has nothing to do with suicide, it's just a scapegoat for the family / friends to use instead of accepting that they failed to make the girl realize that she had people who cared about her and wanted her around.
By you claiming that someone forced her to do this and that they should be punished just for not liking her, you are not only promoting irresponsibility, but promoting people being weak and not ignoring / standing up to bullies.
Most states (if not all) only apply those laws to adults and / or people who are not within a certain number of years in age of the other person.
Statutory rape is one of the most bullshit legal inventions ever. It's prosecuting someone for doing something personal that both people chose to do.
*hope, not help