The reasoning behind this move, which if you think about it was inevitable, is the reason why I still think all cars being put electric is infeasible. You simply CANNOT have enough fast chargers around to reasonably accommodate everyone who needs to fuel up in a day.
I still support electric cars mind you; it's just that in the end most electric cars will be hydrogen fuel cell based, where you can fuel up in a reasonable timeframe just like cars today.
I think for electric cars to really take off, people will need to stop "fueling" their cars as they currently do. That is, instead of going somewhere specifically to "fill up" (or in this case, fast charge), they will need to destination charge. Instead of going to a gas station, charge up once you've reached work/home/mall/doctor's or wherever else you're going. Obviously, this will require an infrastructure change (except for home charging, which would just require an owner to add an electrical outlet), and a lot of private businesses to get on board with offering more charging stations at their locations, so it's not happening any time soon. And also obviously, fast charging networks will still be needed at various locations for road trips, deliveries, and other commercial transport.
But ultimately, while fast charging networks will be needed and more of them, the mindset for the vast majority of the drivers will need to change from "fuel/charge when near empty" to "charge whenever the car is parked." While this type of adoption/mindset seems unreachable, the ever-increasing capacity of all-electric car batteries may help to make this more palatable in the near future.
I believe the hope here is not that it will bring forward some new revelation, but that it will simply get the general public excited about science again.
The original Cosmos series helped get a lot of the public talking about science, and probably grew some careers out of the kids that watched it as well. Whether Tyson and the rest of the new Cosmos staff will be able to do this remains to be seen, but I think the primary goal is not necessarily to give new insight into the mysteries of the universe, but to make thinking about these questions interesting again to the general public.
In today's television world of History being taught by Pawn Stars, and The Learning Channel showing us insights of child beauty pageants, reality shows are now the bread and butter for almost every network. It has seriously diluted the education that is occurring from television (and let's be honest, whether it should be or not, there is no escape that a lot of people do substitute television watching for actual learning). While PBS and a few other stray networks help a bit, this new series of Cosmos offers some hope. If NatGeo was the only one doing it, it would gain some attention, but the fact that a major over-the-air network like Fox (especially with its reputation) is teaming up with this is encouraging.
If the new Cosmos can actually succeed, not necessarily in explaining complex scientific theories about our world and the universe, but if it can succeed in what the original Cosmos did in just getting everyday people excited in science again, it would do a lot of long term good for this country. Perhaps, just perhaps, a few other networks could follow suit and knock out one or two hours a week of their reality programs to put more science into their programming. Perhaps it can get more people, especially young people, into looking at science as a viable career option instead of trying to figure out how to get their 15 mins of fame on another reality show. Lofty dreams to be sure, but we have to start somewhere, and hopefully this new series will either help be that spark to get others excited, or confirm once and for all that no one in this country really gives a damn about science and watch as our scientific knowledge plummets compared to the rest of the world.
There's some good and bad sides to this. I actually tried this out about 3 years ago, wanted to travel while I'm still young and can do more. Me and the wife bought a 35' fifth wheel, moved out of the apartment, and put excess stuff in storage. After about 6 months, we moved out of the RV and back into another apartment. (Kept the RV though, still like to travel!)
The good: - Having a new backyard every day/week was great. - Met a lot of friendly people along the way. Many having dinner outside their RV would frequently ask if we wanted to sit and eat with them when we were walking around the park. In turn, we always tried to do the same when we had cooked something. - A lot of experienced RVers and full-timers are more than willing to help out with issues you might have, as long as you're open to it. - Seeing the country is great fun, especially the out of the way areas. - On some days it feels like a full-time vacation (even when working).
The bad: - High speed Internet access was spotty/unreliable. Being in a rural area, you may be familiar with this already, but when traveling around in an RV to random campsites and rest areas, you find out rather quickly that anything above 3G is still iffy on the open road. Don't count on the coverage map saying 3G or 4G is available in the middle of nowhere, especially if you have time-sensitive work you need to submit. - Most campgrounds (i.e. RV-oriented campgrounds, not state parks and such) will offer wi-fi access, but it may be spotty, slow speed, or unreliable. And the campground office tends to either be empty when trying to find someone to tell there's a problem with the wi-fi, or if a person is there they usually aren't sure about the wi-fi setup or how to troubleshoot/reset it. - If you travel a lot (i.e. don't hook up in one place for more than a few days) you will spend a lot on gas. And if you do stay in one place for a period of time, don't forget to account for campground fees. - Most trailers aren't made for "permanent" living. You'll notice this most with the walls and lack of insulation, especially in peak summer and winter months. Quality counts here.
You'll definitely want to budget things out though, as you can easily spend a lot more than you would in mortgage or rent. Joining Good Sam helps some, committing to a place for 2-4 weeks at a time can help out more with campground prices. Some campgrounds will even let you do odd jobs to help decrease the "rent", but you'll usually find that "regulars" that have been there for extended periods already are doing those jobs. If you do commit to full-time, let your insurance agent know - most major carriers can convert your homeowners/renters insurance into an equivalent "full-timer" RV policy so you'll have coverage on the stuff in the camper.
In short, if you like to travel it's a good experience. If you don't like camping out, you won't have a good time (modern RVs are comfortable, but you still need to remember it's camping out, and you won't have all the amenities of a regular apartment/house). Also depending on how much you need an Internet connection, how fast you need it, and how often you need it, you may not want to commit to it full time. At least, just yet. As the infrastructure and reliability continues to improve, this will become less of an issue as time goes on (I'm sure it's improved some in the 2-3 years since we did it).
I just don't get it. I refuse to go to Blockbuster and I cannot justify Netflix's fees and I really like to watch movies (I consider watching three or four movies a month above average). I go to the local grocery store and up to their DVD kiosk and rent a movie for 24 hours at 1.05 (including tax). What's wrong with Netflix's fees? They seem perfectly reasonable. In their most basic plan, I'm paying about $2.50 per rental, and the amount average decreases a bit each time I go up in plan service - and that's not including the on-demand stuff. Last time I checked, Blockbuster is $5+. And with the $1 grocery store kiosk, I have to come back in 24 hrs, and I end up making a wasting trip and paying the savings in gas. I usually watch movies once a week, so Netflix works for that perfectly, and I don't have to worry about late fees or making wasted trips.
Not saying stores are bad though, both have their place. Netflix doesn't have the "instant gratification" -- if some friends and I have to watch a certain movie "right now", I can head down to the $1 kiosk. If I wanted a larger library to choose from for my instant gratification, we can go to Blockbuster and pay the $5+ premium for that service. Netflix works for me mostly, and for the occasion it doesn't I can use the physical store choices. For others, they want to be able to have a sudden urge to watch a movie and pick it out right then, grocery stores and Blockbuster stores are there, you just pay extra for that added "instant gratification" convenience. I don't believe either is going away anytime soon. Well, not until the availability of home fiber connections is as common as a neighborhood Blockbuster.
"My wallet just cried," wrote one gamer, who calls himself 'DingoStoleMyBaby' on Shacknews.com.
Never thought I'd ever see the word "DingoStoleMyBaby" on CNN. You would think of all the sources available to them, they could pull a better "Damn this console is too high" quote from somewhere else.
Before these parent groups start complaining about the ESRB, they should actually pay attention to the ratings these games get. GTA was rated 'M', which, according to ESRB's website, is "... suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language." 'AO' rating is "... content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older." Only 1 year difference.
So, putting aside the problem with how the ESRB is supposed to rate content it knows nothing about ("Hot Coffee"), this game was already marked by the ESRB as for adults only. It did not get the specific "Adults Only" rating, but when a game is rated for people 17+, I would assume that it does not include scenes from Sesame Street.
When the Hot Coffee thing first went mainstream, there were plenty of quotes in the media from parents and grandparents outcrying why this content was hidden in a game they gave their kids. WTF?! The game is already rated 17+. The rating system did not fail you, you failed to look at the rating system.
That is the biggest problem with the ratings system, not that it is bias, or fails to take into account hidden content. It is that most parents don't bother to look at them. A lot may not even realize they exist. Most think back to the Mario and Pac-man days and assume that modern video games are similar, with slightly better graphics. And before someone comments, "Well wait, I'm a parent and I'm not like that," well, by being on slashdot you've proven you're in the minority. Most parents pay little attention to the ratings of a video game, and you know it.
Ultimately, this is all about control. The government wants to control the rating system, and most parents want to be controlled, i.e. told, what to buy and not buy. Looking at the ratings for most games so far, they seem to be rated fairly, it's just that the parents aren't looking/caring about them unless they hear about it on the six o'clock news, then it is the ESRB's fault for not having a neon-flashing sign in 6-foot lettering announcing the game's rating. They (parent groups and the gov't) have been looking to push this agenda for a while now, Hot Coffee was not a sign that the ESRB system is failing, it was the excuse they needed to take control.
Is reverse-engineering software necessarily illegal? Has a precedent been set in the software world that would apply to this?
Well, the Nintendo vs Tengen case pops to mind (pretty similar actually), where the Atari/Tengen reversed-engineered the lock-out chip so they wouldn't have to be limited by Nintendo's strict release rules.
It was found out though that it wasn't pure reverse-engineering, but they lied to the patent office to get the details on the Nintendo chip, so they got sued for copyright infringement and breech of contract (since they were still making games). Without those two factors, it might have been less likely to go in Nintendo's way.
After the whole fiasco that Sony had with the NA release of HDD (delaying it by years, promising it would do things it never did, then abandoning it completely with the PS2 redesign after being on market less than a year), I'm not beliving anything Sony says about PS3, HDD specs or otherwise, until it is physically at the store available for purchase.
Personally, I think it would be a mistake that they not include an HDD with the console, but considering the rumoured cost of the PS3, it is probably doubtful that it will include one at launch.
This is very fitting timing, and a reminder, to the Three Mile Island accident which happened 25 years ago on March 28. We were extremely close to experiencing a total catsrophe, but avoided it narrowly mostly due to luck.
TiVo already offers GPL-based code on their website. The backup images being offered on other websites include the full OS and TiVo GUI, which aren't covered under GPL. So technically they have the right to shut these sites down, although, as mentioned, I think it's a shame as it could shut down the TiVo upgrade/white-hack community.
Software such as this (and Apple's more elaborate PowerSchool ) is at least getting parents more involved in school and their child's schoolwork, which is A Good Thing. As with anything else, the primary problem here is user education, i.e., the school administrators using other things besides SSNs to validate users.
But I'm glad to see more software like this developed for schools: with both parents usually working full-time, it makes it easier for them to get an idea of how their child is doing, and at least makes an attempt to bring them back into their child's education. As many of the other posters have stated, you should at least be glad that your parents are interested enough in your education to take action (which, even though they are technically required to until you're 18, many don't bother).
First the RIAA will sue me for attempting to put MP3s on my iPod; then Madonna, No Doubt, and Beck will sue me for attempting to steal their iPods. "Why yes officer, that is my iPod, see, that's my signature right there."
You'd think the coppers would have something better to do than having trade mark wrangles with the BBC over something they stopped using nearly 50 years ago. Or the beeb would have something better to do than having trade mark wrangles with the Metropolitan Police over something they stopped using nearly 20 years ago.
*sigh* Now if only the beeb could use these powers for good, and actually produce some NEW Doctor Who episodes. I miss Doctor Who, and those radio episodes and books just don't hold up to actually watching the Doctor in action on the television.
Since taxpayers cover at least part of the cost of these shows via the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, shouldn't ALL these shows be free-as-in-everything? We paid for them, after all!
Actually, total federal funding to CPB/PBS is about $250 million, only 12.2% of CPB's total budget (figures from CPB). This is less than 0.0005% of the total federal budget.
Personally, I wish Congress would either a) leave CPB/PBS alone, cut funding entirely, and let it do its own thing, instead of this shoestring allowance it gives it (currently, the President picks the head of the CPB board and Congress approves) OR b) keep CPB's current setup, but FUND the organization it founded so they don't have to rely on so many advertisers, and so they can give us better programming. [/rant]
When I used to work as a theatre projectionist (before they all went south and had the managers do projection work instead), several films had trailers attached directly on the movie, or in the can with the movie. Usually, though, these were advertising other films by _that studio_.
At one chain I worked at, it was company policy at the time, and probably still is (Regal), to cut off the MPAA "green/red" warning in front of all preview trailers, and attach ALL trailers together (if it was attached to the film, we were to "remove" it from the film and re-attach it to the rest of the preview trailers). I'm sure other theatres have similar policies, since they assume that the audience assumes the feature presentation is next after the "theatre chain" ad & sound trailer (for those theatres that still bother to put sound trailers on the film).
So while it isn't that interesting that the trailer is directly attached to the print, and it isn't that interesting that the trailer is being chopped off/moved around/replaced (has been happening for years), it is rather interesting that a Fox movie trailer was attached to a Disney film.
Imagine paying $30 a month to listen to any song or watch any movie you wanted...
I can watch any movie or TV program I want to
right now, on demand, for $30 a month. It's
called DirecTV + TiVo.
Oh wait, even though TiVo uses Linux, they want
to charge for their service too, so they must
be bad as well.:)
What's so sad about the massive politicized anti-region-encoding movement, is that VHS tapes are also "region encoded", in that there are at least two entirely incompatible standards for encoding the video signal (NTSC and PAL) which are used throughout the world, and you can't buy a video tape from a region which uses PAL (such as Europe) and play it back in an NTSC region (such as the US).
Unlike the PAL/NTSC issue, the motion picture companies are trying to make owning a multi-regional player illegal. There's nothing stopping me from going out and buying a multi-system telvision or VCR (in fact, NTSC/PAL* TVs and VCRs are closer to "consumer-level" prices than ever before; independent film producers distributing internationally would probably be able to afford the NTSC/PAL VCR themselves). Some newer TVs even have NTSC/PAL compatibility built-in. This is perfectly legal. Buying a multi-regional DVD, however, is currently considered gray/black-market, and the MPAA and others want it to be considered illegal.
* = (actually, many multi-system TV/VCRs also allow SECAM, but most people tend to forget about SECAM. Let's not talk about SECAM. Forget i mentioned it).:)
Slashdot Mirror
The reasoning behind this move, which if you think about it was inevitable, is the reason why I still think all cars being put electric is infeasible. You simply CANNOT have enough fast chargers around to reasonably accommodate everyone who needs to fuel up in a day.
I still support electric cars mind you; it's just that in the end most electric cars will be hydrogen fuel cell based, where you can fuel up in a reasonable timeframe just like cars today.
I think for electric cars to really take off, people will need to stop "fueling" their cars as they currently do. That is, instead of going somewhere specifically to "fill up" (or in this case, fast charge), they will need to destination charge. Instead of going to a gas station, charge up once you've reached work/home/mall/doctor's or wherever else you're going. Obviously, this will require an infrastructure change (except for home charging, which would just require an owner to add an electrical outlet), and a lot of private businesses to get on board with offering more charging stations at their locations, so it's not happening any time soon. And also obviously, fast charging networks will still be needed at various locations for road trips, deliveries, and other commercial transport.
But ultimately, while fast charging networks will be needed and more of them, the mindset for the vast majority of the drivers will need to change from "fuel/charge when near empty" to "charge whenever the car is parked." While this type of adoption/mindset seems unreachable, the ever-increasing capacity of all-electric car batteries may help to make this more palatable in the near future.
I believe the hope here is not that it will bring forward some new revelation, but that it will simply get the general public excited about science again.
The original Cosmos series helped get a lot of the public talking about science, and probably grew some careers out of the kids that watched it as well. Whether Tyson and the rest of the new Cosmos staff will be able to do this remains to be seen, but I think the primary goal is not necessarily to give new insight into the mysteries of the universe, but to make thinking about these questions interesting again to the general public.
In today's television world of History being taught by Pawn Stars, and The Learning Channel showing us insights of child beauty pageants, reality shows are now the bread and butter for almost every network. It has seriously diluted the education that is occurring from television (and let's be honest, whether it should be or not, there is no escape that a lot of people do substitute television watching for actual learning). While PBS and a few other stray networks help a bit, this new series of Cosmos offers some hope. If NatGeo was the only one doing it, it would gain some attention, but the fact that a major over-the-air network like Fox (especially with its reputation) is teaming up with this is encouraging.
If the new Cosmos can actually succeed, not necessarily in explaining complex scientific theories about our world and the universe, but if it can succeed in what the original Cosmos did in just getting everyday people excited in science again, it would do a lot of long term good for this country. Perhaps, just perhaps, a few other networks could follow suit and knock out one or two hours a week of their reality programs to put more science into their programming. Perhaps it can get more people, especially young people, into looking at science as a viable career option instead of trying to figure out how to get their 15 mins of fame on another reality show. Lofty dreams to be sure, but we have to start somewhere, and hopefully this new series will either help be that spark to get others excited, or confirm once and for all that no one in this country really gives a damn about science and watch as our scientific knowledge plummets compared to the rest of the world.
There's some good and bad sides to this. I actually tried this out about 3 years ago, wanted to travel while I'm still young and can do more. Me and the wife bought a 35' fifth wheel, moved out of the apartment, and put excess stuff in storage. After about 6 months, we moved out of the RV and back into another apartment. (Kept the RV though, still like to travel!)
The good:
- Having a new backyard every day/week was great.
- Met a lot of friendly people along the way. Many having dinner outside their RV would frequently ask if we wanted to sit and eat with them when we were walking around the park. In turn, we always tried to do the same when we had cooked something.
- A lot of experienced RVers and full-timers are more than willing to help out with issues you might have, as long as you're open to it.
- Seeing the country is great fun, especially the out of the way areas.
- On some days it feels like a full-time vacation (even when working).
The bad:
- High speed Internet access was spotty/unreliable. Being in a rural area, you may be familiar with this already, but when traveling around in an RV to random campsites and rest areas, you find out rather quickly that anything above 3G is still iffy on the open road. Don't count on the coverage map saying 3G or 4G is available in the middle of nowhere, especially if you have time-sensitive work you need to submit.
- Most campgrounds (i.e. RV-oriented campgrounds, not state parks and such) will offer wi-fi access, but it may be spotty, slow speed, or unreliable. And the campground office tends to either be empty when trying to find someone to tell there's a problem with the wi-fi, or if a person is there they usually aren't sure about the wi-fi setup or how to troubleshoot/reset it.
- If you travel a lot (i.e. don't hook up in one place for more than a few days) you will spend a lot on gas. And if you do stay in one place for a period of time, don't forget to account for campground fees.
- Most trailers aren't made for "permanent" living. You'll notice this most with the walls and lack of insulation, especially in peak summer and winter months. Quality counts here.
You'll definitely want to budget things out though, as you can easily spend a lot more than you would in mortgage or rent. Joining Good Sam helps some, committing to a place for 2-4 weeks at a time can help out more with campground prices. Some campgrounds will even let you do odd jobs to help decrease the "rent", but you'll usually find that "regulars" that have been there for extended periods already are doing those jobs. If you do commit to full-time, let your insurance agent know - most major carriers can convert your homeowners/renters insurance into an equivalent "full-timer" RV policy so you'll have coverage on the stuff in the camper.
In short, if you like to travel it's a good experience. If you don't like camping out, you won't have a good time (modern RVs are comfortable, but you still need to remember it's camping out, and you won't have all the amenities of a regular apartment/house). Also depending on how much you need an Internet connection, how fast you need it, and how often you need it, you may not want to commit to it full time. At least, just yet. As the infrastructure and reliability continues to improve, this will become less of an issue as time goes on (I'm sure it's improved some in the 2-3 years since we did it).
Not saying stores are bad though, both have their place. Netflix doesn't have the "instant gratification" -- if some friends and I have to watch a certain movie "right now", I can head down to the $1 kiosk. If I wanted a larger library to choose from for my instant gratification, we can go to Blockbuster and pay the $5+ premium for that service. Netflix works for me mostly, and for the occasion it doesn't I can use the physical store choices. For others, they want to be able to have a sudden urge to watch a movie and pick it out right then, grocery stores and Blockbuster stores are there, you just pay extra for that added "instant gratification" convenience. I don't believe either is going away anytime soon. Well, not until the availability of home fiber connections is as common as a neighborhood Blockbuster.
iNewton
Sounds like a winner to me. It's more a Newton than a phone anyway from the looks of it.
Seriously, anything but iPhone, "i___" is overused anyway, and no sense in Apple throwing money to Cisco just for a name.
"My wallet just cried," wrote one gamer, who calls himself 'DingoStoleMyBaby' on Shacknews.com.
Never thought I'd ever see the word "DingoStoleMyBaby" on CNN. You would think of all the sources available to them, they could pull a better "Damn this console is too high" quote from somewhere else.
Before these parent groups start complaining about the ESRB, they should actually pay attention to the ratings these games get. GTA was rated 'M', which, according to ESRB's website, is "... suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language." 'AO' rating is "... content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older." Only 1 year difference.
So, putting aside the problem with how the ESRB is supposed to rate content it knows nothing about ("Hot Coffee"), this game was already marked by the ESRB as for adults only. It did not get the specific "Adults Only" rating, but when a game is rated for people 17+, I would assume that it does not include scenes from Sesame Street.
When the Hot Coffee thing first went mainstream, there were plenty of quotes in the media from parents and grandparents outcrying why this content was hidden in a game they gave their kids. WTF?! The game is already rated 17+. The rating system did not fail you, you failed to look at the rating system.
That is the biggest problem with the ratings system, not that it is bias, or fails to take into account hidden content. It is that most parents don't bother to look at them. A lot may not even realize they exist. Most think back to the Mario and Pac-man days and assume that modern video games are similar, with slightly better graphics. And before someone comments, "Well wait, I'm a parent and I'm not like that," well, by being on slashdot you've proven you're in the minority. Most parents pay little attention to the ratings of a video game, and you know it.
Ultimately, this is all about control. The government wants to control the rating system, and most parents want to be controlled, i.e. told, what to buy and not buy. Looking at the ratings for most games so far, they seem to be rated fairly, it's just that the parents aren't looking/caring about them unless they hear about it on the six o'clock news, then it is the ESRB's fault for not having a neon-flashing sign in 6-foot lettering announcing the game's rating. They (parent groups and the gov't) have been looking to push this agenda for a while now, Hot Coffee was not a sign that the ESRB system is failing, it was the excuse they needed to take control.
Is reverse-engineering software necessarily illegal? Has a precedent been set in the software world that would apply to this?
Well, the Nintendo vs Tengen case pops to mind (pretty similar actually), where the Atari/Tengen reversed-engineered the lock-out chip so they wouldn't have to be limited by Nintendo's strict release rules.
It was found out though that it wasn't pure reverse-engineering, but they lied to the patent office to get the details on the Nintendo chip, so they got sued for copyright infringement and breech of contract (since they were still making games). Without those two factors, it might have been less likely to go in Nintendo's way.
After the whole fiasco that Sony had with the NA release of HDD (delaying it by years, promising it would do things it never did, then abandoning it completely with the PS2 redesign after being on market less than a year), I'm not beliving anything Sony says about PS3, HDD specs or otherwise, until it is physically at the store available for purchase.
Personally, I think it would be a mistake that they not include an HDD with the console, but considering the rumoured cost of the PS3, it is probably doubtful that it will include one at launch.
... the goggles do nothing!
Notice how close it is to Valentine's Day? A perfect gift for that geeky girl, a night on the town, and going to a video game concert.
Because 3 is the magic number.
This is very fitting timing, and a reminder, to the Three Mile Island accident which happened 25 years ago on March 28. We were extremely close to experiencing a total catsrophe, but avoided it narrowly mostly due to luck.
TiVo already offers GPL-based code on their website. The backup images being offered on other websites include the full OS and TiVo GUI, which aren't covered under GPL. So technically they have the right to shut these sites down, although, as mentioned, I think it's a shame as it could shut down the TiVo upgrade/white-hack community.
can you imagine the average cashier at WalMart giving back 98 cents change with an 18-cent coin?
I guess the story submitter can as they listed an 18c coin as one in regular US circulation!
Software such as this (and Apple's more elaborate PowerSchool ) is at least getting parents more involved in school and their child's schoolwork, which is A Good Thing. As with anything else, the primary problem here is user education, i.e., the school administrators using other things besides SSNs to validate users.
But I'm glad to see more software like this developed for schools: with both parents usually working full-time, it makes it easier for them to get an idea of how their child is doing, and at least makes an attempt to bring them back into their child's education. As many of the other posters have stated, you should at least be glad that your parents are interested enough in your education to take action (which, even though they are technically required to until you're 18, many don't bother).
First the RIAA will sue me for attempting to put MP3s on my iPod; then Madonna, No Doubt, and Beck will sue me for attempting to steal their iPods. "Why yes officer, that is my iPod, see, that's my signature right there."
You'd think the coppers would have something better to do than having trade mark wrangles with the BBC over something they stopped using nearly 50 years ago.
Or the beeb would have something better to do than having trade mark wrangles with the Metropolitan Police over something they stopped using nearly 20 years ago.
*sigh* Now if only the beeb could use these powers for good, and actually produce some NEW Doctor Who episodes. I miss Doctor Who, and those radio episodes and books just don't hold up to actually watching the Doctor in action on the television.
Sincerely,
The Slashdot Automated Performance Monitor
The SAP Monitor... I like it.
Actually, total federal funding to CPB/PBS is about $250 million, only 12.2% of CPB's total budget (figures from CPB). This is less than 0.0005% of the total federal budget.
Personally, I wish Congress would either a) leave CPB/PBS alone, cut funding entirely, and let it do its own thing, instead of this shoestring allowance it gives it (currently, the President picks the head of the CPB board and Congress approves) OR b) keep CPB's current setup, but FUND the organization it founded so they don't have to rely on so many advertisers, and so they can give us better programming. [/rant]
Apparently the Scientologists have moderator points, too.
As I submitted this earlier and it was rejected.
Oh well, to add to this, Reuters has confirmed the news, as well.
When I used to work as a theatre projectionist (before they all went south and had the managers do projection work instead), several films had trailers attached directly on the movie, or in the can with the movie. Usually, though, these were advertising other films by _that studio_.
At one chain I worked at, it was company policy at the time, and probably still is (Regal), to cut off the MPAA "green/red" warning in front of all preview trailers, and attach ALL trailers together (if it was attached to the film, we were to "remove" it from the film and re-attach it to the rest of the preview trailers). I'm sure other theatres have similar policies, since they assume that the audience assumes the feature presentation is next after the "theatre chain" ad & sound trailer (for those theatres that still bother to put sound trailers on the film).
So while it isn't that interesting that the trailer is directly attached to the print, and it isn't that interesting that the trailer is being chopped off/moved around/replaced (has been happening for years), it is rather interesting that a Fox movie trailer was attached to a Disney film.
I can watch any movie or TV program I want to right now, on demand, for $30 a month. It's called DirecTV + TiVo. Oh wait, even though TiVo uses Linux, they want to charge for their service too, so they must be bad as well. :)
Unlike the PAL/NTSC issue, the motion picture companies are trying to make owning a multi-regional player illegal. There's nothing stopping me from going out and buying a multi-system telvision or VCR (in fact, NTSC/PAL* TVs and VCRs are closer to "consumer-level" prices than ever before; independent film producers distributing internationally would probably be able to afford the NTSC/PAL VCR themselves). Some newer TVs even have NTSC/PAL compatibility built-in. This is perfectly legal. Buying a multi-regional DVD, however, is currently considered gray/black-market, and the MPAA and others want it to be considered illegal.
* = (actually, many multi-system TV/VCRs also allow SECAM, but most people tend to forget about SECAM. Let's not talk about SECAM. Forget i mentioned it). :)