>If now, gasoline vs. electric cars cost $50,000 vs. $110,000 over 10 years, while in 20 years those costs are $120,000 vs $100,000, we will be in bad shape.
Over the past 20 years, a more than tripling of the cost of running a car has occurred. Check an old "Price is Right" from 1984 and you'll see that the cost of a car back then was as low as $5,000 and gas was less than $0.40 a litre. That makes the car from my example cost $9,800 over the lifetime of the vehicle.
That car now "comfortably" costs over $30,000 over it's lifetime.
I think we'd be in fine shape, myself, if you consider how much _less_ the inflation would be over that period.
>Add to that, the world is not an ideal economic system: People are not rational, and they do not have perfect information.
True. Fortunately, people in general do not control the gas supply. People running stores, and, more importantly, people owning oil wells and refineries do. Generally, these people tend to operate as a group, and, doing this, tend to iron out decisions that would cause massive disruption to world economics.
>Finally, and selfishly, in 30 years when I am driving around in my biodiesel hybrid electric / solar car, I would like gasoline for my vintage Delorian / Cessna / Mustang I maintain as a hobby to cost less than $10 / gallon instead of $100 / gallon.
I'm sure you would, but that won't happed. Besides, if it's a hobby car, you won't be driving it far enough, or often enough, to worry about the price of gas. Even if you are, most people aren't, so you don't need to worry. Think of building/driving gas powered cars going to the way of HAM radio in 25 years, and I think you'll see why I'm not worried about hobbyists using up the last of the gas supply.:)
>I'm sorry, but if it unaffordable for almost everyone that is, from a practical standpoint, the same thing as running out.
However, from an economic, doomsday, and personal safety perspective, it's completely different.
Basically, in one case you could have complete pandemonium if gas is completely unavailable one day and is needed. In the other case you have a slow acclimation to the "new reality", which has always been proven to be far safer.
You can think of it simply: Saying we will run out of gas is like calling the Waaaahmbulance. Saying gas will get expensive is like saying trees will grow. People are used to steadily rising prices and are prepared adapt to them.
So, from the practical, yes, you're right, if we ignore all other "practical" factors, like RPG production, AK-47 production, mental hospital building, repairing blown up streets, replacing exploded buildings, government coups, and other mad max 2 scenarios. Which seems like a *lot* to ignore to fit into your definition, but to each his own, I suppose.
Perhaps you sorta get where I'm coming from here, now. Think Mad Max 2 vs. Back to the Future 2, and you'll understand.
If counterfeiting money is stealing, then why does every country have a special law against it? For fun? For the hell of it? Because it feels good to pass more laws? It's not as if laws against stealing are any less lenient than laws against counterfeiting.
The fact is those special counterfeiting laws exist simply because the government could not prosecute an individual for stealing if they were to reproduce bank notes without such laws. They could only prosecute under copyright law, if they were lucky, which clearly would be pointless, as the offender would again just print out the amount of money they are fined.
For reference, you may wish to look at the Bank of Canada's notes on this. They definately wouldn't waste their breath saying this if reproducing bank notes were stealing:
Even in those cases where the reproduction of the bank note image is not an offence under the Criminal Code or the Copyright Act, the Bank is still entitled to enforce its copyright through civil action. Reproducing a bank note image without the Bank's permission may lead to civil action by the Bank for recovery of the infringing copies, as well as injunctions and the awarding of damages.
>You are using a service that you aren't paying for.
That's the point! Not paying for a service and stealing are not equal. If it were, why would an officer give you a $10 parking ticket, rather than claiming you stole parking service from the city, which would net them a lot more, and would certainly stop people from parking illegally (who wants a criminal record for _stealing_?) I'll tell you why. Because he wouldn't win.
Neither would anyone suing you for stealing their work when you only pirated it.
>Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain the practical difference, for the average person, between running physically out of oil and merely having it become unavailable to a vast majority of the population, who will presumably still have cars -- and, more to the point, tractors -- on this hypothetical day.
Oh, that's simple.
- Let's say you use 100 litres of fuel a month. At current Canadian prices, you are paying $90 a month for that. Also, let's say the gas car costs $20,000.
- Let's say hydrogen to power a hydrogen car the same distance would cost, oh, $500 a month (of course, that's far too high -- that isn't important, as you'll see). Let's say an equivalent hydrogen car costs $50,000
The gas car, over ten years, would cost a total of $30,800 ignoring maintenance costs and inflation (best case scenario for limited fuel supply vehicles).
The hydrogen car, over ten years, would cost a total of $110,000.
So, at those rates, choosing a gas car is clearly the economically smart option.
Now, let's look, say, 25 years into the future, when gas is harder to come by, and therefore rates have naturally increased very much.
- 100 litres might cost $900 (actually, that's probably LOWER than it will be -- look at gas prices in Europe right now). The car costs $50,000.
- Hydrogen, being unlimited, has come down in price due to a larger supply, to, say, $50 for the equivalent amount. The hydrogen car, due to scale manufacturing benefits now costs only $50,000 (remember, inflation says costs would go up, but we have a force driving them down).
The gas car costs $158,000 over 10 years. The hydrogen car costs $56,000.
This time, clearly, economically the hydrogen car is the best choice.
As cars last only about 10 years, the transition should be expected to take up to 10 years (in reality, it will be less, due to savings making people dump gas cars early).
Now, the difference is that the gas will still be there for applications that require it. But the change will be smooth from gas to hydrogen (or whatever you prefer). As the gas price slowly rises in the next few years, people will, one by one, individually decide not to replace their decaying gas cars with new gas cars, and will replace them with electric cars instead.
We would be much more screwed if cars and tractors lasted forever. Fortunately, I can't think of a any cars, that, under daily use, last forever.
If one follows gas price increases over the past 10 years (the lifetime of a car in my parts), you'll see that nobody will be particularly "burned" in the present supply/demand scheme, as gas prices do *NOT* rise that sharply often.
Now, if we were to run out of gas totally, and we ignore supply/demand economics, the results would be far more dramatic. One day you would be happily driving your car to the gas station filling it up, the next all but 2 stations would have gas, then the next, nobody would have gas. It'd be chaos. It'd be like lining up for bread in the USSR.
>The general public in the US is so amazingly ignorant, they probably never even bother thinking that we could run out of oil, much less that we will, and that is is only a matter of time before we do (if no action is taken, which is looking rather likely as always).
Ignorance is only a factor for those willing to forget basic economics 101 from elementary school. It dictates a simple principle that is as follows:
We will never "run out" of anything. It will simply become unaffordable for almost everyone.
What *could* happen, is that oil becomes a strictly controlled substance, similar to cocaine, and simply becomes unavailable for sale so that various militaries can use it to power ever increasingly hungry aircraft, and possibly use trading oil to force other countries into various positions. Again, we still haven't run out.
Basically, oil could (has?) become the new gold.
>"just so some pinko environmentalist wackos can stop using oil".
Oddly enough, about the *ONLY* likely scenario (not the only one, but things like the earth exploding, I don't believe in) that could cause us to run out of oil *IS* communism, which, by its very nature, ignores the effects of supply and demand on prices, and rather presses the effects more viscerally on to the proletariat.
>And half of them probably would say "Poppycock; there's no way we could run out of fuel. God wouldn't let that happen to us!" It sounds like an anti-religion troll, but I seem to recall actually hearing rubbish like that from the far-right...
Religion ain't got nothin' to do with it. I'm sure any PhD in economics from a recognized university could explain why we won't run out of oil even better than I have.
13.2 Volts will not shock anyone without subdermal probes (not suggested). You don't feel a thing when you touch the two terminals of a 9 volt battery with your fingers, do you, even when they're wet with salt water? Now, touching a spark plug, that probably would give you a shock, but I'm not a car mechanic, so I can't/don't want to verify it.
>and please no diatribe on whether steal is the right word
Ok. Instead can I point out a third method to obtain music that isn't shoplifting (everthing you mentioned, by the way, is bang on for the word stealing, so yes, you are right, that's a valid method to obtain music)?
Pirating it.
That being said...
>Yes, people will steal more than they would buy, but that doesn't change the fact they wanted the music to begin with, which certainly points toward a possible sale.
Oddly enough, most stolen goods end up in pawn shops or quickly resold to someone else. Rarely is anything stolen kept for personal use. Probably has something to do with the fact that being caught with torn apart CD security covers isn't going to do much for your defence in court...
>When do these companies realize the real need ? A PDA below the USD400 price tag in metal casing, with classical PDA functions and a built in 1.8" HDA so you can seriously use it for MP3. Oh, and add a GPRS system.
When you can get GPRS service widely in the US, especially on a train.:-D
Using the Microjack 4-eyes card (way cheaper than 4 separate capture cards). It's got 4 inputs and a BT878 encoder so I have a good feeling I'll get it working.
There's a nearby gorge (Elora Gorge, to be exact) to me which is surrounded by woods. Every couple of years someone manages to fall off it (or so is rumored), despite the signs.
Mostly, that's because there's no guard rail installed, and the trees are thick enough that they block the sunlight [example]. The land is such that if you aren't spending your time looking down during your time in the woods, you could easily take a step too far.
Personally, I'm not active enough to care that much, and even if I were, I wouldn't go there due to the danger -- but that doesn't mean I don't care about people that do!
And if the signs say things like "Dangerous cliff -- use caution" and someone dies because you stole the signs and they didn't know the area; I guess you just disregard that as nature culling the herd, right?
You're even colder than I am. And that's fucking ice cold.
If you want woods without signs, get your own damn money and buy some. Or use your vote to change things to the way you want them (hint: Nobody else agrees with you).
Otherwise, keep your damn hands off everyone's property, hoodlum.
Yes, but having fixed quite a few "pre-installs" of XP on various manufacturer's (Sony, Compaq, HP, e-Machines, Toshiba, etc) computers by re-installing from a "Real" XP home edition OEM CD, the CD-keys provided with those machines are generally perfectly compatible with it.
This means nobody should be whining about having to use a pirate key -- yours *should* be ok. Although I'm willing to entertain exceptions, I do have doubts about their existance.
>Ummm... obviously someone has forgotton about the days before sdram
No, I haven't.
>pairs are nothing new, nor unusual.
They were only found, after the heyday of 72-pin simms, and long after SDRAM had "conquered" the desktop market, "commonly" on RAMBUS machines. In quotes because I never did get to work on a RAMBUS machines until a few months ago, it was that rare.
I do believe anyone planning to crack a system probably already owns a simlar system, so wouldn't only informing those affected put them in the same position as letting everyone at large know?
(This is, of course, ignoring economics -- just paying attention to the security aspect).
>Why don't they simply mount the GPU to the other side of the board to allow a much larger heatsink?
Filter capacitors. I've often found them mounted just behind the video card. A combination of a heatsink on the wrong side, along with these, would be a big problem, even if they didn't touch (most capacitors don't appreciate heat).
If you'd read closer, he also mentions using this in favour of his current 19" monitor set up, which I doubt gets a resolution so high.
So, 1600x1200 on that LCD would look just peachy in comparison to 1280x1024 on the monitor he dislikes.
That being said, the editors don't have the time or energy to memorize the specs of every electronics product every manufacturer sells. On that note... How far is it from tip to grip on the Hakko 900S soldering handle?
If your potential employer sucks so hard they can't get H/R a PDF reader, then, just perhaps, you're lucky they can't open the file. I mean, what kind of tech job are you going to be doing where installing a PDF reader for someone isn't allowed? Working for Fort Knox? (heck, perhaps I take that back!)
Anyways, if you're that desparate for work that you'll take anything from anyone, I expect that you'll be presenting your resume in person, anyways.
BTW: McDonald's will take any format you want to submit (paper, fax, or any form of email you could think of). Also, from personal experience many years ago as a student looking for lazy work, the regular floor staff didn't get their jobs by handing in resumes. They had to fill out a special McDonald's-only application form, and undergo an interview. No resume at all, word, or PDF. That being said, you're just too stupid to think of looking up the relevant page at McDonald's for yourself, so we forgive you.
So, all-in-all, yeah, he'd actually have to look farther than McDonald's. A lot farther. Perhaps you could give us an actual example of how much farther? Joe's Eat In and Get Gas, perhaps?
Slashdot Mirror
Q: Should we end emacipation?
A: ( ) YES / ( ) NO
>If now, gasoline vs. electric cars cost $50,000 vs. $110,000 over 10 years, while in 20 years those costs are $120,000 vs $100,000, we will be in bad shape.
:)
Over the past 20 years, a more than tripling of the cost of running a car has occurred. Check an old "Price is Right" from 1984 and you'll see that the cost of a car back then was as low as $5,000 and gas was less than $0.40 a litre. That makes the car from my example cost $9,800 over the lifetime of the vehicle.
That car now "comfortably" costs over $30,000 over it's lifetime.
I think we'd be in fine shape, myself, if you consider how much _less_ the inflation would be over that period.
>Add to that, the world is not an ideal economic system: People are not rational, and they do not have perfect information.
True. Fortunately, people in general do not control the gas supply. People running stores, and, more importantly, people owning oil wells and refineries do. Generally, these people tend to operate as a group, and, doing this, tend to iron out decisions that would cause massive disruption to world economics.
>Finally, and selfishly, in 30 years when I am driving around in my biodiesel hybrid electric / solar car, I would like gasoline for my vintage Delorian / Cessna / Mustang I maintain as a hobby to cost less than $10 / gallon instead of $100 / gallon.
I'm sure you would, but that won't happed. Besides, if it's a hobby car, you won't be driving it far enough, or often enough, to worry about the price of gas. Even if you are, most people aren't, so you don't need to worry. Think of building/driving gas powered cars going to the way of HAM radio in 25 years, and I think you'll see why I'm not worried about hobbyists using up the last of the gas supply.
>I'm sorry, but if it unaffordable for almost everyone that is, from a practical standpoint, the same thing as running out.
However, from an economic, doomsday, and personal safety perspective, it's completely different.
Basically, in one case you could have complete pandemonium if gas is completely unavailable one day and is needed. In the other case you have a slow acclimation to the "new reality", which has always been proven to be far safer.
You can think of it simply: Saying we will run out of gas is like calling the Waaaahmbulance. Saying gas will get expensive is like saying trees will grow. People are used to steadily rising prices and are prepared adapt to them.
So, from the practical, yes, you're right, if we ignore all other "practical" factors, like RPG production, AK-47 production, mental hospital building, repairing blown up streets, replacing exploded buildings, government coups, and other mad max 2 scenarios. Which seems like a *lot* to ignore to fit into your definition, but to each his own, I suppose.
Perhaps you sorta get where I'm coming from here, now. Think Mad Max 2 vs. Back to the Future 2, and you'll understand.
>Its still stealing.
If counterfeiting money is stealing, then why does every country have a special law against it? For fun? For the hell of it? Because it feels good to pass more laws? It's not as if laws against stealing are any less lenient than laws against counterfeiting.
The fact is those special counterfeiting laws exist simply because the government could not prosecute an individual for stealing if they were to reproduce bank notes without such laws. They could only prosecute under copyright law, if they were lucky, which clearly would be pointless, as the offender would again just print out the amount of money they are fined.
For reference, you may wish to look at the Bank of Canada's notes on this. They definately wouldn't waste their breath saying this if reproducing bank notes were stealing:
Even in those cases where the reproduction of the bank note image is not an offence under the Criminal Code or the Copyright Act, the Bank is still entitled to enforce its copyright through civil action. Reproducing a bank note image without the Bank's permission may lead to civil action by the Bank for recovery of the infringing copies, as well as injunctions and the awarding of damages.
>You are using a service that you aren't paying for.
That's the point! Not paying for a service and stealing are not equal. If it were, why would an officer give you a $10 parking ticket, rather than claiming you stole parking service from the city, which would net them a lot more, and would certainly stop people from parking illegally (who wants a criminal record for _stealing_?) I'll tell you why. Because he wouldn't win.
Neither would anyone suing you for stealing their work when you only pirated it.
>Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain the practical difference, for the average person, between running physically out of oil and merely having it become unavailable to a vast majority of the population, who will presumably still have cars -- and, more to the point, tractors -- on this hypothetical day.
Oh, that's simple.
- Let's say you use 100 litres of fuel a month. At current Canadian prices, you are paying $90 a month for that. Also, let's say the gas car costs $20,000.
- Let's say hydrogen to power a hydrogen car the same distance would cost, oh, $500 a month (of course, that's far too high -- that isn't important, as you'll see). Let's say an equivalent hydrogen car costs $50,000
The gas car, over ten years, would cost a total of $30,800 ignoring maintenance costs and inflation (best case scenario for limited fuel supply vehicles).
The hydrogen car, over ten years, would cost a total of $110,000.
So, at those rates, choosing a gas car is clearly the economically smart option.
Now, let's look, say, 25 years into the future, when gas is harder to come by, and therefore rates have naturally increased very much.
- 100 litres might cost $900 (actually, that's probably LOWER than it will be -- look at gas prices in Europe right now). The car costs $50,000.
- Hydrogen, being unlimited, has come down in price due to a larger supply, to, say, $50 for the equivalent amount. The hydrogen car, due to scale manufacturing benefits now costs only $50,000 (remember, inflation says costs would go up, but we have a force driving them down).
The gas car costs $158,000 over 10 years. The hydrogen car costs $56,000.
This time, clearly, economically the hydrogen car is the best choice.
As cars last only about 10 years, the transition should be expected to take up to 10 years (in reality, it will be less, due to savings making people dump gas cars early).
Now, the difference is that the gas will still be there for applications that require it. But the change will be smooth from gas to hydrogen (or whatever you prefer). As the gas price slowly rises in the next few years, people will, one by one, individually decide not to replace their decaying gas cars with new gas cars, and will replace them with electric cars instead.
We would be much more screwed if cars and tractors lasted forever. Fortunately, I can't think of a any cars, that, under daily use, last forever.
If one follows gas price increases over the past 10 years (the lifetime of a car in my parts), you'll see that nobody will be particularly "burned" in the present supply/demand scheme, as gas prices do *NOT* rise that sharply often.
Now, if we were to run out of gas totally, and we ignore supply/demand economics, the results would be far more dramatic. One day you would be happily driving your car to the gas station filling it up, the next all but 2 stations would have gas, then the next, nobody would have gas. It'd be chaos. It'd be like lining up for bread in the USSR.
Hope that helps!
>The general public in the US is so amazingly ignorant, they probably never even bother thinking that we could run out of oil, much less that we will, and that is is only a matter of time before we do (if no action is taken, which is looking rather likely as always).
Ignorance is only a factor for those willing to forget basic economics 101 from elementary school. It dictates a simple principle that is as follows:
We will never "run out" of anything. It will simply become unaffordable for almost everyone.
Why?
Supply and Demand.
What *could* happen, is that oil becomes a strictly controlled substance, similar to cocaine, and simply becomes unavailable for sale so that various militaries can use it to power ever increasingly hungry aircraft, and possibly use trading oil to force other countries into various positions. Again, we still haven't run out.
Basically, oil could (has?) become the new gold.
>"just so some pinko environmentalist wackos can stop using oil".
Oddly enough, about the *ONLY* likely scenario (not the only one, but things like the earth exploding, I don't believe in) that could cause us to run out of oil *IS* communism, which, by its very nature, ignores the effects of supply and demand on prices, and rather presses the effects more viscerally on to the proletariat.
>And half of them probably would say "Poppycock; there's no way we could run out of fuel. God wouldn't let that happen to us!" It sounds like an anti-religion troll, but I seem to recall actually hearing rubbish like that from the far-right...
Religion ain't got nothin' to do with it. I'm sure any PhD in economics from a recognized university could explain why we won't run out of oil even better than I have.
13.2 Volts will not shock anyone without subdermal probes (not suggested). You don't feel a thing when you touch the two terminals of a 9 volt battery with your fingers, do you, even when they're wet with salt water? Now, touching a spark plug, that probably would give you a shock, but I'm not a car mechanic, so I can't/don't want to verify it.
>and please no diatribe on whether steal is the right word
Ok. Instead can I point out a third method to obtain music that isn't shoplifting (everthing you mentioned, by the way, is bang on for the word stealing, so yes, you are right, that's a valid method to obtain music)?
Pirating it.
That being said...
>Yes, people will steal more than they would buy, but that doesn't change the fact they wanted the music to begin with, which certainly points toward a possible sale.
Oddly enough, most stolen goods end up in pawn shops or quickly resold to someone else. Rarely is anything stolen kept for personal use. Probably has something to do with the fact that being caught with torn apart CD security covers isn't going to do much for your defence in court...
>When do these companies realize the real need ? A PDA below the USD400 price tag in metal casing, with classical PDA functions and a built in 1.8" HDA so you can seriously use it for MP3. Oh, and add a GPRS system.
:-D
When you can get GPRS service widely in the US, especially on a train.
(ok, ok, we know you're british, that's alright)
1.4 Watts? OH MY GOD!
:-)
My 1000 mAh 3.6 volt battery will only give me 2 1/2 hours of talk time! YIPES! What will I do?
Using the Microjack 4-eyes card (way cheaper than 4 separate capture cards). It's got 4 inputs and a BT878 encoder so I have a good feeling I'll get it working.
:-)
The software I'll use is ZoneMinder.
I'll post my success.
There's a nearby gorge (Elora Gorge, to be exact) to me which is surrounded by woods. Every couple of years someone manages to fall off it (or so is rumored), despite the signs.
Mostly, that's because there's no guard rail installed, and the trees are thick enough that they block the sunlight [example]. The land is such that if you aren't spending your time looking down during your time in the woods, you could easily take a step too far.
Personally, I'm not active enough to care that much, and even if I were, I wouldn't go there due to the danger -- but that doesn't mean I don't care about people that do!
And if the signs say things like "Dangerous cliff -- use caution" and someone dies because you stole the signs and they didn't know the area; I guess you just disregard that as nature culling the herd, right?
You're even colder than I am. And that's fucking ice cold.
If you want woods without signs, get your own damn money and buy some. Or use your vote to change things to the way you want them (hint: Nobody else agrees with you).
Otherwise, keep your damn hands off everyone's property, hoodlum.
With that reasoning, you could justify putting everyone on a regimen of Ritalin.
The chip is an ISD 2500, and will make some seriously ghetto sound (think worse than telephone), but hey, when you're going ghetto, DO IT ALL GHETTO!
Yes, but having fixed quite a few "pre-installs" of XP on various manufacturer's (Sony, Compaq, HP, e-Machines, Toshiba, etc) computers by re-installing from a "Real" XP home edition OEM CD, the CD-keys provided with those machines are generally perfectly compatible with it.
This means nobody should be whining about having to use a pirate key -- yours *should* be ok. Although I'm willing to entertain exceptions, I do have doubts about their existance.
I guess the sign at my store will have to change from:
"If you are running windows XP with this key (pirate key here) you are vulnerable to the blaster virus -- fix it buy buying windows XP here!"
to:
"If you are running windows XP with this key (pirate key) download SP2 to fix your sasser/blaster/etc virus".
Oh well. About time I suppose.
>Ummm... obviously someone has forgotton about the days before sdram
No, I haven't.
>pairs are nothing new, nor unusual.
They were only found, after the heyday of 72-pin simms, and long after SDRAM had "conquered" the desktop market, "commonly" on RAMBUS machines. In quotes because I never did get to work on a RAMBUS machines until a few months ago, it was that rare.
Worse yet, most RAMBUS had to be installed in pairs, while all other memory systems had switched over to single stick technology, doubling the cost.
>Tires are expected to not blow up
Just like with batteries, worn tires are expected to blow up (so we replace them before they are worn).
However, just like people want more than a year from a new set of tires, they also want more than a year from a battery.
As a reference, most laptop batteries will last at least 2 years with regular use.
I do believe anyone planning to crack a system probably already owns a simlar system, so wouldn't only informing those affected put them in the same position as letting everyone at large know?
(This is, of course, ignoring economics -- just paying attention to the security aspect).
>Why don't they simply mount the GPU to the other side of the board to allow a much larger heatsink?
Filter capacitors. I've often found them mounted just behind the video card. A combination of a heatsink on the wrong side, along with these, would be a big problem, even if they didn't touch (most capacitors don't appreciate heat).
If you'd read closer, he also mentions using this in favour of his current 19" monitor set up, which I doubt gets a resolution so high.
So, 1600x1200 on that LCD would look just peachy in comparison to 1280x1024 on the monitor he dislikes.
That being said, the editors don't have the time or energy to memorize the specs of every electronics product every manufacturer sells. On that note... How far is it from tip to grip on the Hakko 900S soldering handle?
If your potential employer sucks so hard they can't get H/R a PDF reader, then, just perhaps, you're lucky they can't open the file. I mean, what kind of tech job are you going to be doing where installing a PDF reader for someone isn't allowed? Working for Fort Knox? (heck, perhaps I take that back!)
Anyways, if you're that desparate for work that you'll take anything from anyone, I expect that you'll be presenting your resume in person, anyways.
BTW: McDonald's will take any format you want to submit (paper, fax, or any form of email you could think of). Also, from personal experience many years ago as a student looking for lazy work, the regular floor staff didn't get their jobs by handing in resumes. They had to fill out a special McDonald's-only application form, and undergo an interview. No resume at all, word, or PDF. That being said, you're just too stupid to think of looking up the relevant page at McDonald's for yourself, so we forgive you.
So, all-in-all, yeah, he'd actually have to look farther than McDonald's. A lot farther. Perhaps you could give us an actual example of how much farther? Joe's Eat In and Get Gas, perhaps?
chntpasswd + windows PE = Done & Done. :-)