Granted, I haven't actually seen the movie, but if someone like Corley's involved, it's gotta be quality. If it were in the current poll, I'd be tempted to change my vote from Sneakers.
I've seen it, and I thought it was horrible. Truly mind-numbing.
and the right to make you agree to eula's comes from copyright law (since you're copying to your hard drive - a flimsy ass reason in the first place).
That's an interesting fact.
Some games and such require the CD even after the "full" installation. Is that really a copy? It doesn't seem like it to my naive self. That is, the stuff on the hard drive doesn't serve as a replacement for the installation media. Sounds pretty difficult to argue.
Web merchants are already struggling to keep pace with brick and mortar stores in the sense that all web orders must include shipping to the customers home. This additional burden places additional pressure on Internet retailers and forces them to cut margins even further to maintain competitive pricing with local shops.
I agree. I have some innovative practices which the government and the industry should support.
I build laptops out of ice using chainsaws. It costs a lot to buy the ice, and we have a lot of warranty problems. Furthermore, training the highly skilled artists is expensive.
Rather than using conventional shipping companies, I deliver goods by flying monkeys. Training costs are high, but I think society will find the service valuable.
Seriously, the whole point of a free market is to encourage people to do things efficiently. How does society benefit by subsidizing on-line transactions?
I was under the impressrion that the macrovision copy protection required both a hardware and software element... meaning that if the recording device and the media being copied both have macrovision on it, then the copies fail (or the signal is interfered with so it records funky). I used to have 2 VCR's, a newer and an older one. If I tried recording from the old to the new, it would crap out, but if I did the recording on the old one (without macrovision on it) then everything was hunky-dory.
If I recall correctly, type 1 macrovision works by confusing the Automatic Gain Control (AGC) of the VCR. An old VCR might not have AGC, and thus would not be affected.
The statute makes clear, however, that any exceptions to 1201(a)(1)(A) adopted by the Librarian of Congress are not defenses to violations of the
anti-traffic king provisions contained in 1201(a)(2) and 1201(b).
Go US government! The traffic king cuts me off all the time with his darn SUV.
The appropriate one is region 8, the one used by the airlines.
See the faq:
1: U.S., Canada, U.S. Territories
2: Japan, Europe, South Africa, and Middle East (including Egypt)
3: Southeast Asia and East Asia (including Hong Kong)
4: Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Islands, Central America, Mexico, South America, and the Caribbean
5: Eastern Europe (Former Soviet Union), Indian subcontinent, Africa, North Korea, and Mongolia
6: China
7: Reserved 8: Special international venues (airplanes, cruise ships, etc.)
Scenarist (which handles the authoring, but not MPEG encoding) for Irix has been around for years. This has been an expensive (outside the reach of consumers) solution, but it's the standard. Mac & NT solutions came later.
I can only watch one channel at the time. Why waste all this bandwidth on stuff you cannot possibly watch anyway. Put the tuner on the other side of the cable and switch channels remotely. All the extra bandwidth can be used for regular internet usage.
Right. That's exactly how they do it.
As a matter of fact, why not stream that remaining channel over TCP/IP anyway?
Because TCP isn't an efficient protocol for video. If you miss frames of video, you don't want them resent. You just drop 'em.
Lex Talionis, the principle of an eye for an eye, is a morally bankrupt code of law we've been moving away from for the past few thousand years, thankfully. It can't deal with the complexities of the modern legal order, and it ignores all proper justifications for systems of punishment: rehabilitation, prophylaxis, etc. It makes an assertion of rigid judgment in an attempt to avoid judgment itself. We can't live in a world without judgment.
Ask yourself this: should we rape the rapist? If not, why not?
It's not like that at all. The outage isn't a punishment; it just happened due to their own policies. It's more like the rapist getting herpes.
Actually, this is a very interesting phenomenon. It revolves around what the formal category of number expresses for different varieties of English-- does it express merely grammatical (i.e., purely formal) agreement of the verb with the subject noun phrase, or does it more or less transparently express some semantic concept of plurality?
There certainly is a debate among good writers about this; however, there is one true answer.;-)
Use singular nouns for singular ideas.
Use plural nouns for plural ideas. That is, if one means "the people at Microsoft" or the "jurors" then one should write that, not "Microsoft" or the "the jury".
I believe the point of matching the number of the subject and verb is to help us sort out which word is the subject. What information does one convey by using a singular verb above? Don't we all know that multiple people work at Microsoft?
Imagine what a bitch this sort of thing is for your second language. The reader has to imagine whether or not the writer thinks the word feels plural.
Re:JonKatz knows his technology...
on
'Thirteen Days'
·
· Score: 1
Seeing a boom mike in frame is not a "projectionist error." Think about it--if the man caught the boom mike in frame, it's going to be in the shot, and the film editors either catch it and fix it, or they don't. They're just like proofreaders.
How did they arrive at this conclusion? If they surveyed the workers, I think the result is biased. Many people would like to believe they're less mercenaries than they are.
* It turns out that each person's vote is more powerful that way. You vote for a small portion of the big vote, but you have a much bigger contribution to your portion of the vote compared to if you just had a general popular election.
How can this be? No matter what the system, the sum total of the power of the votes is to pick a president. How can each person's vote become more poweful? Can they elect two presidents? The only way one person gets more power is by taking it from someone else.
What is the probability that one person's vote will be able to turn a national election? The higher the probability, the more power each voter commands.
This sounds like nonsense to me. There's a finite amount of power, which we distribute among the voters.
The only question is, how should the power be distributed? One obvious answer is equally. One vote to each. Any other voting scheme operates by taking power from one voter and giving it to another. Therefore, I believe that this mathematical argument is hooey.
Now on the other hand, I can see great political benefit for the states (rather than the people directly) electing the president. Look at how the federal government routinely infringes on states' authority by controlling the flow of funds. These are funds gathered from residents of these states. Would this happen if we reverted to the state governments electing a president? I think not.
What does being from Sony have to do with having DD5.1 and DTS? There is no special relationship between Sony and DTS. In truth, *ANY* dvd player with digital audio out (copper sp/dif or optical toslink) will do both DD5.1 and DTS because "bits is bits" and the actual DD5.1/DTS processing is being handled by the receiver, not the dvd player.
I think your points are very good, but this statement isn't entirely true. Some older DVD players (e.g., older Sony 7000) don't do DTS paththrough on DVDs. The player doesn't have to do much, but it has to get the formatting and the demux right.
But yeah, the feature DTS passthrough in no way follows from the fact Sony makes it. In fact, Sony's SDDS competes with DTS in theaters directly.
Now, let's look at the cost. More than likely, it would be a per use cost for long period of time. So lets say all software use cost $.05 per minute because that's the best way to charge your customer and make the most profit inthe beginning. (Remember, right now Microsoft has the market share to force people to do things their way.) Let's say you use 240 minutes a month. 240*$.05 = $12 a month. Ok not bad, but consider 12 months * $12 = $144 a year. If the soft would cost $80 OTC, you just paid $64 more dollars than you would have if you bought the software. How many of us only use their computer for 4 hours a month?
Let me summarize.
Assuming the service is expensive, the service is expensive.
What does this have to do with mp3, exactly? It's an audio -> FM transmitter. very common, you can buy kits all over the place, and have been able to for years. Same stuff old (and new) CD changers work off of.... very simple circuit to build yourself.
How is this news?
Maybe it's like the mp3-compatible 56k modem I saw at Best Buy.
Slashdot Mirror
Some games and such require the CD even after the "full" installation. Is that really a copy? It doesn't seem like it to my naive self. That is, the stuff on the hard drive doesn't serve as a replacement for the installation media. Sounds pretty difficult to argue.
How about copying the programing into RAM?
I build laptops out of ice using chainsaws. It costs a lot to buy the ice, and we have a lot of warranty problems. Furthermore, training the highly skilled artists is expensive.
Rather than using conventional shipping companies, I deliver goods by flying monkeys. Training costs are high, but I think society will find the service valuable.
Seriously, the whole point of a free market is to encourage people to do things efficiently. How does society benefit by subsidizing on-line transactions?
+1, funny
1: U.S., Canada, U.S. Territories
2: Japan, Europe, South Africa, and Middle East (including Egypt)
3: Southeast Asia and East Asia (including Hong Kong)
4: Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Islands, Central America, Mexico, South America, and the Caribbean
5: Eastern Europe (Former Soviet Union), Indian subcontinent, Africa, North Korea, and Mongolia
6: China
7: Reserved
8: Special international venues (airplanes, cruise ships, etc.)
Scenarist (which handles the authoring, but not MPEG encoding) for Irix has been around for years. This has been an expensive (outside the reach of consumers) solution, but it's the standard. Mac & NT solutions came later.
I suspect that genuinely good programmers are underpaid relative to their less productive counterparts. I suspect that a union doesn't help them.
It seems pretty hopeless for the mass media when /. doesn't differentiate between hackers and crackers.
- Use singular nouns for singular ideas.
- Use plural nouns for plural ideas. That is, if one means "the people at Microsoft" or the "jurors" then one should write that, not "Microsoft" or the "the jury".
- I believe the point of matching the number of the subject and verb is to help us sort out which word is the subject. What information does one convey by using a singular verb above? Don't we all know that multiple people work at Microsoft?
Imagine what a bitch this sort of thing is for your second language. The reader has to imagine whether or not the writer thinks the word feels plural.How did they arrive at this conclusion? If they surveyed the workers, I think the result is biased. Many people would like to believe they're less mercenaries than they are.
The only question is, how should the power be distributed? One obvious answer is equally. One vote to each. Any other voting scheme operates by taking power from one voter and giving it to another. Therefore, I believe that this mathematical argument is hooey.
Now on the other hand, I can see great political benefit for the states (rather than the people directly) electing the president. Look at how the federal government routinely infringes on states' authority by controlling the flow of funds. These are funds gathered from residents of these states. Would this happen if we reverted to the state governments electing a president? I think not.
But yeah, the feature DTS passthrough in no way follows from the fact Sony makes it. In fact, Sony's SDDS competes with DTS in theaters directly.
Assuming the service is expensive, the service is expensive.