No way, not in a million years. What most people fail to realize is that when a provider carries a channel, they are required (forced?) to carry a whole bunch of other channels with it. Remember the Echostar vs. Viacom fiasco? It's either all or none with Vialcom and their ilk.
Echostar used to offer the custom channel thing, but then broadcasters like Viacom step in and say "If you want Spongebob, then you will carry these other 10 channels of ours, or you get nothing." That's just how it works.
I'd say the worst change pointed out there is the re-dubbing of Boba Fett. The new voice sounds horrible; it's weak and delivered badly. Shit, I could do a better job. The accent doesn't work, either. With the original voice, he didn't have to say too much because when he did speak, it had the tone of "F with me and you'll regret it before you know it." The voice was the main thing, it made you feel the character, and it got bastardized.
The new voice makes me think "WTF is Vader listening to this wimp for?" whereas before Boba Fett sounded like someone who was as equally badass as Vader.
You mean, apart from Bush terrible record these laft four years? Honnestly, I just don't understand. Are you blind? This guy is the worst president the US ever had!
Again, no examples, just a satement with nothing to back it up.
Let's talk mining industry, for example. The Clinton administration sent those jobs out of the U.S. and pretty much shut down any new mining in the country. How? By a reinterpretation of the mining law regarding how much space the processing plant can take in proportion to the size of the deposit to be mined. Thankfully, existing operations were grandfathered in, otherwise we'd be in a world of hurt and have to rely 100% on other countries for raw materials.
Mining is required. No question about it. Where do all the various metals in your computer come from? (Or all the vehicles we drive, parts of the buildings we live in, and on and on and on...) Not trees, nor plants. It has to be mined. Since mining companies aren't allowed enough space to build a plant to process the ore under the previous administration's reinterpretation of an existing law, and we require the minerals to support our economy, it must come from out of the country. Barrick Gold operates the Goldstrike mine in Nevada, one of the largest producers of gold. However, take a look at where all their new projects are going to be. Not in the U.S. In 1994 the company started to expand outside of the U.S. Previously, the company only focused on North American properties.
Sending jobs out of the country comes in many forms. The mining industry is one of them, and Bush didn't do it. I'm not blind; I can see beyind the TV ads, look up information, and think for myself.
Of the three responses for each section, I feel like Kerry had the least to say about almost everything. Bush and Nader had much more useful information, and at least tried to back up their responses with some justification.
In particular, here's Kerry's response in Social Security:
We must end the practice of robbing the Social Security Trust Fund to balance the budget and protect savings for the future.
But HOW? Bush and Nader at least say something as to how, or have some vague idea. But Kerry just returns a idealistic line of nonsense that people think is smart, but provides no idea what we might expect him to do if elected. Responses like this make Kerry look like the clueless one. Maybe he's just saying generic stuff so he can change his mind on something later.
That, and the fact that my university is so horribly biased against the Republican party without any apparent reason (except that it's cool to hate and deface property around here with anti-Bush whatever), make me lean away from Kerry.
If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.
If you are traveling at a high rate of speed losing power steering/braking will cause more problems for you. First try neutral and even a lower gear if for some reason neutral isn't engaging. It's going to over-rev the engine but personally I'd prefer to replace a transmission or the entire engine rather than my blood or organs.
In all of the cars I've driven, including my parents' cars, power seeting and power brakes still work fine as long as the vehicle is in motion and the transmission is in gear. It feels basically like a power take off to keep things critical to control the vehicle running in the event the engine stalls. My current car (a Ford Focus) does this, too. If I turn the car off and leave it in gear, it keeps going just fine, although without the engine it will eventually just stop. Since I have a manual, if I depress the clutch, I can feel the power assist go away. Release the clutch and it comes back and the car doesn't handle any different than if it were actually running. The only difference is the warning lights and the tach reads zero while the speedometer still indicates current speed.
The danger in turning the key is that the steering wheel will lock. Although you will still have power brakes and power steering, the steering wheel ends up locked and you're going to be stuck in whatever direction it hits the lock at. If you're going fast, a locked steering wheel could lead to a quick disaster.
I wouldn't recommend that anyone try this with their own cars unless you're sure of your ability to handle the vehicle in case something goes wrong. If you must, go find an empty parking lot to find out what your car does when you turn it off while in motion and how to do it safely.
I still don't see the value added. I can see these movies in the theater which is better than anything I can put in my home... for a lot less money: $9 vs $10k or even $2k.
The biggest value for me boils down to a lack of asshats with cell phones and parents with screaming babies who refuse to take the child out of the theater because "it's just a baby." I could also do without the losers who won't shut up, or the person who feels the need to explain every second of the movie to everyone around them. The big screen would be nice if everyone could behave.
Some of the best theater experiences I've had were watching any of the LOTR movies at their first showing because 99% of the crowd were well behaved fans who wanted to stay up till 3am to watch the movie before everyone else. The worst ones were any other time.
I'd rather have a big TV, nice sound system, my sofa, and a Netflix subscription. Aside from costing me less in the long run, if a movie really sucks, I don't lose $20. (Girlfriends are expensive. I never spent $35 at the theater before that, and as poor as I am, Netflix is a better deal.)
At 35 bucks a shot for the theater, versus a $3000 widescreen TV, that'd give me about 85 theater movies. I've got almost triple that number in Netflix waiting, a lot of it stuff I've seen before and find worth my time to watch. Plus no idiots, a screen that's always in focus, a sound system that someone didn't mess with, and the food is cheaper. Plus it does HDTV, and some TV out there really is worth watching. (Not lame shit like Big Brother 5 or brain dead comedies.) That's the value to me, anyway.
Since the article is a dupe, I'll just dupe my response, too.
"Hey, I know how to fix the internet!" "How?" "Build a new internet on top of the old one!" "Uhh..."
The internet doesn't need fixing, it seems to run just fine. What it does need are less people running virus magnets and creating all kinds of problems. The lack of security is *not* the internet's fault; it already does what it needs to do. Security should not be the job of the transport. The job of the transport is to transport stuff, be it unencrypted data or the next generation of uber-encrypted VPN for those who want security. (This is my gripe with all these "wireless security" methods. Just build a damn base station with a built in VPN server and be done with it. But then they couldn't introduce "new and improved security" every other month and sell more stuff.)
Got virus problems? It's not the internet's falut, nor its responsibility. The responsibility for that should be on the client side. I see attempted windows exploits coming to my network all the time: in my denied connections for my firewall. Packets dropped, no harm done. Same with my Apache logs. I scan my incoming and outgoing email for viruses, firewall everything, and make those in my family who use Windows aware of issues like don't click on random shit in your email you know nothing about. And guess what? Everything works smoothly and plays nice.
The idea is nothing more than buzz to create some interest from people who have money in the hope that they'll part with their money. "Look what we can do, we can fix the internet! Now, we'll just need you to write a check for..." Besides, how long will it be before an internet tunneled over an internet gets overloaded? Then what? Tunnel another internet over the internet tunneled over the internet? If you want a new, faster, better network, you gotta build one from the ground up.
"Hey, I know how to fix the internet!" "How?" "Build a new internet on top of the old one!" "Uhh..."
The internet doesn't need fixing, it seems to run just fine. What it does need are less people running virus magnets and creating all kinds of problems. The lack of security is *not* the internet's fault; it already does what it needs to do. Security should not be the job of the transport. The job of the transport is to transport stuff, be it unencrypted data or the next generation of uber-encrypted VPN for those who want security. (This is my gripe with all these "wireless security" methods. Just build a damn base station with a built in VPN server and be done with it. But then they couldn't introduce "new and improved security" every other month and sell more stuff.)
Got virus problems? It's not the internet's falut, nor its responsibility. The responsibility for that should be on the client side. I see attempted windows exploits coming to my network all the time: in my denied connections for my firewall. Packets dropped, no harm done. Same with my Apache logs. I scan my incoming and outgoing email for viruses, firewall everything, and make those in my family who use Windows aware of issues like don't click on random shit in your email you know nothing about. And guess what? Everything works smoothly and plays nice.
The idea is nothing more than buzz to create some interest from people who have money in the hope that they'll part with their money. "Look what we can do, we can fix the internet! Now, we'll just need you to write a check for..." Besides, how long will it be before an internet tunneled over an internet gets overloaded? Then what? Tunnel another internet over the internet tunneled over the internet? If you want a new, faster, better network, you gotta build one from the ground up.
Online subscriptions to content you don't own are such a "great" idea. A DRM crippled PC/game console will be ever so useful when this "company" goes belly up and you don't own any of the bits stored inside.
Anyone remember DIVX? (Not to be confused with DivX.) Kind of the same thing, except targeting the DVD market. Supposedly "better" than DVD. Thankfully, it failed the miserable death it deserved, but not before parting idiots with their money.
serial number series A1045 is under the recall, too.
Re:11,000 dead civilians in iraq
on
Semper WiFi
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
I know more than a few people who went this route (military then college); college is fscking expensive and if you can't afford it, then every bit of money you can get your hands on is a good thing. I spent $300 on books alone last week. Add on housing, tuition, food, etc. and it can be pricey.
Some people will probably join after college and go to OTS. Having a degree is one way to go in as an officer. Others, like Pat Tillman, were probably not motivated to join by money or lack of any other choice. Some people join because it's what they want to do. Hell, I'm considering joining the Air Force or Navy, and I'm not looking to go out and kill people. I'll have a degree in Computer Science by then. Perhaps it'll suck and have burned four years of time, but people spend far much more time in dead end jobs from hell with a PHB. Or maybe it'll be fulfilling and I'll make a career out of it. Stockpiles of money is not what everyone is after.
Yeah, this is supposed to be about WiFi, but I felt the need to respond anyway. Yet those in the military are the ones who protect the freedom to bash those same people.
Re:Why geeks should not discuss firearms...
on
Ready, Aim, HACK!
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, it's a troll, but I'll bite...
If you pointed this device at someone holding a cell phone you are likely to "miss" and pick up the guy behind and to the right, or left, of him. How the hell are you going to zero a fucking antenna? hmmm?! You cant, not with a scope anyway.
Really easy, actually. Get a scope (the other kind) and watch the screen. Adjust the optical scope accordingly. The laser pointer method is typically used as a quick and dirty way to aim two directional antennas at eachother.
Besides, the beam width of a scope is somewhat less than the beam width of a yagi. Laser is much narrower. Assuming you've aligned the scope with a scope, whatever you see is definitely going to be the target. Just because one is kinetic energy and the other RF energy doesn't mean it can't be aimed properly.
because most of you have never even hel a real firearm and you have NO idea how they work! Just beacuse they used a scoped rifle stock doesnt mean it can aim worth a shit!
I can't say SOF2 qualifies you as a firearms expert. Some of us do know how to properly operate, and have used, real live firearms.
Sensible design for its purpose
on
Ready, Aim, HACK!
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The "rifle" design with a scope actually makes sense. If there's a moving target at a decent enough distance, all you have to do it keep them in the sights while you communicate with the device. Otherwise, a yagi on a stick without sights is probably a little harder to aim precisely, especially if your target is far away.
Now if someone can figure out how to send the MPEG transport stream back to the digital cable box for playback...
The 6200 I was playing with was incapable of such a task - it had an output channel, but no input channel. Unfortunately I don't have it anymore since I do all my recording OTA and I don't have cable. With OTA tuners you can send the stream back to the tuner and have it play in all its high definition glory on a widescreen TV.
This guy beat me to an application; all I have to show is a modified version of VirtualDVHS that responds to remote control commands from a Mits integrated HDTV. See it here. It basically pretends to be a VCR and uses the TV's internal event timer to do recordings.
Only if the mac owner owns a powermac g5 because its the only mac that can play back 1920x1080 mpeg2 files.
Which is why the method I use with an old 266 G3 is preferable to me: the HD stream is recorded on the computer, but the TV's tuner does all the decoding work. Granted, I'm doing OTA recording, but that's what I watch so that's what I do.
PC owners are a different breed. They LIKE opening the case. They LIKE planning their next upgrade. They LIKE replacing heatsinks and then benchmarking the performance improvements.
I wouldn't generalize that much. I use a Mac as my primary system and I love to crack open the case on my PC's and screw around with the insides. Just recently I replaced some fans in a server, added some FXO cards to build a home PBX, and fixed a power supply with my trustly soldering iron because I didn't want to buy a new one and they're easy to fix. Did I mention I use Macs?
That's exactly me, the Mac user. I like that stuff, too. the Mac has nothing to do with it. I have Sun hardware, too. Sparc is truly a different breed.
Heck, that setup will cost 'ya over a grand and maybe closer to a grand and a half.
Why not get a HD-TiVo?
Because there is no such thing besides the DirecTV model; you need a DirecTV account to use it.
For the rest of us who want to record HD, I can get these channels for free in my area and timeshift them. Most places have the same channels, and more, available OTA.
OTA HDTV is a great resource, but it seems most people aren't aware of it. Yes, I understand there are conditions where the antenna won't work, but many don't even try. They instead think that whatever cable/DBS feeds them is all they can get.
If you have a HD capable DBS unit, chances are there's an OTA tuner in there, too. Try it. You might be surprised how good OTA HD really is.
Before the inevitable stream of "SBC sucks" comments, I'd like to throw in my hat for those of us who find SBC not that bad for what we are paying for. SBC, for their standard rates, gives me:
* Bridged DSL - No PPPoE crap (the right way to do it) * A proper CIDR subnet to my end (didn't even ask, came that way) * 2-bit connection subnet for the above (again, the right way to do it) * CIDR reverse DNS delegation (done in under an hour from asking) * Doesn't care if I have servers (yes, they know)
And they'll do this on any level account. It was impossible for me to find a provider that offered the same service in my area. One local ISP, when asked if they would do reverse CIDR delegation, didn't know what that was. (Yep, their "system admins" didn't know.) Needless to say, they would not get my business, aside from being three times more expensive than SBC.
SBC isn't that bad when the DSL service in your area is done right. Most of the outages I've had were due to people with shovels or backhoes digging up phone trunks, and the few that were their problem were promptly fixed. (One bad RT card, one bad DSLAM port.)
I realize we're all supposed to follow the party line of down with big corporations and up with Speakeasy around here, but there isn't anyone I could find that serves my area that can beat SBC's service offerings.
Slashdot Mirror
customizable channel lineups
No way, not in a million years. What most people fail to realize is that when a provider carries a channel, they are required (forced?) to carry a whole bunch of other channels with it. Remember the Echostar vs. Viacom fiasco? It's either all or none with Vialcom and their ilk.
Echostar used to offer the custom channel thing, but then broadcasters like Viacom step in and say "If you want Spongebob, then you will carry these other 10 channels of ours, or you get nothing." That's just how it works.
I'd say the worst change pointed out there is the re-dubbing of Boba Fett. The new voice sounds horrible; it's weak and delivered badly. Shit, I could do a better job. The accent doesn't work, either. With the original voice, he didn't have to say too much because when he did speak, it had the tone of "F with me and you'll regret it before you know it." The voice was the main thing, it made you feel the character, and it got bastardized.
The new voice makes me think "WTF is Vader listening to this wimp for?" whereas before Boba Fett sounded like someone who was as equally badass as Vader.
Easy solution: Florida doesn't get to vote anymore.
You mean, apart from Bush terrible record these laft four years?
Honnestly, I just don't understand. Are you blind? This guy is the worst president the US ever had!
Again, no examples, just a satement with nothing to back it up.
Let's talk mining industry, for example. The Clinton administration sent those jobs out of the U.S. and pretty much shut down any new mining in the country. How? By a reinterpretation of the mining law regarding how much space the processing plant can take in proportion to the size of the deposit to be mined. Thankfully, existing operations were grandfathered in, otherwise we'd be in a world of hurt and have to rely 100% on other countries for raw materials.
Mining is required. No question about it. Where do all the various metals in your computer come from? (Or all the vehicles we drive, parts of the buildings we live in, and on and on and on...) Not trees, nor plants. It has to be mined. Since mining companies aren't allowed enough space to build a plant to process the ore under the previous administration's reinterpretation of an existing law, and we require the minerals to support our economy, it must come from out of the country. Barrick Gold operates the Goldstrike mine in Nevada, one of the largest producers of gold. However, take a look at where all their new projects are going to be. Not in the U.S. In 1994 the company started to expand outside of the U.S. Previously, the company only focused on North American properties.
Sending jobs out of the country comes in many forms. The mining industry is one of them, and Bush didn't do it. I'm not blind; I can see beyind the TV ads, look up information, and think for myself.
Of the three responses for each section, I feel like Kerry had the least to say about almost everything. Bush and Nader had much more useful information, and at least tried to back up their responses with some justification.
In particular, here's Kerry's response in Social Security:
We must end the practice of robbing the Social Security Trust Fund to balance the budget and protect savings for the future.
But HOW? Bush and Nader at least say something as to how, or have some vague idea. But Kerry just returns a idealistic line of nonsense that people think is smart, but provides no idea what we might expect him to do if elected. Responses like this make Kerry look like the clueless one. Maybe he's just saying generic stuff so he can change his mind on something later.
That, and the fact that my university is so horribly biased against the Republican party without any apparent reason (except that it's cool to hate and deface property around here with anti-Bush whatever), make me lean away from Kerry.
Ack, first two paragraphs are from the parent. My comments start with "In all of the cars I've driven...". Even used preview, too.
If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off... In most cases you will lose both your power steering and your power braking. Make sure that you keep it at least on partially as most cars will not lose total power this way.
If you are traveling at a high rate of speed losing power steering/braking will cause more problems for you. First try neutral and even a lower gear if for some reason neutral isn't engaging. It's going to over-rev the engine but personally I'd prefer to replace a transmission or the entire engine rather than my blood or organs.
In all of the cars I've driven, including my parents' cars, power seeting and power brakes still work fine as long as the vehicle is in motion and the transmission is in gear. It feels basically like a power take off to keep things critical to control the vehicle running in the event the engine stalls. My current car (a Ford Focus) does this, too. If I turn the car off and leave it in gear, it keeps going just fine, although without the engine it will eventually just stop. Since I have a manual, if I depress the clutch, I can feel the power assist go away. Release the clutch and it comes back and the car doesn't handle any different than if it were actually running. The only difference is the warning lights and the tach reads zero while the speedometer still indicates current speed.
The danger in turning the key is that the steering wheel will lock. Although you will still have power brakes and power steering, the steering wheel ends up locked and you're going to be stuck in whatever direction it hits the lock at. If you're going fast, a locked steering wheel could lead to a quick disaster.
I wouldn't recommend that anyone try this with their own cars unless you're sure of your ability to handle the vehicle in case something goes wrong. If you must, go find an empty parking lot to find out what your car does when you turn it off while in motion and how to do it safely.
no waiting until your idiot teammate wearning the "myg0t" tag dies as he is the only one left alive on your team...
i hate yuo!
I still don't see the value added. I can see these movies in the theater which is better than anything I can put in my home ... for a lot less money: $9 vs $10k or even $2k.
The biggest value for me boils down to a lack of asshats with cell phones and parents with screaming babies who refuse to take the child out of the theater because "it's just a baby." I could also do without the losers who won't shut up, or the person who feels the need to explain every second of the movie to everyone around them. The big screen would be nice if everyone could behave.
Some of the best theater experiences I've had were watching any of the LOTR movies at their first showing because 99% of the crowd were well behaved fans who wanted to stay up till 3am to watch the movie before everyone else. The worst ones were any other time.
I'd rather have a big TV, nice sound system, my sofa, and a Netflix subscription. Aside from costing me less in the long run, if a movie really sucks, I don't lose $20. (Girlfriends are expensive. I never spent $35 at the theater before that, and as poor as I am, Netflix is a better deal.)
At 35 bucks a shot for the theater, versus a $3000 widescreen TV, that'd give me about 85 theater movies. I've got almost triple that number in Netflix waiting, a lot of it stuff I've seen before and find worth my time to watch. Plus no idiots, a screen that's always in focus, a sound system that someone didn't mess with, and the food is cheaper. Plus it does HDTV, and some TV out there really is worth watching. (Not lame shit like Big Brother 5 or brain dead comedies.) That's the value to me, anyway.
Since the article is a dupe, I'll just dupe my response, too.
"Hey, I know how to fix the internet!"
"How?"
"Build a new internet on top of the old one!"
"Uhh..."
The internet doesn't need fixing, it seems to run just fine. What it does need are less people running virus magnets and creating all kinds of problems. The lack of security is *not* the internet's fault; it already does what it needs to do. Security should not be the job of the transport. The job of the transport is to transport stuff, be it unencrypted data or the next generation of uber-encrypted VPN for those who want security. (This is my gripe with all these "wireless security" methods. Just build a damn base station with a built in VPN server and be done with it. But then they couldn't introduce "new and improved security" every other month and sell more stuff.)
Got virus problems? It's not the internet's falut, nor its responsibility. The responsibility for that should be on the client side. I see attempted windows exploits coming to my network all the time: in my denied connections for my firewall. Packets dropped, no harm done. Same with my Apache logs. I scan my incoming and outgoing email for viruses, firewall everything, and make those in my family who use Windows aware of issues like don't click on random shit in your email you know nothing about. And guess what? Everything works smoothly and plays nice.
The idea is nothing more than buzz to create some interest from people who have money in the hope that they'll part with their money. "Look what we can do, we can fix the internet! Now, we'll just need you to write a check for..." Besides, how long will it be before an internet tunneled over an internet gets overloaded? Then what? Tunnel another internet over the internet tunneled over the internet? If you want a new, faster, better network, you gotta build one from the ground up.
"Hey, I know how to fix the internet!"
"How?"
"Build a new internet on top of the old one!"
"Uhh..."
The internet doesn't need fixing, it seems to run just fine. What it does need are less people running virus magnets and creating all kinds of problems. The lack of security is *not* the internet's fault; it already does what it needs to do. Security should not be the job of the transport. The job of the transport is to transport stuff, be it unencrypted data or the next generation of uber-encrypted VPN for those who want security. (This is my gripe with all these "wireless security" methods. Just build a damn base station with a built in VPN server and be done with it. But then they couldn't introduce "new and improved security" every other month and sell more stuff.)
Got virus problems? It's not the internet's falut, nor its responsibility. The responsibility for that should be on the client side. I see attempted windows exploits coming to my network all the time: in my denied connections for my firewall. Packets dropped, no harm done. Same with my Apache logs. I scan my incoming and outgoing email for viruses, firewall everything, and make those in my family who use Windows aware of issues like don't click on random shit in your email you know nothing about. And guess what? Everything works smoothly and plays nice.
The idea is nothing more than buzz to create some interest from people who have money in the hope that they'll part with their money. "Look what we can do, we can fix the internet! Now, we'll just need you to write a check for..." Besides, how long will it be before an internet tunneled over an internet gets overloaded? Then what? Tunnel another internet over the internet tunneled over the internet? If you want a new, faster, better network, you gotta build one from the ground up.
So how many of us geeks were twisted enough to find out what came up when you searched for "Vampire shemale beastiality bondage"?
Enough to ensure it'll make the list.
Online subscriptions to content you don't own are such a "great" idea. A DRM crippled PC/game console will be ever so useful when this "company" goes belly up and you don't own any of the bits stored inside.
Anyone remember DIVX? (Not to be confused with DivX.) Kind of the same thing, except targeting the DVD market. Supposedly "better" than DVD. Thankfully, it failed the miserable death it deserved, but not before parting idiots with their money.
Eh... oops. sorry about that.
serial number series A1045 is under the recall, too.
I know more than a few people who went this route (military then college); college is fscking expensive and if you can't afford it, then every bit of money you can get your hands on is a good thing. I spent $300 on books alone last week. Add on housing, tuition, food, etc. and it can be pricey.
Some people will probably join after college and go to OTS. Having a degree is one way to go in as an officer. Others, like Pat Tillman, were probably not motivated to join by money or lack of any other choice. Some people join because it's what they want to do. Hell, I'm considering joining the Air Force or Navy, and I'm not looking to go out and kill people. I'll have a degree in Computer Science by then. Perhaps it'll suck and have burned four years of time, but people spend far much more time in dead end jobs from hell with a PHB. Or maybe it'll be fulfilling and I'll make a career out of it. Stockpiles of money is not what everyone is after.
Yeah, this is supposed to be about WiFi, but I felt the need to respond anyway. Yet those in the military are the ones who protect the freedom to bash those same people.
Yeah, it's a troll, but I'll bite...
If you pointed this device at someone holding a cell phone you are likely to "miss" and pick up the guy behind and to the right, or left, of him. How the hell are you going to zero a fucking antenna? hmmm?! You cant, not with a scope anyway.
Really easy, actually. Get a scope (the other kind) and watch the screen. Adjust the optical scope accordingly. The laser pointer method is typically used as a quick and dirty way to aim two directional antennas at eachother.
Besides, the beam width of a scope is somewhat less than the beam width of a yagi. Laser is much narrower. Assuming you've aligned the scope with a scope, whatever you see is definitely going to be the target. Just because one is kinetic energy and the other RF energy doesn't mean it can't be aimed properly.
because most of you have never even hel a real firearm and you have NO idea how they work! Just beacuse they used a scoped rifle stock doesnt mean it can aim worth a shit!
I can't say SOF2 qualifies you as a firearms expert. Some of us do know how to properly operate, and have used, real live firearms.
The "rifle" design with a scope actually makes sense. If there's a moving target at a decent enough distance, all you have to do it keep them in the sights while you communicate with the device. Otherwise, a yagi on a stick without sights is probably a little harder to aim precisely, especially if your target is far away.
Now if someone can figure out how to send the MPEG transport stream back to the digital cable box for playback...
The 6200 I was playing with was incapable of such a task - it had an output channel, but no input channel. Unfortunately I don't have it anymore since I do all my recording OTA and I don't have cable. With OTA tuners you can send the stream back to the tuner and have it play in all its high definition glory on a widescreen TV.
This guy beat me to an application; all I have to show is a modified version of VirtualDVHS that responds to remote control commands from a Mits integrated HDTV. See it here. It basically pretends to be a VCR and uses the TV's internal event timer to do recordings.
WTF church is this, was it some crazy LDS thing?
Hmm... no, the LDS church does no such thing. Nor do they require money from you, or attendance, or anything, really.
Only if the mac owner owns a powermac g5 because its the only mac that can play back 1920x1080 mpeg2 files.
Which is why the method I use with an old 266 G3 is preferable to me: the HD stream is recorded on the computer, but the TV's tuner does all the decoding work. Granted, I'm doing OTA recording, but that's what I watch so that's what I do.
I've been doing this for about a year already; with existing hardware. Firewire to Mits TV and I'm recording. Works with any FireWire enabled HDTV tuner out there.
PC owners are a different breed. They LIKE opening the case. They LIKE planning their next upgrade. They LIKE replacing heatsinks and then benchmarking the performance improvements.
I wouldn't generalize that much. I use a Mac as my primary system and I love to crack open the case on my PC's and screw around with the insides. Just recently I replaced some fans in a server, added some FXO cards to build a home PBX, and fixed a power supply with my trustly soldering iron because I didn't want to buy a new one and they're easy to fix. Did I mention I use Macs?
That's exactly me, the Mac user. I like that stuff, too. the Mac has nothing to do with it. I have Sun hardware, too. Sparc is truly a different breed.
Heck, that setup will cost 'ya over a grand and maybe closer to a grand and a half.
Why not get a HD-TiVo?
Because there is no such thing besides the DirecTV model; you need a DirecTV account to use it.
For the rest of us who want to record HD, I can get these channels for free in my area and timeshift them. Most places have the same channels, and more, available OTA.
OTA HDTV is a great resource, but it seems most people aren't aware of it. Yes, I understand there are conditions where the antenna won't work, but many don't even try. They instead think that whatever cable/DBS feeds them is all they can get.
If you have a HD capable DBS unit, chances are there's an OTA tuner in there, too. Try it. You might be surprised how good OTA HD really is.
Before the inevitable stream of "SBC sucks" comments, I'd like to throw in my hat for those of us who find SBC not that bad for what we are paying for. SBC, for their standard rates, gives me:
* Bridged DSL - No PPPoE crap (the right way to do it)
* A proper CIDR subnet to my end (didn't even ask, came that way)
* 2-bit connection subnet for the above (again, the right way to do it)
* CIDR reverse DNS delegation (done in under an hour from asking)
* Doesn't care if I have servers (yes, they know)
And they'll do this on any level account. It was impossible for me to find a provider that offered the same service in my area. One local ISP, when asked if they would do reverse CIDR delegation, didn't know what that was. (Yep, their "system admins" didn't know.) Needless to say, they would not get my business, aside from being three times more expensive than SBC.
SBC isn't that bad when the DSL service in your area is done right. Most of the outages I've had were due to people with shovels or backhoes digging up phone trunks, and the few that were their problem were promptly fixed. (One bad RT card, one bad DSLAM port.)
I realize we're all supposed to follow the party line of down with big corporations and up with Speakeasy around here, but there isn't anyone I could find that serves my area that can beat SBC's service offerings.