Naturally, ianal, but my guess is they can probably avoid disclosure if they scratch a check to Foster's lawyers. From my limited experience in litigation (I offer expert witness testimony in my field of expertise), usually it's fair game to cut and run when things turn against you. At this point, Capitol's best move probably is to just call butterfingers and pay up. No matter how they play this, they come out looking like fools. Their billings are either too large, in which case Foster gets her fees, or too small, and everybody knows they're running lean in these cases. There is no middle ground, by the way. It's either too much or too little. Finally, they still lose if they pay up without disclosure because the perception is that they are hiding one of the two aforementioned cases. The only advantage to them is that there's no telling which it is, which will keep up the guessing game for future defendants.
Ultimately, the safest way to handle GM foods is to handle them the same way they handle new species of plants/animals. If someone tried to sell a new species of plant that was recently found in the Brazilian rain forest, the FDA would be on their case in a heartbeat. The excuse "it looks like spinach and might actually have evolved from spinach, but includes 100 times more nutrients" wouldn't fly and they certainly couldn't market this thing as spinach (even if it turns out to be perfectly safe and has no undesirable side effects).
On the contrary, it would be labeled as a "supplement" in very fine print somewhere on the baggie, and until a celebrity died from it the FDA would ignore it.
I definitely agree on the potential for danger from GM foodstocks. The benefits don't appear to outweigh the problems, but to agribusiness - and everyone else since they have to complete - an extra few dollars an acre adds up a lot on the bottom line.
I'm afraid greenpeace has very little credibility to me - almost as little as Monsanto, if that's possible - because of their extreme positions on many issues (or more specifically my perception of them). That doesn't really bode well for GP, especially as I consider myself left of center on average, and pretty solidly left on environmental issues.
(1) GM is bad, and this corn is a good example - see the potential damage (2) GM is new, some food are bad for you, this is an example where some people are sensitive to...(blah blah blah)
GM peanuts would be pretty toxic to a small percentage of the population, and might even have a (small but barely significant) increase in reaction from those sensitive.
TFA is light on detail, and I'm not a biogeneticist. I think I'll pass on judgement here right now. I don't trust Monsanto to tell the truth, but I also don't trust GreenPeace to not have an agenda.
Consider a pda phone like the HTC TyTN (there's supposed to be a new version with GPS "soon" uner a new name). It's got a keyboard that is small but usable for simple notes. It's GSM (so should work as a phone most places) and it has b/g wifi. As for battery life on the phone - I've gone a week when I skipped the data and bluetooth. If you're close enough to civilization to use networking, you can probably find power.
And a Fuji F30 camera. Why the fuji? Small, easy to use, fast CCD (=easy low light photgraphy w/o the flash), and a wicked long-life battery. xD memory sucks, but it's still (relatively) cheap.
So right off the bat my quest to do a homemade Tivo on the cheap without monthly fees set me back about $600 after throwing in a large hard drive, too.
Would I do it again now? I don't know. TivoHD is too expensive.
Well, I think the TivoS3 is now down to $599 at some outlets, and although there is a subscription it is under $12/mo in bulk, iirc. Not necessarily a bargain, but about what you'd pay to build your own. For me $12/mo is probably low enough to not have to fool with the box every couple of weeks.
I'm hoping that either I get a computer based system that can jukbox my DVDs (about 250, but the Sony box is a PITA), and have CC2.0, or that Tivo gets a CC2.0, before DirecTV shuts off my HD DirectTivo box.
Shame they didn't consider combining with oxygen - nearly 6% H efficiency right out of the gate. Sure, it takes a bit more energy to extract the H2 on the vehicle end, but it's easy to store and transport. Plus, no recombination issues since you can just get more in the pre-combined state, as it occurs naturally at STP.
We have those laws, but they're too difficult to enforce. That's why you only see them applied after an accident has occured. The primary exception to this is speeding, which is easy to detect and prosecute.
HDCP is devil's spawn, but it doesn't prevent you from using HD for personal stuff.
HDMI has the advantage of a single audio/video cable solutiion from component to TV. If you want to stream your home movies over HDMI, you can happily do so.
The fact that the industry has eliminated fair use by stripping your latitide to do what you want with their content (not yours, btw - you don't own what comes to you via sat or cable, nor do you have many rights when it comes to OTA).
You must be one rich AC, 'cause there's not a lawyer in America who will take this one on for you without throwing a phone number at them. With the area code.
This is an issue for the amp folks. You might as well blame them for not being able to strip the digital audio from the HDMI link.
As for mixing audio and video, it makes for a much cleaner equipment are for 99.9999% of those doing this stuff. I'd say you're one in a million if you plan on routing seaparate channels to discrete amps which accept and decode digital data with a frequency syncronization lock between all components to avoid the inevitable 3-10 microsecond drift associated with the data paths. Better to have the syncronization done at the head end and sent with timecode sync over the HDMI bus to a single balanced timing amp.
Heck, even an expensive unlimited data-only plan (i.e. tethered computer at Cingular) is only $60/mo. Having a phone like this on the market would certainly get their panies in a wad!
I've never been of a competition fan. I've been with the boyscouts for over 12 years (and in Holland the boyscouts are not the pussies they are in the USA).
Good thing you're not competitive. You might stoop to verbally belittling your competition if you were.
I don't think the HD hype has hit the sound card market yet, at least not in name. 7.1 cards are everywhere already, and I think many will already do 192kHz/16(+) bit decoding witht he right source.
As for amps - you do have a point. I've been without one for a while, so the "big" tv just gets the one cable. (okay, more like a dozen once you add the comp input, plus the two sd inputs and the coax..what a mess). I'm grasping at straws here, but it would also be useful for sending the HDMI to a splitter and feeding it to multiple sets, where the remotes might not have a separate amp.
As for those 3840x2160p sets...well let's just say that I'm having a bit of a hard time even finding components to keep my Dell 400sc useable in the HT arena, and it's only 3 yeras old (it's AGP and socket 478...I may as well be using a vcr with wired remote;-)
HDMI = video and audio data link with HDCP for consumer television sets DVI = single data link with HDCP or dual data link for very hi res screens without audio for computer monitors.
There's a big difference there - HDMI is for TVs, which max out as single link data rates. You can keep your DVI for that 30" Apple Studio monitor, but you underestimate the utility of having the audio in a single cable. The only reason to buy these cards is for HTPCs and the like. And its a nice option to have. Now if they would just make it in AGP form.
I think the AC above you doesn't have kids. Not that some folks don't pay any attention to them, but as the father of a 4 year old, you simply cannot hold their hand 24/7. Movies are a break for both parents and kids alike.
'Cause if you did, and you knew how much they pay for such little bandwidth (there are still places where $45 for high speed internet gets you access to the V.90 modem pool), you would realize that delivering broadband is an emergency service.
There are _lots_ of places in this country that have neither landline nor even *shiver* cellular data services which are well within the range of local OTA TV transmissions. 200Mbits over VHF3-13 may not sound like much in the big city, but it will sure as hell serve a darned wide area where Telcos wouldn't even bother to ask "can you hear me now?"
If you think it's a screen saver, you must be too young to remember (or too old...that happens to me too) that there were actual scandals over people using what was then very expensive computing cycles to run their models.
No, actually it won't. That is, it won't transmit both audio and video across the HDMI cable. The audio is not just a few extra pins, but is interleaved with the data. I was hoping for a DVI/RL->HDMI dongle about a year ago and after reading the spec realized that such a beast doesn't really exist (or could exist without fairly extensive (& expensive) processing.
I've got bad news for you. The folks running Washington don't have your (or my) best interests in mind when they make business decisions. For the record, that would include all 535 suits at the opposite end of the mall from the oval office.
Thing is, there is essentially nothing you can do to stop them - you* voted them in. Twice. All you can do is vote them our next time - preferrably by a wide enough margin that there is no question as to who won.
*The you I am referring to is the collective, American you, not you-singular. You may have voted for someone else, but clearly you didn't convince enough people to vote with you (maybe you should have a few more pen pals in battleground states?). I'm guilty, too. I didn't vote for him (else I'd be complaining about tomato and vinegar subsidies, I suppose), but I also didn't convince enough of my Virginia bretheren to vote against him. I will take credit for voting out Allen, though. And for keeping Boucher in office. Might as well take some credit as well as the blame. If it makes you feel better, my other half - who did vote for him - has finally come to her senses and realized that she made a horrible mistake. And if those nuts in Iowa don't all get drunk and vote for Hillary, she just might correct that mistake next time.
Just quoting the story. And there is some sliver of veracity to it - they're moving their headquarters and their CEO to where the action is. He could end up with a better business sense of the situation, and really work to endear himself to his primary customer base.
It's not my fault he'll probably be riding around in a pickup, drinking beer and having a bikini clad model in the passenger seat. You can take the redneck out of Texas,...;-)
As for Dubai buying up all sort of stuff. Dubai is swimming in cash from oil revenue. They knonw that the oil won't last forever. Massive investment in recreation facilities (as a tourism destination) and diversification in major international corporations with good cash flow is just plain smart business.
I'll be lifting a glass of celebratory champagne when George the worst and his pack of Nixon era cronies leave office, but even I don't think there's really all that much to get worked up over here. This is business, and it makes business sense.
Now, I'm going to take a chance on this that the information on NPR today was accurate, namely:
A second local "headquarters" will be set up in Dubai, and the CEO will reside there. The current "headquarters" will remain in Houston, TX. The Dubai office is to get closer to the action and get some PR separation from us dirty Americans
The corporation will still be registered, and taxable, in the US. Changes to the laws make offshoring more difficult, including needing to have 10% of the Halliburton workforce located in Dubai in order to swith their corporate tax liabilities out of the US. Given the size of Halliburton, that's likely not going to happen.
Finally, the major support contracts for the US military are held by a subsidiary of Halliburton which will be spun off as an independent US corporation next month.
Now, one final disclaimer: this is all from memory based on a short bit on te radio. Feel free to fill in the blanks and correct the errors (be they in my memory or by the reporting staff at NPR).
I'm not sure which is funnier, the fact that such a simple premise was a pretty serious deal when it was automated (and so many expensive computer cycles "wasted" playing the game way back when) - or that there are that many/. moderators which don't know about the game, and modded me a troll. I didn't explain it because I thought it wouldn't need an explanation here. Of course, that last part is "sad" funny, not "ha ha" funny.
Slashdot Mirror
Naturally, ianal, but my guess is they can probably avoid disclosure if they scratch a check to Foster's lawyers. From my limited experience in litigation (I offer expert witness testimony in my field of expertise), usually it's fair game to cut and run when things turn against you. At this point, Capitol's best move probably is to just call butterfingers and pay up. No matter how they play this, they come out looking like fools. Their billings are either too large, in which case Foster gets her fees, or too small, and everybody knows they're running lean in these cases. There is no middle ground, by the way. It's either too much or too little. Finally, they still lose if they pay up without disclosure because the perception is that they are hiding one of the two aforementioned cases. The only advantage to them is that there's no telling which it is, which will keep up the guessing game for future defendants.
Ultimately, the safest way to handle GM foods is to handle them the same way they handle new species of plants/animals. If someone tried to sell a new species of plant that was recently found in the Brazilian rain forest, the FDA would be on their case in a heartbeat. The excuse "it looks like spinach and might actually have evolved from spinach, but includes 100 times more nutrients" wouldn't fly and they certainly couldn't market this thing as spinach (even if it turns out to be perfectly safe and has no undesirable side effects).
On the contrary, it would be labeled as a "supplement" in very fine print somewhere on the baggie, and until a celebrity died from it the FDA would ignore it.
I definitely agree on the potential for danger from GM foodstocks. The benefits don't appear to outweigh the problems, but to agribusiness - and everyone else since they have to complete - an extra few dollars an acre adds up a lot on the bottom line.
I'm afraid greenpeace has very little credibility to me - almost as little as Monsanto, if that's possible - because of their extreme positions on many issues (or more specifically my perception of them). That doesn't really bode well for GP, especially as I consider myself left of center on average, and pretty solidly left on environmental issues.
And we're surprised at this?
There are two sides to this:
(1) GM is bad, and this corn is a good example - see the potential damage
(2) GM is new, some food are bad for you, this is an example where some people are sensitive to...(blah blah blah)
GM peanuts would be pretty toxic to a small percentage of the population, and might even have a (small but barely significant) increase in reaction from those sensitive.
TFA is light on detail, and I'm not a biogeneticist. I think I'll pass on judgement here right now. I don't trust Monsanto to tell the truth, but I also don't trust GreenPeace to not have an agenda.
Consider a pda phone like the HTC TyTN (there's supposed to be a new version with GPS "soon" uner a new name). It's got a keyboard that is small but usable for simple notes. It's GSM (so should work as a phone most places) and it has b/g wifi. As for battery life on the phone - I've gone a week when I skipped the data and bluetooth. If you're close enough to civilization to use networking, you can probably find power.
And a Fuji F30 camera. Why the fuji? Small, easy to use, fast CCD (=easy low light photgraphy w/o the flash), and a wicked long-life battery. xD memory sucks, but it's still (relatively) cheap.
So right off the bat my quest to do a homemade Tivo on the cheap without monthly fees set me back about $600 after throwing in a large hard drive, too.
Would I do it again now? I don't know. TivoHD is too expensive.
Well, I think the TivoS3 is now down to $599 at some outlets, and although there is a subscription it is under $12/mo in bulk, iirc. Not necessarily a bargain, but about what you'd pay to build your own. For me $12/mo is probably low enough to not have to fool with the box every couple of weeks.
I'm hoping that either I get a computer based system that can jukbox my DVDs (about 250, but the Sony box is a PITA), and have CC2.0, or that Tivo gets a CC2.0, before DirecTV shuts off my HD DirectTivo box.
Shame they didn't consider combining with oxygen - nearly 6% H efficiency right out of the gate. Sure, it takes a bit more energy to extract the H2 on the vehicle end, but it's easy to store and transport. Plus, no recombination issues since you can just get more in the pre-combined state, as it occurs naturally at STP.
;-)
.
.
.
(for the humor impaired)
We have those laws, but they're too difficult to enforce. That's why you only see them applied after an accident has occured. The primary exception to this is speeding, which is easy to detect and prosecute.
HDCP is devil's spawn, but it doesn't prevent you from using HD for personal stuff.
HDMI has the advantage of a single audio/video cable solutiion from component to TV. If you want to stream your home movies over HDMI, you can happily do so.
The fact that the industry has eliminated fair use by stripping your latitide to do what you want with their content (not yours, btw - you don't own what comes to you via sat or cable, nor do you have many rights when it comes to OTA).
You must be one rich AC, 'cause there's not a lawyer in America who will take this one on for you without throwing a phone number at them. With the area code.
This is an issue for the amp folks. You might as well blame them for not being able to strip the digital audio from the HDMI link.
;-)
As for mixing audio and video, it makes for a much cleaner equipment are for 99.9999% of those doing this stuff. I'd say you're one in a million if you plan on routing seaparate channels to discrete amps which accept and decode digital data with a frequency syncronization lock between all components to avoid the inevitable 3-10 microsecond drift associated with the data paths. Better to have the syncronization done at the head end and sent with timecode sync over the HDMI bus to a single balanced timing amp.
BTW - I just made all that up.
Heck, even an expensive unlimited data-only plan (i.e. tethered computer at Cingular) is only $60/mo. Having a phone like this on the market would certainly get their panies in a wad!
I've never been of a competition fan. I've been with the boyscouts for over 12 years (and in Holland the boyscouts are not the pussies they are in the USA).
Good thing you're not competitive. You might stoop to verbally belittling your competition if you were.
I don't think the HD hype has hit the sound card market yet, at least not in name. 7.1 cards are everywhere already, and I think many will already do 192kHz/16(+) bit decoding witht he right source.
;-)
As for amps - you do have a point. I've been without one for a while, so the "big" tv just gets the one cable. (okay, more like a dozen once you add the comp input, plus the two sd inputs and the coax..what a mess). I'm grasping at straws here, but it would also be useful for sending the HDMI to a splitter and feeding it to multiple sets, where the remotes might not have a separate amp.
As for those 3840x2160p sets...well let's just say that I'm having a bit of a hard time even finding components to keep my Dell 400sc useable in the HT arena, and it's only 3 yeras old (it's AGP and socket 478...I may as well be using a vcr with wired remote
I'm going to correct you assertions:
HDMI = video and audio data link with HDCP for consumer television sets
DVI = single data link with HDCP or dual data link for very hi res screens without audio for computer monitors.
There's a big difference there - HDMI is for TVs, which max out as single link data rates. You can keep your DVI for that 30" Apple Studio monitor, but you underestimate the utility of having the audio in a single cable. The only reason to buy these cards is for HTPCs and the like. And its a nice option to have. Now if they would just make it in AGP form.
I think the AC above you doesn't have kids. Not that some folks don't pay any attention to them, but as the father of a 4 year old, you simply cannot hold their hand 24/7. Movies are a break for both parents and kids alike.
'Cause if you did, and you knew how much they pay for such little bandwidth (there are still places where $45 for high speed internet gets you access to the V.90 modem pool), you would realize that delivering broadband is an emergency service.
There are _lots_ of places in this country that have neither landline nor even *shiver* cellular data services which are well within the range of local OTA TV transmissions. 200Mbits over VHF3-13 may not sound like much in the big city, but it will sure as hell serve a darned wide area where Telcos wouldn't even bother to ask "can you hear me now?"
If you think it's a screen saver, you must be too young to remember (or too old...that happens to me too) that there were actual scandals over people using what was then very expensive computing cycles to run their models.
No, actually it won't. That is, it won't transmit both audio and video across the HDMI cable. The audio is not just a few extra pins, but is interleaved with the data. I was hoping for a DVI/RL->HDMI dongle about a year ago and after reading the spec realized that such a beast doesn't really exist (or could exist without fairly extensive (& expensive) processing.
I've got bad news for you. The folks running Washington don't have your (or my) best interests in mind when they make business decisions. For the record, that would include all 535 suits at the opposite end of the mall from the oval office.
Thing is, there is essentially nothing you can do to stop them - you* voted them in. Twice. All you can do is vote them our next time - preferrably by a wide enough margin that there is no question as to who won.
*The you I am referring to is the collective, American you, not you-singular. You may have voted for someone else, but clearly you didn't convince enough people to vote with you (maybe you should have a few more pen pals in battleground states?). I'm guilty, too. I didn't vote for him (else I'd be complaining about tomato and vinegar subsidies, I suppose), but I also didn't convince enough of my Virginia bretheren to vote against him. I will take credit for voting out Allen, though. And for keeping Boucher in office. Might as well take some credit as well as the blame. If it makes you feel better, my other half - who did vote for him - has finally come to her senses and realized that she made a horrible mistake. And if those nuts in Iowa don't all get drunk and vote for Hillary, she just might correct that mistake next time.
Just quoting the story. And there is some sliver of veracity to it - they're moving their headquarters and their CEO to where the action is. He could end up with a better business sense of the situation, and really work to endear himself to his primary customer base.
;-)
It's not my fault he'll probably be riding around in a pickup, drinking beer and having a bikini clad model in the passenger seat. You can take the redneck out of Texas,...
In other words there will be no change in his public profile once he leaves office. ;-)
Do we care where Cheney retires?
As for Dubai buying up all sort of stuff. Dubai is swimming in cash from oil revenue. They knonw that the oil won't last forever. Massive investment in recreation facilities (as a tourism destination) and diversification in major international corporations with good cash flow is just plain smart business.
I'll be lifting a glass of celebratory champagne when George the worst and his pack of Nixon era cronies leave office, but even I don't think there's really all that much to get worked up over here. This is business, and it makes business sense.
Now, I'm going to take a chance on this that the information on NPR today was accurate, namely:
A second local "headquarters" will be set up in Dubai, and the CEO will reside there.
The current "headquarters" will remain in Houston, TX.
The Dubai office is to get closer to the action and get some PR separation from us dirty Americans
The corporation will still be registered, and taxable, in the US. Changes to the laws make offshoring more difficult, including needing to have 10% of the Halliburton workforce located in Dubai in order to swith their corporate tax liabilities out of the US. Given the size of Halliburton, that's likely not going to happen.
Finally, the major support contracts for the US military are held by a subsidiary of Halliburton which will be spun off as an independent US corporation next month.
Now, one final disclaimer: this is all from memory based on a short bit on te radio. Feel free to fill in the blanks and correct the errors (be they in my memory or by the reporting staff at NPR).
I'm not sure which is funnier, the fact that such a simple premise was a pretty serious deal when it was automated (and so many expensive computer cycles "wasted" playing the game way back when) - or that there are that many /. moderators which don't know about the game, and modded me a troll. I didn't explain it because I thought it wouldn't need an explanation here. Of course, that last part is "sad" funny, not "ha ha" funny.
/. mod without a life...]
[cue jokes about
Life