Problem is that there are indeed hundreds if not thousands of people who will be perfectly comfortable with a $500 price tag.
Sony of course would no doubt like to sell a few million of these, not a few thousand.
Re:Blu Ray & HD-DVD, two solutions to a non pr
on
CNN On The $500 PS3
·
· Score: 1
First, the tools for producing HD content are not all up to snuff yet. So the quality of BluRay and HD-DVD may be expected to increase over time, whereas DVD tech has had years to optimize and is probably as good as it will get.
Second, DVD content has no security, which all of the major content producers want. BluRay and HD-DVD both offer DRM.
People may not be aggressive about going out and buying a new system at first. But they will when they can no longer rent or buy their favority movies for their existing DVD system. Much like I (who cares less about picture quality than most) didn't buy a dvd player until I could no longer rent most movies on VHS at BlockBuster. By then it only cost me $40 anyway. Same will be true for the new systems, probably with a slightly slower uptake.
Technically, a century is a period of 100 years, not necessarily starting at a year numbered xx00 in the Christian calendar, so he could have meant 'earlier in the last 100 years', which is interestingly enough probably what he was trying to express.
Technically, a century is a period of 100 years, not necessarily starting at a year numbered xx00 in the Christian calendar, so he could have meant 'earlier in the last 100 years', which is interestingly enough probably what he was trying to express.
All humor aside, punchcards don't last long. My dad had some 15 year old punchcards stored out in the garage. They had dried out and yellowed to the point of fragility already.
Keeping a secret military installment from the general public should fall under the scope of a necessary secret. It's hard to stay ahead of other nations militarily if we have specials on the History channel about all our newest and greatest.
Absolutely. I was only responding to the parent poster, who seemed (to me fairly clearly) to be talking about the principle of government secrecy generally, and in fact I discussed the need for secrecy to maintain security specifically as did the OP.
The only two valid answers to the question, "Is there a conspiracy?" are "I don't know" and "Yes"
That i'd have to disagree with in principle, though in our current government that is certainly true. It is possible to design a government / society where 'no' would be a valid and correct answer.
Of course if you follow any path far enough it can be taken advantage of. Any time you give any power to anyone they have the ability to abuse it. Instead of refusing to give power to those who need it, it is better to find the best checks and balances possible to that power. Such as constantly fighting political parties, three branches of government, bipartisan select committees, etc.
In this case I was referring to a specific, unneeded power. Why grant a power to those who don't need it?
I sent out a mass email to 5000 customers once to sell pre-orders to a software upgrade, and made sure to make it as clear as possible that it was a preorder. Sure enough we got dozens of calls within days from people wondering why they couldnt download it after they just bought it online.
That's a problem for the customer to live with. As long as your documentation is clear, you can refer them back to it by way of explanation when they are confused. That's not an excuse for the government to withhold information.
If the information is "stale", then there is no reason to disclose any information because it is already readably available. If there are still any questions that would have to be made clear to the public, then there must still be some secrets that have not fully leaked. I agree that such information must be reviewed regularly, but I doubt that the general public is good at determining when that info has become "stale". How about we leave that up to our elected officials.
You've misunderstood my usage of stale. I was referring to information which is still secret, but no longer a security risk. Security risks have valid reasons to be withheld from the public. Ex-Security risks do not.
It could be so that your average uneducated person does not form irrational beliefs that could cause civil disorder.
That's not a valid reason. Follow that path far enough and the government can keep you deliberately uneducated to prevent civil disorder. A government that does this is evil.
It could be because the government themselves do not have all of the info yet, and do not want to spread disinformation.
That's semi-valid, though in most cases it would be preferable for the government to release any information that only fell into this category couched in phrasing that makes it clear that the information is not reliable or incomplete.
It could also be because the information has to be kept hidden from foreign governments.
That's valid, though a well designed government should require that such information be reviewed regularly, so that it can be released as soon as it is stale.
In general, the government should keep as few secrets from its people as possible, otherwise you're on your way to fascism.
I would tend to agree with the definition that burn means the oxygen reaction, but I included the bit about chemical explosives because I thought that would be the clearer version.
New or not, it is posted to the frontpage of Tom's with a 9 Jan 2006 11:00 timestamp. If it is old, maybe they've updated it with new information. And yes, slashdot definitely had articles about oil cooling PC's predating 180 days ago.
I believe oil only seriously burns in the presence of oxygen (oil is not a chemical explosive that can burn without an oxygen supply). So this case would just need to be airtight or near airtight to be safe from this, and guess what: you need to do that any way to prevent leaking.
I'm always glad when someone really gets a post like that. As unsubtle as it is, it seems that the moderation is totally unpredictable. For the record, I was aiming for funny, but note that the first moderation was neither funny nor flamebait but instead insightful! (which I suppose, in fairness to the moderator, could be one way of interpreting such a post, and if so I congratulate him/her). That could really be cleared up with a +1 sad but true moderation.
Well of course it won't be direct to jail, there will have to be a trial to determine if you are actually guilty, unless the executive branch has some sort of magical power to just throw people into jails without due process.
Slashdot Mirror
I would suggest that the reason he couldn't be bothered was because the veep is in fact the one running the show and he told him not to.
Problem is that there are indeed hundreds if not thousands of people who will be perfectly comfortable with a $500 price tag.
Sony of course would no doubt like to sell a few million of these, not a few thousand.
First, the tools for producing HD content are not all up to snuff yet. So the quality of BluRay and HD-DVD may be expected to increase over time, whereas DVD tech has had years to optimize and is probably as good as it will get.
Second, DVD content has no security, which all of the major content producers want. BluRay and HD-DVD both offer DRM.
People may not be aggressive about going out and buying a new system at first. But they will when they can no longer rent or buy their favority movies for their existing DVD system. Much like I (who cares less about picture quality than most) didn't buy a dvd player until I could no longer rent most movies on VHS at BlockBuster. By then it only cost me $40 anyway. Same will be true for the new systems, probably with a slightly slower uptake.
Slashdot ate my first submission attempt:
Technically, a century is a period of 100 years, not necessarily starting at a year numbered xx00 in the Christian calendar, so he could have meant 'earlier in the last 100 years', which is interestingly enough probably what he was trying to express.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/century
Technically, a century is a period of 100 years, not necessarily starting at a year numbered xx00 in the Christian calendar, so he could have meant 'earlier in the last 100 years', which is interestingly enough probably what he was trying to express.
Are you suggesting duct tape can fail? Because it has me a little worried, I built my house out of it.
But since people apparently care, why not update the website once a week with a line that says:
Yep, still perfect.
Sure it hurt, but now he's an immortal DVD encryption himself, so who minds a little short term pain with that kind of payoff!
Metamod: note the redundant mod was wrong since this was the first reply.
then? If you haven't been questioning the quality of chinese degrees until now ...
It's significant because google considers it in pagerank.
DDR2 is coming shortly (the new socket M2), in fact the FX-60 may well be the last (highest performing) DDR processor release.
All humor aside, punchcards don't last long. My dad had some 15 year old punchcards stored out in the garage. They had dried out and yellowed to the point of fragility already.
Keeping a secret military installment from the general public should fall under the scope of a necessary secret. It's hard to stay ahead of other nations militarily if we have specials on the History channel about all our newest and greatest.
Absolutely. I was only responding to the parent poster, who seemed (to me fairly clearly) to be talking about the principle of government secrecy generally, and in fact I discussed the need for secrecy to maintain security specifically as did the OP.
The only two valid answers to the question, "Is there a conspiracy?" are "I don't know" and "Yes"
That i'd have to disagree with in principle, though in our current government that is certainly true. It is possible to design a government / society where 'no' would be a valid and correct answer.
Of course if you follow any path far enough it can be taken advantage of. Any time you give any power to anyone they have the ability to abuse it. Instead of refusing to give power to those who need it, it is better to find the best checks and balances possible to that power. Such as constantly fighting political parties, three branches of government, bipartisan select committees, etc.
In this case I was referring to a specific, unneeded power. Why grant a power to those who don't need it?
I sent out a mass email to 5000 customers once to sell pre-orders to a software upgrade, and made sure to make it as clear as possible that it was a preorder. Sure enough we got dozens of calls within days from people wondering why they couldnt download it after they just bought it online.
That's a problem for the customer to live with. As long as your documentation is clear, you can refer them back to it by way of explanation when they are confused. That's not an excuse for the government to withhold information.
If the information is "stale", then there is no reason to disclose any information because it is already readably available. If there are still any questions that would have to be made clear to the public, then there must still be some secrets that have not fully leaked. I agree that such information must be reviewed regularly, but I doubt that the general public is good at determining when that info has become "stale". How about we leave that up to our elected officials.
You've misunderstood my usage of stale. I was referring to information which is still secret, but no longer a security risk. Security risks have valid reasons to be withheld from the public. Ex-Security risks do not.
It could be so that your average uneducated person does not form irrational beliefs that could cause civil disorder.
That's not a valid reason. Follow that path far enough and the government can keep you deliberately uneducated to prevent civil disorder. A government that does this is evil.
It could be because the government themselves do not have all of the info yet, and do not want to spread disinformation.
That's semi-valid, though in most cases it would be preferable for the government to release any information that only fell into this category couched in phrasing that makes it clear that the information is not reliable or incomplete.
It could also be because the information has to be kept hidden from foreign governments.
That's valid, though a well designed government should require that such information be reviewed regularly, so that it can be released as soon as it is stale.
In general, the government should keep as few secrets from its people as possible, otherwise you're on your way to fascism.
I'll bet on it taking longer than the current wmv drm which is uncracked after what, 1.5 years?
http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/information/scripts/1f 01.shtml
h eadygoodness.mp3
You've gotta start selling this for more than a dollar a bag. We lost four more men on this expedition!
Ooh, a head bag! Those are choc-full of... heady goodness!
http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/downloads/sounds/apu_
Yeah, I think the editors don't make funny worthy of karma because they believe that slashdot should be a forum for serious discussion.
I also switched overrated to +1 for my personal view for the very reason you describe.
That's unclear based on the dictionary definition of burn:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/burn
(see the verb definitions).
I would tend to agree with the definition that burn means the oxygen reaction, but I included the bit about chemical explosives because I thought that would be the clearer version.
New or not, it is posted to the frontpage of Tom's with a 9 Jan 2006 11:00 timestamp. If it is old, maybe they've updated it with new information.
/ 11/1756259&tid=222
And yes, slashdot definitely had articles about oil cooling PC's predating 180 days ago.
Here's one from 05/05
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05
Still, I'm guessing that this article has techniques of particular interest. Their main emphasis seems to be on a more self-contained refined design.
Seems worthy enough of a slashdot story to me. Nothing says that only the first attempt at doing something is newsworthy.
I believe oil only seriously burns in the presence of oxygen (oil is not a chemical explosive that can burn without an oxygen supply). So this case would just need to be airtight or near airtight to be safe from this, and guess what: you need to do that any way to prevent leaking.
How's the buff Asian guy next to you going to feel when he and his machine are doused in cooking oil?
Extra Crispy?
I'm always glad when someone really gets a post like that. As unsubtle as it is, it seems that the moderation is totally unpredictable. For the record, I was aiming for funny, but note that the first moderation was neither funny nor flamebait but instead insightful! (which I suppose, in fairness to the moderator, could be one way of interpreting such a post, and if so I congratulate him/her). That could really be cleared up with a +1 sad but true moderation.
Well of course it won't be direct to jail, there will have to be a trial to determine if you are actually guilty, unless the executive branch has some sort of magical power to just throw people into jails without due process.