Maybe it's not logic but experience. I'm sure the beaches can compare the number of theft complaints... I'm sure the headache of people that lose their key/combination or are just plain scamming is another large part of the problem. You've danced around the real issue, one of avoiding liability. If the beach provided public lockers, presumably run by the government, for visitors than the visitors might sue the government if articles from the lockers are stolen. Beach staff would also have to deal with (more) complaints of stolen articles.
So it's not about "reducing theft", it's about "reducing theft the government might be held responsible for". Never mind that they could just pass legislation making it illegal to sue the government over this (I know that's the situation with public transit lockers in California).
My family rents a home in North Carolina that sits right on the ocean. There are public access paths just a few meters up and down the road. However, you get a large number of people who will wander under the house with all of their gear to setup camp. "A few meters..." as in a quarter of a mile. If it REALLY was easier to use the access paths, EVERYONE would be doing it. People are probably going under your house because there is no parking anywhere near the access paths. Are you going to volunteer your house for demolition to build a parking lot for visitors?
People, especially rich people, have to accept the fact that they are not islands. If you live near a PUBLIC resource like the beach, or a park, or an airport, you have to accept noise and discomfort involved in the public accessing that resource. Don't like it? Move. I'm sure there are plenty of gated communities far from parks, beaches, etc. that you can move into where you don't have to deal with the public. If you want to LIVE in isolation you have to BE isolated.
It's much like when MaBell would only sell their equipment You're probably thinking of when AT&T used to RENT phones at an outrageous rate (I think around $6 a month) to residential customers, particularly in poor and rural areas. Early on, you were REQUIRED to use the Bell phones and a replacement phone cost $80 (remember that the above figures are 1970s dollars). Lat time I checked, the Baby Bells are STILL doing this to a few elderly people.
Japan has a telephone monopoly (NTT), as do many European nations, one way or another. These monopolies are tightly regulated so that, among other things, they simply CAN'T make customers sign up for multi-year contracts (at least tis was my experience with Orange and Virgin, YMMV). Since they can't offer a "discount" on the phone for the contract, all phones are sold at full price. A price which is lower that the full price for the phone would be in the USA because the manufacturers jack up the prices to (perversely) encourage customers to sign multi-year contracts because THEY MAKE MORE MONEY THAT WAY (the total of the carrier fees and the "discount" price you pay for the phone is almost always more than they would have made selling the phones individually).
On top of that, there's phone locking. In Europe, all carriers and phones are GSM and all phones are interoperable between carriers simply by switching the SIM card. In the USA, despite the fact that MOST phones are GSM and have SIM cards, carriers implement locking to prevent users from moving phones from carrier to carrier. The locking must be removed by a hacker and it's probably illegal to remove it.
But make no mistake, it is the fault of Motorola, Nokia, and now Apple for playing this reindeer game. You certainly CAN sell unlocked GSM phone in the United States that will work with many carriers. They could bow out of this nonsense and sell their phones in consumer electronics stores. Apple chose a partnering deal with AT&T out of greed.
Right now the biggest problem is that the carriers have convinced the public that they HAVE to sign multi-year contracts in order to get phones. Go to a major carrier and try to sign up month-to-month, NON-PREPAID. It's only Virgin that's offering such plans now and they're being terribly squeezed by the Bells (remember what they did to Covad?).
The solution here is clearly tighter regulation. Cell phone service in the USA has suffered due to the Wild West attitudes of the carriers. They had their chance. It's time for the government to step in and impose standards that will benefit consumers.
I also know I have better options for entertainment than wasting them.... People do not appreciate what they have.
Melodramatic platitudes do not make for real solutions to power production. Nothing you mentioned results in significant net savings.
I have to admit, my refrigerator was running when I made that post, though I have lived without it, I do prefer it. There are quite a few ways to do with less or make it more efficient.
Really? Where's your patent? Contrary to what you might think there ARE engineers out there actually trying to design and build more efficient refrigeration.
Efficient construction, intelligent landscaping (e.g. deciduous trees on southern exposure), drapes, reduces much of the need; people don't bother anymore depending on air conditioning instead.
Yeah, nobody has drapes or blinds anymore. And, at least here in California, new homes have more power and especially heating efficiency than ever. So it's mainly poorer people that are living in the older "less efficient" homes. I suppose they'll just have to soak up the costs of remodeling.
And again, we're not even talking about industry here. Know what the largest consumer of AC power in California is? Datacenters. Are computers just supposed to magically "not get hot"? Yet people are working on more powerful, more power efficient, cooler components. But this DOESN'T mean that our power costs are going to go down because we want to have actual technological progress.
Not wholly certainly, but certainly a good bit during the warm seasons, and as much as I can, food from local markets, not trucked half way across the continent. Do you even know where your local farmers' market is? During the cold months, I usually get at least several uses out of my heat energy, as I use a wood stove for area heating, cook on it, boil water, and use the potash for various things. If the wood comes from local culls and deadfall, it is CO2 neutral. Perfect, no. Better, yes.
Not all of us live in a forest granola boy. However, my brother does and he heats his house with a wood stove. It's a lot of hard work chopping all that wood and feeding it into a stove, time that I think would be better spent doing other things but my brother insists it's a little cheaper. If you think it's a good idea for millions of people to be doing this, you're retarded. It's what caused the deforestation of Europe and is causing the deforestation of South America and Africa. North American forests are relatively untouched because we DON'T use wood for heat.
And yes, I go to the farmer's market quite frequently. This does not make me better than other people. It's because I think the local produce ("local" meaning from the Central Valley) is fresher and tastes better. If I could get quality oranges for Chile I would buy them. Chileans need money too.
The question is, can we reduce the rate of that increase or flatten the slope, thus buying ourselves time and increasing options? There is no way, period, that biofuels or any similar measure can feed our current consumption, let alone an increase. Any savings helps.
You fail to take into account the costs of development, deployment, and production. Why sink money into a technology that is GUARANTEED never to show a net energy gain? Efficiency is fine, and PG&E in particular has shown that you can increase profitability by encouraging consumer efficiency. This is a good thing, but it is not a solution to our long term energy needs.
Trying to zero consumption, getting rid of refrigeration, for instance, is silly. But, many of the people who say they "support" the environment or "support" breaking dependence on foreign energy are entirely unwilling to make the slightest change to their lives if it means inconvenience, or merely learning to do things differently. People will buy "green" products as long as they work exactly the same. They won't change their
1. SK licences UE3 from Epic for a pile of money to make Too Human. 2. SK is unable to get UE3 to work. They blame Epic for bad support. 3. SK develops new in-house engine (presumably based in part on UE3) to use for Too Human.
The purpose of the lawsuit is for SK to recover the money they paid Epic for UE3, and more importantly, to allow them to legally sell their new engine (both in Too Human and to 3rd parties) which I am sure Epic would object too.
The Epic side of this would be that SK are idiots who don't know how to use UE3, and they they just want to repackage and sell UE3 without giving any money back to Epic.
When folks in third world countries use candles and oil lamps, they maximize their use of sunlight, only use light sources when necessary and often for task lighting, take advantage of full moons, and watch consumption closely.... It is not a matter of suffering or 'making do', but just finding you don't need as much as you thought you did. No, it IS a matter of "making do". Do you think people in developing countries really want to live this way? Really, this whole notion that we can significantly cut power consumption in the United States just by making a few "lifestyle changes" is fucking ridiculous.
THE LIGHTS ARE NOT A MAJOR SOURCE OF POWER CONSUMPTION IN YOUR HOUSE. Read that last sentence again slowly. Whether you leave your lights on 24/7 or not will have little effect on your power bill. The BIG uses of electricity involve heating and cooling. In order, these tend to be the big uses:
Refrigerator: No refrigerated food for you! Air Conditioner: You boil in the summer! Yay! Electric heating: No heat for you! Hope you don't freeze to death in the winter. Electric stove: No cooking for you! Hope you can subsist wholly on raw foods. Microwave: See above. Computers and other appliances: No/. for you!
I could also point how this reasoning gets even more silly when we start taking about industry.
Any power plan for the United States has to be REALISTIC and by deal with AT LEAST the current increasing rate of energy consumption. I believe that per-capita energy consumption will increase dramatically in the 21st century (at least 5 times what it is now) so our power system has to deal with this reality.
It's not that nuclear isn't better, it's that our corporate overlords are far too greedy and incompetent to be trusted with anything that requires intelligence and vigilance. Yet somehow our corporate overlords have been able to operate the ones we have now for decades without a major accident. If you don't think the corporate overlords can handle it, how about the government? I don't have any problem conceptually with a state-run nuclear power system as it would definitely be better than fossil fuels, any way you look at it. Or maybe a hybrid system, with the government providing security and monitoring.
I once heard an aerospace executive say (while explaining to another exec why the front office was overruling engineers recommendations) "if those boys in the lab were as smart as we are they'd be making more money than us". Except that in many of these industries the executives ARE former engineers, so this rings a little hollow.
It's not about cost, it's about that mythical 1.3 conversion number that we get from the ethanol industry. I don't buy it. Not for corn, not for sugar. Independent analysts (employing common sense and basic physics) realize that we will always see a net loss. It's even arguable whether or not ethanol fuel will result in less net pollution because alcohol is so much less efficient than gasoline.
The choice is not between oil and ethanol, but between oil and nuclear. We have to cope with the fact that our domestic and global energy needs aren't going down, they're going up dramatically. So far, nuclear is the only system we've developed to which provides energy efficiency comparable to fossil fuels. Maybe in the distant future we will have more efficient solar systems and there is always hot fusion. But RIGHT NOW, nuclear seems the way to go.
The London High Court does not have jurisdiction to inforce this ruling on other countries. Lik-Sang chose to shut down because they were no long to sell to locations under the Jurisdiction of the High Court of London No, it's more complicated. Sony filed lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions. The appropriate jurisdiction was Hong Kong, where they didn't have a leg to stand on. So they convinced the court to transfer the case to London, where they had the advantage, and got an enforceable ruling against Lik-sang IN Hong Kong due to trade agreements. It's classic "venue shopping". Sony shut them down, period.
Personally I think you statement about bribery is bordering on conspiracy theory at best. "Campaign contribution" is a euphemism for "bribe". If ANYONE gives money to a canidate with the intention of influencing specific legislation they are engaging in a corrupt practice. It doesn't matter if they are grandma contributing $5 or ExxonMobile contributing $5,000,000. Hell, I'd change this to "give money" period. Campaigns should be publicly financed.
Congress LITERALLY has the lobbyists write the legislation which they then sign off on. Why are you defending these practices?
The lawmakers in this case are the ones that allow the system to operate the way it does, the corporations are only working within a defective system. They're GAMING the system. Just because you're part of a business organization does not mean you are immune from the laws of the land. Most large businesses engage in tax fraud, and really, fraud of all kinds. White collar enforcement isn't enough of a priority in the US, mainly because DAs don't want the hard work.
Actually, Mad Catz fixed the Dreamcast controller. Mad Catz fixed the awkward shape of the original controller so you were able to hold it properly. That, and the extra buttons, made them about 100X better than the originals.
And the Logitech controllers for the PS2 are generally regarded as being superior to the originals as well.
Arguably the biggest cause of the pollution that is causing our home planet to slowly become less and less livable. And you're arguing that private enterprise is doing more in America to fight pollution that the government? I think you're right here in the sense that most of the new technologies that are eventually going to replace fossil fuel are being developed and deployed by the private sector. For example, I definitely think that the EPA should be more stringent with it's enforcement and that Congress should pass tough new emissions regulation. But it's
It's hanging on by a thread, barely pays out enough to live,... Yes, the wage cap on the Social Security withholdings means the wealthiest people don't have to support the system). I agree. We don't spend enough on social welfare programs and we should expand them. I agree we should make bigger payouts to disabled and needy Americans. And furthermore I agree that we should remove the wage cap to move the burden of Social Security more heavily on the backs of the wealthy. Sounds like we agree here.
They were there, already. Their success is dependant on not doing anything with them. Even the government can handle that, mostly. Don't tell me that thousands of park workers and volunteers throughout the nation are just standing around doing nothing. Really, this statement is so astonishingly ignorant that it angers me. Maybe visit one sometime. Trails, roads, campgrounds, etc. aren't free. Here's a bit from the fucking Wikipedia article:
The 'dean of western writers,' American Pulitzer prize-winning author Wallace Stegner has written that national parks are 'America's best idea,' - a departure from the royal preserves that Old World sovereigns enjoyed for themselves - inherently democratic, open to all, "they reflect us at our best, not our worst."
Also, the term "fanboi" is used by two types of people: Those who wish to make derogatory comments about young Asian people who are overly passionate about something, Which is exactly the context in which the term is used to describe WHITE people(or black people, or whatever). And it is inherently derogatory term. "Fanboi" is simply an alternate spelling of "fanboy". To many the term implies youth (like a child as opposed to a teenager) so is considered slightly more derogatory. Period. It is not a racist slur.
Second they chose to shut down because they were not able to continue to hide behind the protection of Hong Kong law and instead had to contend with the laws of the countries of the citizens they conducted business with. This reasoning is absurd. If a US citizen makes a purchase of Nazi memorabilia by mail from a German company should that US citizen be subject to imprisonment in Germany? No form of international law I'm aware of considers states to have legal jurisdiction outside their borders.
Complain to, and about, the law makers if you have an issue with the law, not to the company that attempts to exercise their rights protected by those laws. This is even more absurd. Companies bribe lawmakers to pass laws that screw consumers (example, recent credit card legislation), but somehow we should only be angry at the lawmakers? It's okay to give bribes but not to receive them?
I don't know HOW they are doing it, but they certainly ARE doing it. BD+ is a requirement for all software players independent of drives (which do not handle BD decryption logic).
My biggest question is: Has BD+ been implemented in all existing standalone hardware players? If not, are those owners just screwed when the new BD+ content comes out?
I think this ties into what one of the parents was saying about BD+ being a JVM. Support for Java apps on BD has been part of the spec for a very long time, so it's almost certainly implemented in all players. So it is possible that some of the older players (like the PS3) are or will run a Java version of BD+. This strikes me as a major PITA for content creators who are going the have to have multiple BD+ versions and some logic to detect which version is appropriate for which player.
And anyone who thinks this hideously complicated system isn't going to fail through a combination of implementation flaws and leaks is mentally ill. All the article shows is that you shouldn't do business with an outfit as inept as the Envisioneering Group.
Re:Wel im not paying anything to extortion
on
Hotmail vs Goodmail
·
· Score: 1
The problem with this is that the only mail servers that support Sender ID are Exchange and Sendmail, experimentally, and the specification was only finalized and released back in NOVEMBER. Domainkeys was just released and its MUCH more likely it's going to be widely adopted. And Sender ID does not work with mail forwarding.
Verizon and AT&T are selling at a loss to get people to sign-up, and then keeping margins low to ensure a large number of customers. No, they're not. Their own "internal" wholesale rate is far lower than what they charge the CLECs. They are deliberately undercutting the price of the CLECs (which they essentially set) to drive them out of business. It is a well-known fact that the ILECs are screwing the CLECs left and right.
There's no reason a 3rd party can't do that. No, they can't, because the ILECs have a government-granted monopoly. As long as they want to do DSL, they have to deal with the ILECs and their predatory pricing. This is why most small ISPs are flocking to WiFi.
worrying about who to sue In the United States, it's basically impossible to sue the police. Give that, we usually use criminal sanctions against police misconduct. It's unclear who you would pursue criminal charges against if the robot went haywire. This is the whole point of this robot, to avoid criminal responsibility for attacking protesters and other civilians.
The two claims are not incompatible. Even so, it seems implausible to me that 40% of the movie piracy takes place in New York. I'm certain they also say that 40% of the piracy takes place in Los Angeles and 40% San Francisco as well. If you look into it a little bit, you'll see that for the most part these statistics are made up out of whole cloth. It's yet another bullshit rationale for trying to waste the justice system's time by making a civil tort (copyright infringement) into a criminal counterfeiting case.
If I had to guess nobody wanted to go through 25 years of CDs and remix them to 5.1 channel surround sound This doesn't really explain why NEW albums aren't recorded in 5.1. The real reason is because mastering in 5.1 costs an order of magnitude more than mastering in stereo and the artists and labels aren't willing to pay for it. None of the recently-introduced formats (MP3, ATRAC, AAC, SACD, DVD-Audio, etc.) really do anything to increase quality of music. The only other "feature" of DVD-Audio was the high capacity. Of course, since the average track count of CDs has slowly been going down and a full CD's capacity (74/80 minutes) is rarely used now, this feature was never exploited by manufacturers.
The only real use I've seen for DVD-Audio is using the format to build extra-long mix discs for parties.
BTW, There are DVD-Audio discs available. And almost all of them are classical movie soundtracks because the music was already recorded in 5.1.
But if the cost of labor goes up (due to effective immigration law enforcement, a really big if ) at the same time that technological costs go down, then this will lead to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of migrant workers. If this happened, the migrant workers would be pushed towards other jobs, like unskilled manufacturing, which might come back to the USA a little bit. But I'd agree with you that this his absolutely no chance of happening. Farmers are enormously powerful in the USA because of federalism, that's why we have so many crop subsidies.
No one in the USA will deploy this due to costs, not as long as Mexico is in the state it's in.
Entrapment, by definition, involves the police persuading you to commit a crime you wouldn't otherwise commit. Exactly, the POLICE. It is always illegal for private citizens to entice people into committing crimes.
However, I don't see how this could hold up in court. Frankly, I really don't know how ANY of these lawsuits go forward against anyone. I, personally, would go pro bono and simply deny everything. They don't (and won't) have the contents of my hard drive so I would simply argue: Wasn't me. They'd say they have my IP address which they confirmed with my ISP and I'd tell them that IP addresses can easily be spoofed so it's not enough to determine identity. I'd get one of networking expert friends to testify to this (because it's true).
Slashdot Mirror
So it's not about "reducing theft", it's about "reducing theft the government might be held responsible for". Never mind that they could just pass legislation making it illegal to sue the government over this (I know that's the situation with public transit lockers in California).
People, especially rich people, have to accept the fact that they are not islands. If you live near a PUBLIC resource like the beach, or a park, or an airport, you have to accept noise and discomfort involved in the public accessing that resource. Don't like it? Move. I'm sure there are plenty of gated communities far from parks, beaches, etc. that you can move into where you don't have to deal with the public. If you want to LIVE in isolation you have to BE isolated.
Japan has a telephone monopoly (NTT), as do many European nations, one way or another. These monopolies are tightly regulated so that, among other things, they simply CAN'T make customers sign up for multi-year contracts (at least tis was my experience with Orange and Virgin, YMMV). Since they can't offer a "discount" on the phone for the contract, all phones are sold at full price. A price which is lower that the full price for the phone would be in the USA because the manufacturers jack up the prices to (perversely) encourage customers to sign multi-year contracts because THEY MAKE MORE MONEY THAT WAY (the total of the carrier fees and the "discount" price you pay for the phone is almost always more than they would have made selling the phones individually).
On top of that, there's phone locking. In Europe, all carriers and phones are GSM and all phones are interoperable between carriers simply by switching the SIM card. In the USA, despite the fact that MOST phones are GSM and have SIM cards, carriers implement locking to prevent users from moving phones from carrier to carrier. The locking must be removed by a hacker and it's probably illegal to remove it.
But make no mistake, it is the fault of Motorola, Nokia, and now Apple for playing this reindeer game. You certainly CAN sell unlocked GSM phone in the United States that will work with many carriers. They could bow out of this nonsense and sell their phones in consumer electronics stores. Apple chose a partnering deal with AT&T out of greed.
Right now the biggest problem is that the carriers have convinced the public that they HAVE to sign multi-year contracts in order to get phones. Go to a major carrier and try to sign up month-to-month, NON-PREPAID. It's only Virgin that's offering such plans now and they're being terribly squeezed by the Bells (remember what they did to Covad?).
The solution here is clearly tighter regulation. Cell phone service in the USA has suffered due to the Wild West attitudes of the carriers. They had their chance. It's time for the government to step in and impose standards that will benefit consumers.
I also know I have better options for entertainment than wasting them. ... People do not appreciate what they have.
Melodramatic platitudes do not make for real solutions to power production. Nothing you mentioned results in significant net savings.
I have to admit, my refrigerator was running when I made that post, though I have lived without it, I do prefer it. There are quite a few ways to do with less or make it more efficient.
Really? Where's your patent? Contrary to what you might think there ARE engineers out there actually trying to design and build more efficient refrigeration.
Efficient construction, intelligent landscaping (e.g. deciduous trees on southern exposure), drapes, reduces much of the need; people don't bother anymore depending on air conditioning instead.
Yeah, nobody has drapes or blinds anymore. And, at least here in California, new homes have more power and especially heating efficiency than ever. So it's mainly poorer people that are living in the older "less efficient" homes. I suppose they'll just have to soak up the costs of remodeling.
And again, we're not even talking about industry here. Know what the largest consumer of AC power in California is? Datacenters. Are computers just supposed to magically "not get hot"? Yet people are working on more powerful, more power efficient, cooler components. But this DOESN'T mean that our power costs are going to go down because we want to have actual technological progress.
Not wholly certainly, but certainly a good bit during the warm seasons, and as much as I can, food from local markets, not trucked half way across the continent. Do you even know where your local farmers' market is? During the cold months, I usually get at least several uses out of my heat energy, as I use a wood stove for area heating, cook on it, boil water, and use the potash for various things. If the wood comes from local culls and deadfall, it is CO2 neutral. Perfect, no. Better, yes.
Not all of us live in a forest granola boy. However, my brother does and he heats his house with a wood stove. It's a lot of hard work chopping all that wood and feeding it into a stove, time that I think would be better spent doing other things but my brother insists it's a little cheaper. If you think it's a good idea for millions of people to be doing this, you're retarded. It's what caused the deforestation of Europe and is causing the deforestation of South America and Africa. North American forests are relatively untouched because we DON'T use wood for heat.
And yes, I go to the farmer's market quite frequently. This does not make me better than other people. It's because I think the local produce ("local" meaning from the Central Valley) is fresher and tastes better. If I could get quality oranges for Chile I would buy them. Chileans need money too.
The question is, can we reduce the rate of that increase or flatten the slope, thus buying ourselves time and increasing options? There is no way, period, that biofuels or any similar measure can feed our current consumption, let alone an increase. Any savings helps.
You fail to take into account the costs of development, deployment, and production. Why sink money into a technology that is GUARANTEED never to show a net energy gain? Efficiency is fine, and PG&E in particular has shown that you can increase profitability by encouraging consumer efficiency. This is a good thing, but it is not a solution to our long term energy needs.
Trying to zero consumption, getting rid of refrigeration, for instance, is silly. But, many of the people who say they "support" the environment or "support" breaking dependence on foreign energy are entirely unwilling to make the slightest change to their lives if it means inconvenience, or merely learning to do things differently. People will buy "green" products as long as they work exactly the same. They won't change their
My reading on this is as follows:
1. SK licences UE3 from Epic for a pile of money to make Too Human.
2. SK is unable to get UE3 to work. They blame Epic for bad support.
3. SK develops new in-house engine (presumably based in part on UE3) to use for Too Human.
The purpose of the lawsuit is for SK to recover the money they paid Epic for UE3, and more importantly, to allow them to legally sell their new engine (both in Too Human and to 3rd parties) which I am sure Epic would object too.
The Epic side of this would be that SK are idiots who don't know how to use UE3, and they they just want to repackage and sell UE3 without giving any money back to Epic.
THE LIGHTS ARE NOT A MAJOR SOURCE OF POWER CONSUMPTION IN YOUR HOUSE. Read that last sentence again slowly. Whether you leave your lights on 24/7 or not will have little effect on your power bill. The BIG uses of electricity involve heating and cooling. In order, these tend to be the big uses:
Refrigerator: No refrigerated food for you!
Air Conditioner: You boil in the summer! Yay!
Electric heating: No heat for you! Hope you don't freeze to death in the winter.
Electric stove: No cooking for you! Hope you can subsist wholly on raw foods.
Microwave: See above.
Computers and other appliances: No
I could also point how this reasoning gets even more silly when we start taking about industry.
Any power plan for the United States has to be REALISTIC and by deal with AT LEAST the current increasing rate of energy consumption. I believe that per-capita energy consumption will increase dramatically in the 21st century (at least 5 times what it is now) so our power system has to deal with this reality.
It's not about cost, it's about that mythical 1.3 conversion number that we get from the ethanol industry. I don't buy it. Not for corn, not for sugar. Independent analysts (employing common sense and basic physics) realize that we will always see a net loss. It's even arguable whether or not ethanol fuel will result in less net pollution because alcohol is so much less efficient than gasoline.
The choice is not between oil and ethanol, but between oil and nuclear. We have to cope with the fact that our domestic and global energy needs aren't going down, they're going up dramatically. So far, nuclear is the only system we've developed to which provides energy efficiency comparable to fossil fuels. Maybe in the distant future we will have more efficient solar systems and there is always hot fusion. But RIGHT NOW, nuclear seems the way to go.
Congress LITERALLY has the lobbyists write the legislation which they then sign off on. Why are you defending these practices? The lawmakers in this case are the ones that allow the system to operate the way it does, the corporations are only working within a defective system. They're GAMING the system. Just because you're part of a business organization does not mean you are immune from the laws of the land. Most large businesses engage in tax fraud, and really, fraud of all kinds. White collar enforcement isn't enough of a priority in the US, mainly because DAs don't want the hard work.
Actually, Mad Catz fixed the Dreamcast controller. Mad Catz fixed the awkward shape of the original controller so you were able to hold it properly. That, and the extra buttons, made them about 100X better than the originals.
And the Logitech controllers for the PS2 are generally regarded as being superior to the originals as well.
The 'dean of western writers,' American Pulitzer prize-winning author Wallace Stegner has written that national parks are 'America's best idea,' - a departure from the royal preserves that Old World sovereigns enjoyed for themselves - inherently democratic, open to all, "they reflect us at our best, not our worst."
I don't know HOW they are doing it, but they certainly ARE doing it. BD+ is a requirement for all software players independent of drives (which do not handle BD decryption logic).
My biggest question is: Has BD+ been implemented in all existing standalone hardware players? If not, are those owners just screwed when the new BD+ content comes out?
I think this ties into what one of the parents was saying about BD+ being a JVM. Support for Java apps on BD has been part of the spec for a very long time, so it's almost certainly implemented in all players. So it is possible that some of the older players (like the PS3) are or will run a Java version of BD+. This strikes me as a major PITA for content creators who are going the have to have multiple BD+ versions and some logic to detect which version is appropriate for which player.
And anyone who thinks this hideously complicated system isn't going to fail through a combination of implementation flaws and leaks is mentally ill. All the article shows is that you shouldn't do business with an outfit as inept as the Envisioneering Group.
The problem with this is that the only mail servers that support Sender ID are Exchange and Sendmail, experimentally, and the specification was only finalized and released back in NOVEMBER. Domainkeys was just released and its MUCH more likely it's going to be widely adopted. And Sender ID does not work with mail forwarding.
Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire is already out and it was a fucking disaster, universally panned by critics. Gamerankings.com currently has it at 37.4%
Deflection, puffs of air, possibly an optical effect. It certainly COULD be a lot of things. Why leap to the conclusion that it's an alien spaceship?
It's ice people. Get a grip.
The only real use I've seen for DVD-Audio is using the format to build extra-long mix discs for parties.
BTW, There are DVD-Audio discs available. And almost all of them are classical movie soundtracks because the music was already recorded in 5.1.
No one in the USA will deploy this due to costs, not as long as Mexico is in the state it's in.
However, I don't see how this could hold up in court. Frankly, I really don't know how ANY of these lawsuits go forward against anyone. I, personally, would go pro bono and simply deny everything. They don't (and won't) have the contents of my hard drive so I would simply argue: Wasn't me. They'd say they have my IP address which they confirmed with my ISP and I'd tell them that IP addresses can easily be spoofed so it's not enough to determine identity. I'd get one of networking expert friends to testify to this (because it's true).