I'd rather see more wolves being brought back into their natural environment and humans taking a step back and removing themselves from the playing field than more hunters running about shooting things.
Wolves, cougars, coyotes and the like aren't well loved in populated areas. They tend to eat pets and occasional humans. I grew up in the sticks and have seen all of those animals on my property (plus deer).
I understand what you want, but it just isn't reality any more. There isn't much natural habitat left. Where I grew up, you couldn't build a house on less than 5 acres, and most people had between 20 and 300 acres. At this point (I'm now 40) along the road I live on, almost every large piece of land has been subdivided to 5 acre pieces. The wild animals used to be able to hang out on "the back 40", but now there's 7 or 8 houses on that previously uninhabited spaces. I'm assuming this is typical for rural America. Deer love it, and there's constant herds of them in my front yard (no dogs here), but the coyotes, wolves and big cats stay away.
Bows, bullets, starvation and vehicles are the only thing that kill deer any more (at least in Southern Oregon).
Diesel vs gasoline: o Louder o Smell worse o Cough plumes of soot These would need to be addressed in a real way before I'd want to drive one. I also wonder if diesel cars, unlike mowers and tractors, have a decent electrical system so the battery doesn't die every few months.
Go to a VW dealer and ask to drive a Diesel. You won't see smoke. You won't see soot. It's a tiny bit louder than a gaas powered car, but not much at all.
The difference between the electrical system in my Dodge with the Diesel option is 99% the same as the gas version. I have had the same 2 batteries in my truck (yes, it carries an extra battery to make sure it fires up on cold days) have been in it since '99. My guess is that you're used to GM vehicles that are piles of crap. GM ran one battery on their Diesel trucks for years, and therefor had battery (and starting) problems. Dodge did it right, while GM worried more about the final cost and sold a turd. All it takes is two batteries and a large alternator (just like is on every 3/4 or 1 ton truck in the US).
As it is, Diesel is not a popular technology in the United States. Most consumers in northern states avoid it for fear of jelling in cold weather, and Diesel all-around has gotten a bad reputation for small vehicles. Consumers prefer Gasoline to Diesel. The only place where Diesel is strong is in the transportation industry as just about every transportation truck fleet is Diesel powered.
Too bad about the misinformed Northerners. Every place with cold weather that sells diesel fuel switches to "winter blend" when it gets cold. There's other technology to keep fuel from gelling as well.
The reason the diesel has a bad reputation falls squarely on the shoulders of GM, who converted their small block Chevy engine to run on diesel back in the 70's. To say it was a steaming pile of crap would be unfair to the piles of crap. People hated them for good reason, and that's what people remember (as well as a handful of French diesels that sucked almost as much).
If you get away from cities, the use of diesel is far more common. People who drive trucks for work, rather than show, have figured out that diesel is the way to go. My 7,200 pound 4x4 diesel powered work truck gets better mileage than my girlfriend's V-6 gas powered 2 wheel drive Ford Explorer. Better in town and better on the highway. My mileage drops by 2 to 3 mpg (down to 15-16 mpg) if I'm towing 5,000 pounds - but my friends with gas trucks get 6 to 10 mpg with the same load. Gas engines make great horsepower, but Diesels make great torque - and torque is what gets work done.
Now that the US is changing the sulfur content of diesel fuel, we'll be able to get small, diesel powered Euro cars again, and it will be a good thing. A great thing. A friend of mine has a (roughly) 5 year old VW Jetta, and he gets 49 mpg at 70 mph. Better than a hybred, without the hassle of throwing away a bunch of batteries in a handful of years.
I just installed 2.0 on XP and it seems to be working quite well. Most of my extensions work, and I'm happy.
Then I discovered The Feature(tm). A website popped up a window, rather than a new tab, with no ability to control the size and whatnot. I discovered a button in the upper right corner that says "open this window in default browser". Clicking it opens that window in a new tab in my open browser.
Thanks to whoever added that feature. Brilliant idea.
Well crap. It only seems to appear on windows spawned from FoxyTunes.
If it was a popup ad, then it's too bad it couldn't just block it. If it opened it because you clicked it, there was the option to have links that spawned a new window to open in a tab in version 1.5
It wasn't a popup ad, and the vast majority of those get blocked.
It actually was spawned from FoxyTunes (which is a great little plugin). In any case, sometimes I want the popup in a new window, adn sometimes I don't. This offers me a choice, and I love having more options and choices.
I just installed 2.0 on XP and it seems to be working quite well. Most of my extensions work, and I'm happy.
Then I discovered The Feature(tm). A website popped up a window, rather than a new tab, with no ability to control the size and whatnot. I discovered a button in the upper right corner that says "open this window in default browser". Clicking it opens that window in a new tab in my open browser.
Thanks to whoever added that feature. Brilliant idea.
So, suddenly your requirements aren't just playing mp3s, it's additionally a 'good interface'.
Not suddenly at all. I started the thread with the title of "Bad interface" and commented that I wouldn't buy it because it was similar to WMPlayer.
Of course what people define as a good interface is different. My requirements for a portable music player, are just something I can hit 'play, stop, pause, rewind, fast forward, skip to next song, skip to last song' as buttons. The end, nothing I need beyond that. I imagine yours are probably beyond that though?
Absolutely. Interface choice is similar to Ford vs Chevy or Coke vs Pepsi. I've used iPods, and I really like the interface. It's simple, but powerful enough to scroll through a huge library quickly. I considered a Shuffle because it fit my needs (and I work as a fabricator in a special effects shop and things get destroyed in a hurry) but they weren't shipping. I ended up with a Nano.
I found iTunes quite annoying, as it didn't support a lot of music formats (MOD, IT, NSF ?), no lyric support, no automatic downloading and displaying of album information. There even seemed to be lack of the ability to synchronise to different devices (like iRiver, minidisc, simple usb-mp3 players -- I let aqaitences sync my mod music library if they wish).
Any how, this is why I use Amarok (which supports all of the above and more). The only disadvantage with Amarok is that you can't play Apple DRM on it -- But then again, that doesn't concern me, since I will do everything in my power not to buy DRM media.
I only have MP3s, as the CD player in my truck plays CDs, MP3s and (I think) Windows Media Files. I don't bother with the other formats (including AAC).
I'm tied to Windows because of an application I need to run, and I feel iTunes is better than all else I've tried. But it's the Coke/Pepsi thing again...
... Then why do you want a iPod if all you want is the ability to play Mp3s?
There are plenty of devices suited to JUST playing mp3s.
Because I haven't found an mp3 player with a good interface from a reliable company. I also use iTunes for my music - after trying and uninstalling just abouit everything out there.
For the whole house you need a current clamp meter with a remote display.
Don't know if they have one for US voltages though.
It may be a good product, but their advertising is horrible. Yes, I hate flash. They claim it "can save up to 25%" on your electric bill. That's simply a lie. It can show you how much power you use, but it can't save power. I never deal with liars like this - kind of like spammers.
I know guns arn't play things so I didn't touch them. I know knives are dangerous unless used correctly and never had a use for them. I had no intrest in drink, so I never touched it.
Same here. But it sounds like you're arguing that the Internet access needs to be moderated an governed by the feds once it's in your house. Guns, knives and booze are OK to have in the house, but Internet access isn't? Sorry, but I just don't understand your argument.
I also grew up with guns and booze in the house. I was taught to respect them, and not treat them as toys. If I had Internet access, it would have been handled in a similar manner.
How many parents lock the car keys away at night? Probably not too many, because there's consequences for stealing a car. Why should Internet access be any different?
Remember - we're talking about 12 year old children having unsupervised access to the Internet. If you can't keep a 12 year old away from the 'net in your own house, how can you trust them with anything else?
Why are parents allowing their 12 year olds to surf the net without supervision? It isn't the government's problem to solve - it belongs to the parents.
Of course, it's the US, so it'll never fall in the lap of the sperm & egg donor.
And guess what? The Republican party as a whole (including the Republican "centrists" of which I once counted myself) are going to pay over the next election or two.
On the good side (for you) the Democrats will insist on running a candidate who can't win.
Rather than focus on rebuilding the middle class, and they'll tackle an issue as pointless as gays in the military (I'm not opposed to it, but it doesn't need to be the focus of a political platform) and be as PC as possible, while chasing away people who are disgusted with the current President.
You're essentially repeating the talking points that Enron paid for to divert people from the fact that Arnold was planning not to try to recover any of the money from the Enron scam that ripped California utility customers off for billions of dollars using staged power shutdowns to scare people into paying any amount of money the power companies demanded.
Thanks for moving to Oregon, the average IQ in California went up when you crossed the state line.
Do us a favor. Don't come back.
Go fuck yourself retard.
As I said, he's not perfect, but he understands that Californina needs businesses to survive in order for the state to survive. Davis was sitting on his fund raising thumb too much to actually do anything to Enron.
We got fucked. By Davis. By Enron. By everybody who had a hand in it.
Sure Arnold should have gone after Enron, and he doesn't have the balls to do it. Just like everybody else. Were we better off with Davis? No way. Are we better off with Arnold? A little. He's still a politician, and he'll continue to cater to the almighty dollar, but he at least has a tiny clue. That tiny clue was way bigger than the one Davis had.
I may have raised the IQ of California when I left, but I also took $100,000 a year business with me. And a house. And a $600 a year vehicle registration. And another car, and two motorcycles, and plenty of sales tax, income tax, and property tax revenue. I left behind an employee who's now on unemployment. California is so much better off chasing out legitimate businesses and leaving the ignorant, unemployed, uninsured, non-licensed people to suck even more welfare, food stamps, and your taxes out of the people. Good going!
Next time you need your house needs some work, make sure you go to Home Depot and hire a guy with no license or insurance.
No, seriously, I thought it was a joke when Arnold started declaring his intention to run for office. I was terrified when I found out he actually won.
I was in California at the time. Davis, the former governor beleived that the answer to most problems was to raise taxes. Arnold made the argument that businesses were being pushed out of California, and if it doesn't stop, the state will collapse. I agree with him. He campained for lower workman's comp insurance rates, (which is one of the main reasons businesses are leaving California). After he was elected, he got them lowered.
He's far from perfect, but his competition was literally a joke. Gary Coleman. A porn star. Circus freaks of every kind were running, including the govenor being recalled. The entire election process was a joke, but Arnold was one of the better candidates.
An example of how out of control taxes are in California, is vehicle registration. It's based on value, but there's weight penalty tax for heavy vehicles. At the time, I was working in constructuion, and needed a large truck to haul materials and trailers with. Big trucks with gas engines get horrible mileage. Big trucks with Diesel engines are really heavy.
My registration fees on a '97 Dodge pickup with a Cummins Diesel engine and a utility bed were $600 a year. That's $50 a month for license plates on a truck. I moved back to Oregon, and I just paid $54 for two years.
Arnold isn't great, but at least he understands that a state needs small & large businesses to survive.
I think it's the bust that happened in the Sports Card industry. Everyone who wanted the cards eventually got them, and then there was no one to sell the existing cards to. The same has happened on eBay. Unless it's a very unique, or new product, everyone who wants one, has already got theirs.
I only see this with popular items that everybody "has to have". My buying habits on eBay haven't changed at all. I look for items when I'm working on a project. For example, I just bought an old Moto Guzzi (Italian motorcycle) and I need a manual and some parts. There are guys selling new old stock parts, as well as rebuild kits for carburators and brakes. It's a small market, but it hasn't changed in the last 5 years.
I wouldn't want to be the guy selling "this week's hot item" for 10 cents over cost, because there are so many guys doing it. On the other hand, if you have a more specialized item, eBay is still fine.
And it's good for used CDs as well. As long as the shipping is reasonable.
Re:Unfounded Criticism
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 1
If a soldier is playing an IPOD over a loudspeaker in Iraq, how does US copyright law apply?
AFAIK - When on a base, you're "in America" and subject to American (and military) law.
The are bands, such as Radiohead, The Beatles & The Stones who have made albums I think sound better as an whole than as individual tracks on random. Sgt Pepper, Satanic Majesty's Request, Kid A... just to name a few.
However, some of those same artists have put out "Best Of" albums that include some of those songs that "must be played as an entire album".
In any case, I think the artist should have the ability to decide how it's to be sold (album vs singles). If the album isn't worth it, I won't buy it. For the most part, I buy the entire album. In my 1,000 album collection, I have fewer than 10 songs as singles.
And if the artists cared that much, they'd release one song that was 45 minutes long. They won't, because it won't sell enough to matter.
Re:Running over with car not 2000 pounds of pressu
on
Flash Drives Go To Work
·
· Score: 2, Informative
My wife backed our Jetta onto my foot once, and then stopped it there when I yelled at her. (She claims it was accidental:) It wasn't comfortable, but it didn't break my foot either.
There's a large difference in teh weight on the front tires vs the weight on the rear tires of a front engine/front wheel drive vehicle. Assuming you care, you could find an old car magazine or road test, and itt'll list the weight balance, as well as the weight of the car. Being run over by the back wheels of a 80's econo-box (not saying that's what the Jetta is) is nothing.
On th eother hand, I have a heavy duty truck with tools, equipment, a utility bed and a Diesel engine. On DOT certified scales, theh front end (front wheels on the scale) weighs 4300 pound, while th erear wheels only put 3200 on the ground. Yup, each front tire is putting a ton onto the ground. That would hurt your foot.
Assuming of course you are happy with the amount of compression the digital satellite company places on the stream. I know I looked at getting a DirecTiVo box which also recorded the digital stream. They made the mistake of showing Boomerang on the floor display: jaggy artifacts all along every high-contrast line in the animation. Apparently someone thought they could recompress the animated channels far more than they can take.
There's lots of people who have no other options than satellite.
I'm out in the sticks, so if I want more than 2 1/2 over the air channels, I need a dish.
So, um, yeah... the ammount of digital artifacts is acceptable.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey,
I'm an expatriate because of the government!
I moved to China!
I can drink a beer on the street here.
You could have moved to Las Vegas. It's much closer and you can drink free drinks on the street.
I'd rather see more wolves being brought back into their natural environment and humans taking a step back and removing themselves from the playing field than more hunters running about shooting things.
Wolves, cougars, coyotes and the like aren't well loved in populated areas. They tend to eat pets and occasional humans. I grew up in the sticks and have seen all of those animals on my property (plus deer).
I understand what you want, but it just isn't reality any more. There isn't much natural habitat left.
Where I grew up, you couldn't build a house on less than 5 acres, and most people had between 20 and 300 acres. At this point (I'm now 40) along the road I live on, almost every large piece of land has been subdivided to 5 acre pieces. The wild animals used to be able to hang out on "the back 40", but now there's 7 or 8 houses on that previously uninhabited spaces. I'm assuming this is typical for rural America. Deer love it, and there's constant herds of them in my front yard (no dogs here), but the coyotes, wolves and big cats stay away.
Bows, bullets, starvation and vehicles are the only thing that kill deer any more (at least in Southern Oregon).
After you pay about $2,000 for such a robo-deer, you put it on a side road
Then you watch as it gets hit by a car.
Actually, if i was just like a real deer, it would jump out in front of motorcycles.
Diesel vs gasoline: o Louder o Smell worse o Cough plumes of soot These would need to be addressed in a real way before I'd want to drive one. I also wonder if diesel cars, unlike mowers and tractors, have a decent electrical system so the battery doesn't die every few months.
Go to a VW dealer and ask to drive a Diesel. You won't see smoke. You won't see soot. It's a tiny bit louder than a gaas powered car, but not much at all.
The difference between the electrical system in my Dodge with the Diesel option is 99% the same as the gas version. I have had the same 2 batteries in my truck (yes, it carries an extra battery to make sure it fires up on cold days) have been in it since '99. My guess is that you're used to GM vehicles that are piles of crap. GM ran one battery on their Diesel trucks for years, and therefor had battery (and starting) problems. Dodge did it right, while GM worried more about the final cost and sold a turd. All it takes is two batteries and a large alternator (just like is on every 3/4 or 1 ton truck in the US).
As it is, Diesel is not a popular technology in the United States. Most consumers in northern states avoid it for fear of jelling in cold weather, and Diesel all-around has gotten a bad reputation for small vehicles. Consumers prefer Gasoline to Diesel. The only place where Diesel is strong is in the transportation industry as just about every transportation truck fleet is Diesel powered.
Too bad about the misinformed Northerners. Every place with cold weather that sells diesel fuel switches to "winter blend" when it gets cold. There's other technology to keep fuel from gelling as well.
The reason the diesel has a bad reputation falls squarely on the shoulders of GM, who converted their small block Chevy engine to run on diesel back in the 70's. To say it was a steaming pile of crap would be unfair to the piles of crap. People hated them for good reason, and that's what people remember (as well as a handful of French diesels that sucked almost as much).
If you get away from cities, the use of diesel is far more common. People who drive trucks for work, rather than show, have figured out that diesel is the way to go. My 7,200 pound 4x4 diesel powered work truck gets better mileage than my girlfriend's V-6 gas powered 2 wheel drive Ford Explorer. Better in town and better on the highway. My mileage drops by 2 to 3 mpg (down to 15-16 mpg) if I'm towing 5,000 pounds - but my friends with gas trucks get 6 to 10 mpg with the same load. Gas engines make great horsepower, but Diesels make great torque - and torque is what gets work done.
Now that the US is changing the sulfur content of diesel fuel, we'll be able to get small, diesel powered Euro cars again, and it will be a good thing. A great thing. A friend of mine has a (roughly) 5 year old VW Jetta, and he gets 49 mpg at 70 mph. Better than a hybred, without the hassle of throwing away a bunch of batteries in a handful of years.
Bring on the diesel!
If this money were used to update roads and safety issues related to cars and roads, what effect would it make?
Our drivers would be even less attentive than they are now. Will all those safety features, why bother to be a good driver?
I just installed 2.0 on XP and it seems to be working quite well. Most of my extensions work, and I'm happy.
Then I discovered The Feature(tm). A website popped up a window, rather than a new tab, with no ability to control the size and whatnot. I discovered a button in the upper right corner that says "open this window in default browser". Clicking it opens that window in a new tab in my open browser.
Thanks to whoever added that feature. Brilliant idea.
Well crap.
It only seems to appear on windows spawned from FoxyTunes.
Oh well, the euphoria was great while it lasted.
If it was a popup ad, then it's too bad it couldn't just block it. If it opened it because you clicked it, there was the option to have links that spawned a new window to open in a tab in version 1.5
It wasn't a popup ad, and the vast majority of those get blocked.
It actually was spawned from FoxyTunes (which is a great little plugin). In any case, sometimes I want the popup in a new window, adn sometimes I don't. This offers me a choice, and I love having more options and choices.
I just installed 2.0 on XP and it seems to be working quite well. Most of my extensions work, and I'm happy.
Then I discovered The Feature(tm). A website popped up a window, rather than a new tab, with no ability to control the size and whatnot. I discovered a button in the upper right corner that says "open this window in default browser". Clicking it opens that window in a new tab in my open browser.
Thanks to whoever added that feature. Brilliant idea.
So, suddenly your requirements aren't just playing mp3s, it's additionally a 'good interface'.
Not suddenly at all. I started the thread with the title of "Bad interface" and commented that I wouldn't buy it because it was similar to WMPlayer.
Of course what people define as a good interface is different. My requirements for a portable music player, are just something I can hit 'play, stop, pause, rewind, fast forward, skip to next song, skip to last song' as buttons. The end, nothing I need beyond that. I imagine yours are probably beyond that though?
Absolutely. Interface choice is similar to Ford vs Chevy or Coke vs Pepsi. I've used iPods, and I really like the interface. It's simple, but powerful enough to scroll through a huge library quickly. I considered a Shuffle because it fit my needs (and I work as a fabricator in a special effects shop and things get destroyed in a hurry) but they weren't shipping. I ended up with a Nano.
I found iTunes quite annoying, as it didn't support a lot of music formats (MOD, IT, NSF ?), no lyric support, no automatic downloading and displaying of album information. There even seemed to be lack of the ability to synchronise to different devices (like iRiver, minidisc, simple usb-mp3 players -- I let aqaitences sync my mod music library if they wish).
Any how, this is why I use Amarok (which supports all of the above and more). The only disadvantage with Amarok is that you can't play Apple DRM on it -- But then again, that doesn't concern me, since I will do everything in my power not to buy DRM media.
I only have MP3s, as the CD player in my truck plays CDs, MP3s and (I think) Windows Media Files. I don't bother with the other formats (including AAC).
I'm tied to Windows because of an application I need to run, and I feel iTunes is better than all else I've tried. But it's the Coke/Pepsi thing again...
... Then why do you want a iPod if all you want is the ability to play Mp3s?
There are plenty of devices suited to JUST playing mp3s.
Because I haven't found an mp3 player with a good interface from a reliable company. I also use iTunes for my music - after trying and uninstalling just abouit everything out there.
The Zune interface is just like a miniature version of the Windows Media Center user interface
That will keep my money in Apple's pocket.
And I don't want wireless. I don't want FM. I don't want games.
I want to play mp3 files. That's it.
For the whole house you need a current clamp meter with a remote display.
Don't know if they have one for US voltages though.
It may be a good product, but their advertising is horrible. Yes, I hate flash.
They claim it "can save up to 25%" on your electric bill. That's simply a lie. It can show you how much power you use, but it can't save power. I never deal with liars like this - kind of like spammers.
Take a look at this: http://www.tequipment.net/Ideal61-701.asp
Same idea, and a good multimeter as well.
I know guns arn't play things so I didn't touch them.
I know knives are dangerous unless used correctly and never had a use for them.
I had no intrest in drink, so I never touched it.
Same here.
But it sounds like you're arguing that the Internet access needs to be moderated an governed by the feds once it's in your house. Guns, knives and booze are OK to have in the house, but Internet access isn't? Sorry, but I just don't understand your argument.
I also grew up with guns and booze in the house. I was taught to respect them, and not treat them as toys. If I had Internet access, it would have been handled in a similar manner.
How many parents lock the car keys away at night? Probably not too many, because there's consequences for stealing a car. Why should Internet access be any different?
Remember - we're talking about 12 year old children having unsupervised access to the Internet. If you can't keep a 12 year old away from the 'net in your own house, how can you trust them with anything else?
I used to know a 13 year old girl who had the same rule. She'd sneak down at like 2am and log on AIM for a few hours.
Like I said, can't stop a kid who really wants it.
Right.
Remove the keyboard, mouse and monitor.
Look people - if you don't control your children, the feds will do it for you. Each and every one of us will pay at that point.
If you can't raise a child, don't have one.
Why are parents allowing their 12 year olds to surf the net without supervision?
It isn't the government's problem to solve - it belongs to the parents.
Of course, it's the US, so it'll never fall in the lap of the sperm & egg donor.
And guess what? The Republican party as a whole (including the Republican "centrists" of which I once counted myself) are going to pay over the next election or two.
On the good side (for you) the Democrats will insist on running a candidate who can't win.
Rather than focus on rebuilding the middle class, and they'll tackle an issue as pointless as gays in the military (I'm not opposed to it, but it doesn't need to be the focus of a political platform) and be as PC as possible, while chasing away people who are disgusted with the current President.
Typical slashdot troll.
"I don't like your politics so I'll call you names".
You're essentially repeating the talking points that Enron paid for to divert people from the fact that Arnold was planning not to try to recover any of the money from the Enron scam that ripped California utility customers off for billions of dollars using staged power shutdowns to scare people into paying any amount of money the power companies demanded.
Thanks for moving to Oregon, the average IQ in California went up when you crossed the state line.
Do us a favor. Don't come back.
Go fuck yourself retard.
As I said, he's not perfect, but he understands that Californina needs businesses to survive in order for the state to survive.
Davis was sitting on his fund raising thumb too much to actually do anything to Enron.
We got fucked. By Davis. By Enron. By everybody who had a hand in it.
Sure Arnold should have gone after Enron, and he doesn't have the balls to do it. Just like everybody else. Were we better off with Davis? No way. Are we better off with Arnold? A little. He's still a politician, and he'll continue to cater to the almighty dollar, but he at least has a tiny clue. That tiny clue was way bigger than the one Davis had.
I may have raised the IQ of California when I left, but I also took $100,000 a year business with me. And a house. And a $600 a year vehicle registration. And another car, and two motorcycles, and plenty of sales tax, income tax, and property tax revenue. I left behind an employee who's now on unemployment. California is so much better off chasing out legitimate businesses and leaving the ignorant, unemployed, uninsured, non-licensed people to suck even more welfare, food stamps, and your taxes out of the people. Good going!
Next time you need your house needs some work, make sure you go to Home Depot and hire a guy with no license or insurance.
Cheers!
No, seriously, I thought it was a joke when Arnold started declaring his intention to run for office. I was terrified when I found out he actually won.
I was in California at the time. Davis, the former governor beleived that the answer to most problems was to raise taxes. Arnold made the argument that businesses were being pushed out of California, and if it doesn't stop, the state will collapse. I agree with him. He campained for lower workman's comp insurance rates, (which is one of the main reasons businesses are leaving California). After he was elected, he got them lowered.
He's far from perfect, but his competition was literally a joke. Gary Coleman. A porn star. Circus freaks of every kind were running, including the govenor being recalled. The entire election process was a joke, but Arnold was one of the better candidates.
An example of how out of control taxes are in California, is vehicle registration. It's based on value, but there's weight penalty tax for heavy vehicles. At the time, I was working in constructuion, and needed a large truck to haul materials and trailers with. Big trucks with gas engines get horrible mileage. Big trucks with Diesel engines are really heavy.
My registration fees on a '97 Dodge pickup with a Cummins Diesel engine and a utility bed were $600 a year. That's $50 a month for license plates on a truck. I moved back to Oregon, and I just paid $54 for two years.
Arnold isn't great, but at least he understands that a state needs small & large businesses to survive.
I think it's the bust that happened in the Sports Card industry. Everyone who wanted the cards eventually got them, and then there was no one to sell the existing cards to. The same has happened on eBay. Unless it's a very unique, or new product, everyone who wants one, has already got theirs.
I only see this with popular items that everybody "has to have". My buying habits on eBay haven't changed at all. I look for items when I'm working on a project. For example, I just bought an old Moto Guzzi (Italian motorcycle) and I need a manual and some parts. There are guys selling new old stock parts, as well as rebuild kits for carburators and brakes. It's a small market, but it hasn't changed in the last 5 years.
I wouldn't want to be the guy selling "this week's hot item" for 10 cents over cost, because there are so many guys doing it. On the other hand, if you have a more specialized item, eBay is still fine.
And it's good for used CDs as well. As long as the shipping is reasonable.
If a soldier is playing an IPOD over a loudspeaker in Iraq, how does US copyright law apply?
AFAIK - When on a base, you're "in America" and subject to American (and military) law.
The are bands, such as Radiohead, The Beatles & The Stones who have made albums I think sound better as an whole than as individual tracks on random. Sgt Pepper, Satanic Majesty's Request, Kid A... just to name a few.
However, some of those same artists have put out "Best Of" albums that include some of those songs that "must be played as an entire album".
In any case, I think the artist should have the ability to decide how it's to be sold (album vs singles). If the album isn't worth it, I won't buy it. For the most part, I buy the entire album. In my 1,000 album collection, I have fewer than 10 songs as singles.
And if the artists cared that much, they'd release one song that was 45 minutes long. They won't, because it won't sell enough to matter.
My wife backed our Jetta onto my foot once, and then stopped it there when I yelled at her. (She claims it was accidental :) It wasn't comfortable, but it didn't break my foot either.
There's a large difference in teh weight on the front tires vs the weight on the rear tires of a front engine/front wheel drive vehicle. Assuming you care, you could find an old car magazine or road test, and itt'll list the weight balance, as well as the weight of the car. Being run over by the back wheels of a 80's econo-box (not saying that's what the Jetta is) is nothing.
On th eother hand, I have a heavy duty truck with tools, equipment, a utility bed and a Diesel engine. On DOT certified scales, theh front end (front wheels on the scale) weighs 4300 pound, while th erear wheels only put 3200 on the ground. Yup, each front tire is putting a ton onto the ground. That would hurt your foot.
Assuming of course you are happy with the amount of compression the digital satellite company places on the stream. I know I looked at getting a DirecTiVo box which also recorded the digital stream. They made the mistake of showing Boomerang on the floor display: jaggy artifacts all along every high-contrast line in the animation. Apparently someone thought they could recompress the animated channels far more than they can take.
There's lots of people who have no other options than satellite.
I'm out in the sticks, so if I want more than 2 1/2 over the air channels, I need a dish.
So, um, yeah... the ammount of digital artifacts is acceptable.