No kidding. The Playstation store is all but unusable - impossible to find anything. I've only ever downloaded a few demos, but it seems that every time I do I somehow end up with two copies of it. This doesn't exactly instill confidence in the store, making it very unlikely I will ever actually buy something through it.
It also seems to be extremely slow to load, very clunky interface, and basically looks like it was designed by someone who has never, ever visited or seen an online retailer. Pretty bad all around.
GWB was dealt a shitty hand? Are you serious? After the attacks he had the kind of national solidarity and unity that any president would dream of having. The attacks were a terrible tragedy, but they put him in a nearly unprecedented position both domestically and internationally, where everyone almost had to get behind him and go with his plans.
He then proceeded to completely fuck it all up, in every way imaginable.
And yes, I remember the 2000 campaign. We got exactly what I expected - an incompetent, religio-fascist idiot - and we paid for it in the years following 9/11.
That said, I can't believe Obama was even nominated for the prize after only 2 weeks in office. Maybe if he had accomplished something prior to his run for president, but he really doesn't have any credentials that would put him on the radar for the prize. This seems to be a clear use of the prize to give Obama some more political firepower to try to ram through his agenda - not what I would think of as the purpose of the prize, but it is an interesting development.
Well, based on my wife's experience yesterday they already force text messaging plans on any new phone purchased that has a qwerty keyboard. Specifically, she was looking at the Samsung Magnet. Notice that you are required to get a text or data plan that is a minimum of $20 per month in addition to the cheapest voice plan at $40 per month. Absolutely insane.
If we weren't both on our respective family plans (yeah, married for five years and both of us are on our parent's plans - though her brother gets their bill, and I get my family's bill, but still...) I'd ditch AT&T in a second. Of course, none of the other national carriers seem to offer a better value, and I do get that 0.0001% savings for also having AT&T DSL (which I've actually been extremely happy with - cheap and fast).
My wife just went in to an AT&T store to pick up a new phone (hers was ~5 years old, and the last time she dropped it the thing finally [mostly] died). Yes, they have text message plans. In fact, in order to get the phone she really wanted (with a qwerty keypad), she would have been required to add unlimited text messaging. Not a big deal, right? Wrong. They want $20 per month for an unlimited texting plan (or $5 per month for 200 messages). Absolute insanity.
I'd threaten to switch to another carrier, but all of the national carriers seem to be in on the text messaging extortion these days. And no, $0.20 is not the cost without a plan (unless you mean a separate text messaging plan). I regularly pay $3-$5 in text message fees every month for the few text messages my friends insist on sending (yes, I could probably disable them [the text messages, though probably most of my friends too if it came to that:] - but I actually rather like text messages, I just think the carriers charge astronomical rates for something that should be included in a calling plan for free).
Tough to tell from the article, but it sounds like he didn't actually install a script on the terminals. Sounds like he copied the information (cookie?) from a couple of terminals that had access to the retrieval system, then used that login/cookie information to run a script on Amazon's cloud service that sent a request every 3 seconds using the authorization from the terminal(s). Hence the comment in the FBI file that he should have known it was illegal because he didn't own the account he used to access the retrieval system - he was using the information from the terminal(s).
I was fortunate enough to have taken a science fiction class in high school. I'd recommend nearly all of the books we covered:
Starship Troopers (Heinlein) Childhood's End (Clarke) Dune (Herbert) A Canticle for Leibowitz (Miller) Space Merchants (Pohl/Kornbluth) Ender's Game (Card)
Those are the ones I remember that I would recommend. The only other novel I recall from the class was Earth Abides by George Stewart, but I detested it.
I'm sure there are any number of books you could add (I think there must have been something from Asimov that we read, but I don't recall what), but that was a pretty good crop with decent variety, and didn't include some of the other classics that the students have read/will read in other classes (like Fahrenheit 451 and 1984). We also did a couple movies (Star Wars as a framework for the traditional hero's journey, Independence Day because it was new and big [a friend and I wrote a tongue-in-cheek paper claiming that Independence Day was actually about the spread of the evil that was AOL, spread by those pesky disks]). We also did a few short stories: A Sound of Thunder, Prospector's Special, and some story where an architect builds a crazy multidimensional house that collapses in on itself stick in my mind.
I'm not sure what I'd go to for the fantasy portion of such a class. Tolkien of course, but after that it becomes much more difficult - there are a lot of science fiction books that are stand-alone, but with fantasy a lot of the better ones I've read are part of a series, and it becomes difficult to identify one book from a series that really encompasses everything you want to include. Ursula K. LeGuin's Earthsea books are great (and the first three are quite short, so you might even be able to fit them all in), maybe The Riddlemaster of Hed by Patricia McKillip (sp?).
Hmm...most states I know of, are 'at will' states, where you can quit or be let go for any reason shy of federal discrimination laws, without notice.
Good luck proving anything in those states...
IANAL and all that, but my understanding is that it is a bit more complicated than that. I live and work in California, which is an at-will employment state. So yes, my company could let me go for any reason at any time (and I could quit for any reason at any time). However, as soon as the company says something like "You are being fired for x reason," then you can in fact challenge your dismissal over that reason. If the company told this person they are being fired for "not being a team player", then even in an at-will employment state like California that person could probably file a lawsuit and the company would have to show evidence supporting their claim or be subject to paying damages for wrongful termination. This is part of the reason that people are not usually actually given a reason for their dismissal, unless their conduct was especially egregious. You can be terminated for any reason, but you can not be terminated for a fabricated reason.
I agree - I refuse to pay $60 for a game, so I don't. For my PS3 I've bought all of my games used (see, game publishers? Instead of getting a reasonable amount from me, say $40 - $45, you get nothing!), or waited for the price to come down.
That said, when Gran Turismo finally comes out I'll pay full price (although I have the nasty feeling they are going to jack up the price on it - hell, I stopped by a GameStop the other day and they were charging $35 or $40 for GT5: Prologue). There is an occassional game I'm willing to pay that price for, but I would consider it a very special, once-per-system kind of price for a game.
Fortunately PC games haven't quite gotten to the same price point (yet).
3 3/4 miles straight up (actually less in a place like Afghanistan, where large areas are over 5,000 feet elevation), but that isn't the point. You aren't going to be parking these directly over the enemy in most situations. Per the article, at 20,000 feet it has a line of sight of 173 miles (presumably over flat land at 0 elevation, but still). Park it 20 or 30 miles away horizontally, and even with relatively advanced AA nothing is going to be touching it, while it should still be able to provide good overhead imagery. Just wait until they mount frickin' laser beams on it.
Nah, it's just the natural progression when your creative talent realize they can make more money for less work by transferring to the marketing department. You really don't need many writers and such to throw together the formulaic BS story for Flashy Graphics Sequel 9.
Instead of looking at it cynically, though, I think we should all be very excited. Here is a company, formerly known for selling over-priced, often crappy games, that has decided to give away their best work! There's no need to actually buy their games when you can play Media Circus for free! More of an interactive movie than a video game, but still a blast!
It's a VW. As long as you keep them away from anything to do with the electrical part of the system, it should run forever.
Seriously though, it does seem like this would greatly increase maintenance requirements. We us propane- and NG-powered IC generators (I think based on Ford or GM engines) at some remote sites, and they need pretty regular maintenance visits. Though come to think of it the generators themselves don't need a whole lot of maintenance, it is mostly the systems they are attached to that need checkups. Still, you need to check/change the oil, filters, plugs, belts, etc. from time to time - things that you don't need to do with a normal furnace.
I'd say it isn't really the use of the Joker's likeness that is at issue here, but the clear use of the trademarked "Time". The image is essentially claiming to be a cover from Time magazine. Just because you are parodying something doesn't mean you can pretend to be them. It is probably this infringement of Time's trademark that got the photo pulled, not any of the other BS people have been spouting.
Have you actually seen the parody in question? It's not the "Socialism" picture that you're probably thinking of. It is, quite obviously, a parody of a Time magazine cover.
The "Socialism" picture was a derivative of the magazine cover parody.
It is quite clearly not a parody. In fact, it quite clearly claims to be a cover of Time magazine. If I showed this image to someone who wasn't familiar with the magazine, they could quite easily mistake it for the real thing. Maybe if he had changed the title to "O-Time", or "Crime" or something it would be a parody, but by leaving the trademarked "Time" in place it is clearly taken out of the realm of parody, even if that was the intention - there is absolutely no indication that this is not the work of Time Magazine.
You (and to be fair, a lot of others) seem to have difficulty understanding why the photoshopped image prominently featuring the word "TIME" across the top of a modified image of Obama (and indeed, including the rest of the text from the actual cover) is different from all those photos you point out that feature modified images of Bush. "This is an outrage!" you cry. Clearly the evil media lords that are Flickr will not allow us to freely express our opinions!
I'll give you a hint why this image was taken down - it has to do with "TIME" being plastered across the top of the image. Somebody ( I'm not sure who, but someone) might object to having their trademark misused to suggest they created an image when they did not.
It's ok to have a picture of Bush as Hitler/Joker/Satan, but Obama is clearly off limits.
The level of failure in your post, along with many others in this thread, is staggering. Taking down the "original" shopped image had absolutely nothing to do with the supposed political commentary it contained. It had everything to do with the fact that the artist left the rest of the Time Magazine cover intact - specifically, "Time" in great big letters across the top. You know, exactly the way Time does it. While the shopped image of Obama would be clearly acceptable as a parody, and by all indications Flickr would have had no problem with that, the "original" image clearly violates Time magazine's trademark. If the original 'shopper had changed the title to "Crime" or something non-identical to Time's trademark, then it would have been a non-issue. However, with the edited image clearly misusing the Time trademark, Flickr really had no choice but to take it down when informed of it (which, not surprisingly, happened when it shot up immensely in popularity). This probably has little or nothing to do with use of the Joker's likeness (which is probably fair use), or the subject matter (anti-Obama people seem to love to pretend that they are being prevented from expressing their opinion), and everything to do with a clear infringement of Time Magazine's trademark - by leaving everything from the Time cover on there, the 'shopper is pretty much pretending that this was a Time cover.
It becomes a little more dicey when you get to the 2nd-order 'shopped image, where all of the Time magazine text (and trademark) has been removed (and the blatantly political speech added). At this point it is clearly a derivative work of the 1st-order 'shop, which as discussed above clearly violated Time magazine's trademark. If the original 'shopper had gone straight to the 2nd order image, then this would pretty clearly be parody or protected political speech. The fact that it is a derivative work of a work that clearly infringes on a trademark makes it a lot dicier - so Flickr took the reasonable stance of ditching that image as well (actually, I don't recall from the article if the 2nd-order 'shop was taken down from Flickr, or if it even appeared there, but whatever).
A whole bunch of people have jumped on this trying to claim that Flickr is trying to prevent criticism of Obama. I'm sorry, but the story is much simpler than that - look at the actual image discussed in the article, and it is clearly mis-using Time's trademark. Sort of like if I decided to make a parody of Slashdot, and included everything down to an unaltered Slashdot logo while changing some of the text in the summaries. Clearly not an example of fair use or protected speech (now, if I called it "Smashdot" or something and used a subtly-modified logo, it would probably be fine - just something to indicate that no, this is not in fact Slashdot).
So, a long comment to simply point out that the original image is in clear violation of Time's trademark - if you disagree I'd love to hear your reasoning, but it really is pretty clear-cut.
Only problem I've had recently with Windows (Vista, in this case... IIRC; not my computer) and resolutions is with a laptop connected to a dock. When it is connected to the dock, it correctly displays on the external monitor at the resolution I tell it to. However, every time I plug it into the dock it changes the settings on the built-in display when I disconnect it, and when I open the screen settings to change it back to what I want there are zero alternative resolutions (I don't remember what resolution it goes to; something like 1024 x 768 on a 16:10 monitor). I seem to have to restart the laptop after disconnecting it from the dock in order to get the display to work correctly.
Like I said, it isn't my computer, so I haven't really dug into it to try and solve the problem. Other than that, I haven't had any problems with resolutions displaying properly in years (I used to have a monitor that wouldn't report its capabilities to Windows, so Windows would always tell me the only supported setting was 640 x 480 at 60 hz after any video driver changes. Easy enough to fix, since you could always just force whatever resolution/refresh rate you wanted and see if it worked).
According to the specs in the DPReview article, the projector is "VGA Quality", so I guess that would mean 640 by 480. Not great, but pretty impressive for a $430 camera. Light output is listed as only 10 lumens, so probably need a pretty dim setting for it to work well.
Slashdot Mirror
No kidding. The Playstation store is all but unusable - impossible to find anything. I've only ever downloaded a few demos, but it seems that every time I do I somehow end up with two copies of it. This doesn't exactly instill confidence in the store, making it very unlikely I will ever actually buy something through it.
It also seems to be extremely slow to load, very clunky interface, and basically looks like it was designed by someone who has never, ever visited or seen an online retailer. Pretty bad all around.
GWB was dealt a shitty hand? Are you serious? After the attacks he had the kind of national solidarity and unity that any president would dream of having. The attacks were a terrible tragedy, but they put him in a nearly unprecedented position both domestically and internationally, where everyone almost had to get behind him and go with his plans.
He then proceeded to completely fuck it all up, in every way imaginable.
And yes, I remember the 2000 campaign. We got exactly what I expected - an incompetent, religio-fascist idiot - and we paid for it in the years following 9/11.
That said, I can't believe Obama was even nominated for the prize after only 2 weeks in office. Maybe if he had accomplished something prior to his run for president, but he really doesn't have any credentials that would put him on the radar for the prize. This seems to be a clear use of the prize to give Obama some more political firepower to try to ram through his agenda - not what I would think of as the purpose of the prize, but it is an interesting development.
Well, based on my wife's experience yesterday they already force text messaging plans on any new phone purchased that has a qwerty keyboard.
Specifically, she was looking at the Samsung Magnet.
Notice that you are required to get a text or data plan that is a minimum of $20 per month in addition to the cheapest voice plan at $40 per month. Absolutely insane.
If we weren't both on our respective family plans (yeah, married for five years and both of us are on our parent's plans - though her brother gets their bill, and I get my family's bill, but still...) I'd ditch AT&T in a second. Of course, none of the other national carriers seem to offer a better value, and I do get that 0.0001% savings for also having AT&T DSL (which I've actually been extremely happy with - cheap and fast).
My wife just went in to an AT&T store to pick up a new phone (hers was ~5 years old, and the last time she dropped it the thing finally [mostly] died). Yes, they have text message plans. In fact, in order to get the phone she really wanted (with a qwerty keypad), she would have been required to add unlimited text messaging. Not a big deal, right? Wrong. They want $20 per month for an unlimited texting plan (or $5 per month for 200 messages). Absolute insanity.
I'd threaten to switch to another carrier, but all of the national carriers seem to be in on the text messaging extortion these days. And no, $0.20 is not the cost without a plan (unless you mean a separate text messaging plan). I regularly pay $3-$5 in text message fees every month for the few text messages my friends insist on sending (yes, I could probably disable them [the text messages, though probably most of my friends too if it came to that :] - but I actually rather like text messages, I just think the carriers charge astronomical rates for something that should be included in a calling plan for free).
Tough to tell from the article, but it sounds like he didn't actually install a script on the terminals. Sounds like he copied the information (cookie?) from a couple of terminals that had access to the retrieval system, then used that login/cookie information to run a script on Amazon's cloud service that sent a request every 3 seconds using the authorization from the terminal(s). Hence the comment in the FBI file that he should have known it was illegal because he didn't own the account he used to access the retrieval system - he was using the information from the terminal(s).
I was fortunate enough to have taken a science fiction class in high school. I'd recommend nearly all of the books we covered:
Starship Troopers (Heinlein)
Childhood's End (Clarke)
Dune (Herbert)
A Canticle for Leibowitz (Miller)
Space Merchants (Pohl/Kornbluth)
Ender's Game (Card)
Those are the ones I remember that I would recommend. The only other novel I recall from the class was Earth Abides by George Stewart, but I detested it.
I'm sure there are any number of books you could add (I think there must have been something from Asimov that we read, but I don't recall what), but that was a pretty good crop with decent variety, and didn't include some of the other classics that the students have read/will read in other classes (like Fahrenheit 451 and 1984). We also did a couple movies (Star Wars as a framework for the traditional hero's journey, Independence Day because it was new and big [a friend and I wrote a tongue-in-cheek paper claiming that Independence Day was actually about the spread of the evil that was AOL, spread by those pesky disks]). We also did a few short stories: A Sound of Thunder, Prospector's Special, and some story where an architect builds a crazy multidimensional house that collapses in on itself stick in my mind.
I'm not sure what I'd go to for the fantasy portion of such a class. Tolkien of course, but after that it becomes much more difficult - there are a lot of science fiction books that are stand-alone, but with fantasy a lot of the better ones I've read are part of a series, and it becomes difficult to identify one book from a series that really encompasses everything you want to include. Ursula K. LeGuin's Earthsea books are great (and the first three are quite short, so you might even be able to fit them all in), maybe The Riddlemaster of Hed by Patricia McKillip (sp?).
Hmm...most states I know of, are 'at will' states, where you can quit or be let go for any reason shy of federal discrimination laws, without notice.
Good luck proving anything in those states...
IANAL and all that, but my understanding is that it is a bit more complicated than that. I live and work in California, which is an at-will employment state. So yes, my company could let me go for any reason at any time (and I could quit for any reason at any time). However, as soon as the company says something like "You are being fired for x reason," then you can in fact challenge your dismissal over that reason. If the company told this person they are being fired for "not being a team player", then even in an at-will employment state like California that person could probably file a lawsuit and the company would have to show evidence supporting their claim or be subject to paying damages for wrongful termination. This is part of the reason that people are not usually actually given a reason for their dismissal, unless their conduct was especially egregious. You can be terminated for any reason, but you can not be terminated for a fabricated reason.
Still waiting for CoD5 to drop in price...
I agree - I refuse to pay $60 for a game, so I don't. For my PS3 I've bought all of my games used (see, game publishers? Instead of getting a reasonable amount from me, say $40 - $45, you get nothing!), or waited for the price to come down.
That said, when Gran Turismo finally comes out I'll pay full price (although I have the nasty feeling they are going to jack up the price on it - hell, I stopped by a GameStop the other day and they were charging $35 or $40 for GT5: Prologue). There is an occassional game I'm willing to pay that price for, but I would consider it a very special, once-per-system kind of price for a game.
Fortunately PC games haven't quite gotten to the same price point (yet).
So when do I get my mini-gun toting Agents?
3 3/4 miles straight up (actually less in a place like Afghanistan, where large areas are over 5,000 feet elevation), but that isn't the point. You aren't going to be parking these directly over the enemy in most situations. Per the article, at 20,000 feet it has a line of sight of 173 miles (presumably over flat land at 0 elevation, but still). Park it 20 or 30 miles away horizontally, and even with relatively advanced AA nothing is going to be touching it, while it should still be able to provide good overhead imagery. Just wait until they mount frickin' laser beams on it.
A very long stick with a rubber ...
You'd better stay away from my multitouch surface!
Nah, it's just the natural progression when your creative talent realize they can make more money for less work by transferring to the marketing department. You really don't need many writers and such to throw together the formulaic BS story for Flashy Graphics Sequel 9.
Instead of looking at it cynically, though, I think we should all be very excited. Here is a company, formerly known for selling over-priced, often crappy games, that has decided to give away their best work! There's no need to actually buy their games when you can play Media Circus for free! More of an interactive movie than a video game, but still a blast!
It's a VW. As long as you keep them away from anything to do with the electrical part of the system, it should run forever.
Seriously though, it does seem like this would greatly increase maintenance requirements. We us propane- and NG-powered IC generators (I think based on Ford or GM engines) at some remote sites, and they need pretty regular maintenance visits. Though come to think of it the generators themselves don't need a whole lot of maintenance, it is mostly the systems they are attached to that need checkups. Still, you need to check/change the oil, filters, plugs, belts, etc. from time to time - things that you don't need to do with a normal furnace.
I'd say it isn't really the use of the Joker's likeness that is at issue here, but the clear use of the trademarked "Time". The image is essentially claiming to be a cover from Time magazine. Just because you are parodying something doesn't mean you can pretend to be them. It is probably this infringement of Time's trademark that got the photo pulled, not any of the other BS people have been spouting.
Have you actually seen the parody in question? It's not the "Socialism" picture that you're probably thinking of. It is, quite obviously, a parody of a Time magazine cover.
The "Socialism" picture was a derivative of the magazine cover parody.
It is quite clearly not a parody. In fact, it quite clearly claims to be a cover of Time magazine. If I showed this image to someone who wasn't familiar with the magazine, they could quite easily mistake it for the real thing. Maybe if he had changed the title to "O-Time", or "Crime" or something it would be a parody, but by leaving the trademarked "Time" in place it is clearly taken out of the realm of parody, even if that was the intention - there is absolutely no indication that this is not the work of Time Magazine.
You (and to be fair, a lot of others) seem to have difficulty understanding why the photoshopped image prominently featuring the word "TIME" across the top of a modified image of Obama (and indeed, including the rest of the text from the actual cover) is different from all those photos you point out that feature modified images of Bush. "This is an outrage!" you cry. Clearly the evil media lords that are Flickr will not allow us to freely express our opinions!
I'll give you a hint why this image was taken down - it has to do with "TIME" being plastered across the top of the image. Somebody ( I'm not sure who, but someone) might object to having their trademark misused to suggest they created an image when they did not.
It's ok to have a picture of Bush as Hitler/Joker/Satan, but Obama is clearly off limits.
The level of failure in your post, along with many others in this thread, is staggering.
Taking down the "original" shopped image had absolutely nothing to do with the supposed political commentary it contained. It had everything to do with the fact that the artist left the rest of the Time Magazine cover intact - specifically, "Time" in great big letters across the top. You know, exactly the way Time does it. While the shopped image of Obama would be clearly acceptable as a parody, and by all indications Flickr would have had no problem with that, the "original" image clearly violates Time magazine's trademark. If the original 'shopper had changed the title to "Crime" or something non-identical to Time's trademark, then it would have been a non-issue. However, with the edited image clearly misusing the Time trademark, Flickr really had no choice but to take it down when informed of it (which, not surprisingly, happened when it shot up immensely in popularity). This probably has little or nothing to do with use of the Joker's likeness (which is probably fair use), or the subject matter (anti-Obama people seem to love to pretend that they are being prevented from expressing their opinion), and everything to do with a clear infringement of Time Magazine's trademark - by leaving everything from the Time cover on there, the 'shopper is pretty much pretending that this was a Time cover.
It becomes a little more dicey when you get to the 2nd-order 'shopped image, where all of the Time magazine text (and trademark) has been removed (and the blatantly political speech added). At this point it is clearly a derivative work of the 1st-order 'shop, which as discussed above clearly violated Time magazine's trademark. If the original 'shopper had gone straight to the 2nd order image, then this would pretty clearly be parody or protected political speech. The fact that it is a derivative work of a work that clearly infringes on a trademark makes it a lot dicier - so Flickr took the reasonable stance of ditching that image as well (actually, I don't recall from the article if the 2nd-order 'shop was taken down from Flickr, or if it even appeared there, but whatever).
A whole bunch of people have jumped on this trying to claim that Flickr is trying to prevent criticism of Obama. I'm sorry, but the story is much simpler than that - look at the actual image discussed in the article, and it is clearly mis-using Time's trademark. Sort of like if I decided to make a parody of Slashdot, and included everything down to an unaltered Slashdot logo while changing some of the text in the summaries. Clearly not an example of fair use or protected speech (now, if I called it "Smashdot" or something and used a subtly-modified logo, it would probably be fine - just something to indicate that no, this is not in fact Slashdot).
So, a long comment to simply point out that the original image is in clear violation of Time's trademark - if you disagree I'd love to hear your reasoning, but it really is pretty clear-cut.
I want MY America back! This isn't Nazi Germany!
You're right! They were much better dressed!
They also had a very advanced walk, don't forget. It took the Ministry over 20 years to replicate that walk!
Only problem I've had recently with Windows (Vista, in this case... IIRC; not my computer) and resolutions is with a laptop connected to a dock. When it is connected to the dock, it correctly displays on the external monitor at the resolution I tell it to. However, every time I plug it into the dock it changes the settings on the built-in display when I disconnect it, and when I open the screen settings to change it back to what I want there are zero alternative resolutions (I don't remember what resolution it goes to; something like 1024 x 768 on a 16:10 monitor). I seem to have to restart the laptop after disconnecting it from the dock in order to get the display to work correctly.
Like I said, it isn't my computer, so I haven't really dug into it to try and solve the problem. Other than that, I haven't had any problems with resolutions displaying properly in years (I used to have a monitor that wouldn't report its capabilities to Windows, so Windows would always tell me the only supported setting was 640 x 480 at 60 hz after any video driver changes. Easy enough to fix, since you could always just force whatever resolution/refresh rate you wanted and see if it worked).
No worries - the theaters already bludgeon people to death if they come anywhere near with a digital camera, so you should be safe.
According to the specs in the DPReview article, the projector is "VGA Quality", so I guess that would mean 640 by 480. Not great, but pretty impressive for a $430 camera. Light output is listed as only 10 lumens, so probably need a pretty dim setting for it to work well.
As bad as Radio Shack's prices are, they're still cheaper than Best buy...
Syndicate was excellent, a remake of that would be great (just forget the travesty that was Syndicate Wars).
Ascendancy - loved that game. I'd definitely like to see another like it.
Yeah, Locomotion was a huge disappointment.
Despite the ancient graphics, I've gone back to TTD via OpenTTD. Much better game than Locomotion.