I've ben using (and still do) Web Washer a JS/Popup/Ad blocking proxy tool. Nice thing about it is tht it works for any browser. Un-nice thing is that it is not too website specific.
"The first order of business for an energy consumer should be to minimize energy consumption. The economics are simple: a reduction in demand will reduce costs."
This over simplified way of looking at things does not match reality.
I guarantee that if then entire US halved their energy needs overnight, you'd find that the cost of electricity per kWh would double within months. The electrical companies are charging the maximum amount that they can without starting any serious consumer outcry. It's not based on "suppply and demand" anywhere near as much as on "what the market will bear".
Although the "energy required to produce" solar cells myth it just that, a myth. What it not a myth is that it takes about 25 years to pay off a residential solar install at today's electricity/solar system costs. And that pretty much is the same thing.
Then after 25 years, the power output is down by 20% and you need to replace or add cells to keep the power up. No, they don't just die, but they do fade in efficiency slowly over time.
Till solar is 1/2 or less of it's current costs per kw of output vs electrical cost from the grid, it's not doing much good. In fact isn't it strange that solar installs are pretty much the same cost as power costs over their lifetime? Hmmm. There are market forces at work here... It's a lot easier for a manufacturer and installer to sell fewer high priced systems than a lot more lower priced systems.
Then of course there is the problem where if every house and buisness had solar, we'd find that we all would go back to candles at night because there would no longer be enough of a power grid left to take up the slack when the sun went down. Most solar installs are batteryless for several reasons, woking on the "feed the grid" during the day and "suck on the grid" at night, balancing out to even if possible. Imagine if no residense or buisness payed anything for power off the grid? How long would the grid last then?
Right now solar (as it is) works or would work only up to maybe 1 in 100 buildings before it started to cause problems like evening brownouts due to an underpowered grid when the sun was not shining.
We/were/ doing this, decades ago. But something like 80% of the money that was budgeted for it got "misdirected" onto other projects and the US effort languished to death. Now it is up to someone else to finish what we could not, rather/would not/ do.:(
Currently we are gladly letting other spend the money now and as of just this year, completely dismantled plans for any more US based research in this area, even though we are one of, if not the, worlds largest energy user.
I hope they really kicks our ass on it too. With something like 20 years of a head start, the hobbling of the US fusion research effort by the all too political "Energy" department is yet another of our great shames.
All joking about Paris Hilton aside, once you've typed in most of your search word(s) it does offer some interesting alternatives for more tightly defining a search, or searching for your subject on peoples pages that can't spell.
But they should probably not even start making alist till 4-5 characters are typed, before that it's just suggesting stupid things.
Also, it uses JavaScript. I have never had to "trust" google to use it before and as time goes on I have less reason to truly trust them, I don't know how it could be done without using JS but I really hope they exhausted all other options before deciding to use it. At least if you have JS turned off the search box still functions as it always did, so if this makes it into the main page, you won;t be forced to turn it on (or switch search providers) if you don't want.
Can't figure out that ordering system though, it's not alphabetical, and not string length and not frequency, is it random? As others have suggested, I too have to wonder how long before the order is determined by the amount of money they get paid.
A gay coubple being married does not affect anyone outside the gay couple. (Except nosy and intolerant people that can't keep their noses out of other peoples buisness)
In this case, a minority is directly influencing what everyone can and cannot watch on TV.
You forgot the biggest and most unfortunate reason of all.
Even when people are given control of their own fate, they are generally too lazy to do anytyhing on their own. Therefore, they feel that it must all be done for them without having to lift a finger.
Oh, and of course the minor corollary: It is far easier to bitch about something than to learn how to fix the problem youself.
Spamming has only recently become a crime anywhere and is still perfectly legal in most places.
So no, the spammer sites are mostly just places that "offend" us. We (Lycos) have made NO distinction between the 419 "CRIMINAL" spammers and spammers that do actually have a product (From what I see in my in box it seems to be about 50/50)
My arguments still stand. What about when the "Moral" "Majority" gets internet literate enough to coordinate a wide scale attack on anything they deem an afront to god? There are certainly enough of them with computers to be able to run the new "Iamforgod" screen saver and take down half the net if they wanted to.
And today we have the beginings of people finding that sort of behavior (when it suits THEM) acceptable!
You can't claim morality when it suits you personally. You need to look at the bigger picture!
A great example of EVERYTHING THAT IS HIDEOUSLY WRONG WITH THIS IDEA!!!
Thank god there was actually a concrete example for all the vigilanti monkeys here screaming for blood so much they don't see that innocent people will get whacked by their activities.
It seriously disturbs me that seemingly 50% of the respondants here care nothing for other people's rights or for any possible collateral damage they might cause going after their "target".
All to "America in the 21st century" unfortunately. Makes me ashamed to be one sometimes:(
Why not get every person and every site on the net to DDos the entire farking thing off the planet? Doesn't that sound like fun?
Think about it, there is not one thing on the net that probably isn't an annoyance to at least one person out there.
If DDOSing a site you don't like becomes generally acceptable behavior, the net is in some serious trouble.
It's entire foundation of the internet being based on believing that people will generally "play nice" (as it is) is on the verge of causing it's destruction here.
Lets keep cool heads. Boycott and stop supporting the use of the lycos screen saver and get back to work on a better email protocol!
Spyware is frequently installed by the user, not by some IE exploit. Hell some computers com efrom the manufacturer with built in spyware!
Although some soyware IS installed by IE, that is merely one of many vectors for it.
As a counter to your single point of status, I use IE and have since IE 4 came out and have never been spyware infected. Why? I spend 30 seconds on each new machine turning off active X and Java script and enabling it only for the rare instance that it is needed on "trustworthy" sites.
But then I also don't install every single new screen saver, password saver or other cutsie-poo program that comes down the internet pike like a hell of a lot of other people do too.
How are Linux and OS-X "designed" to prevent spyware?
They don't suffer because the platforms are not (yet) targets.
Both OSes allow users to install software that can access the net knowingly and that means that both OSes can host spyware.
Remember, a lot of spyware is merely piggyback functionality on other software that the user has knowingly installed. So even if a helpful firewall comes up and says "Hey, I am blocking XXX from acessing the internet" The user will simply go "Oh, yeah I installed that, I WANT it to access the internet" without knowing that it is also sending marketing info along with whatever the hell else it was doing that the user thought they wanted it to.
As soon as the number of moron users reaches a critical point on either OS there will be plenty of spyware available, don't worry.
Then it'll be Microsoft that determines what software is "Spyware" and what is not?!?
This is NOT an OS problem at all. Spyware is (as far as the OS is concerned) a legitimately installed and running program.
There is nothing in Linux or OSX that will prevent spyware on those OSes either. It's an ignorant user that installs Gator and the syware it comes with (or any of dozens of other spyware carrying programs)
That being said, XP SP2 does help in this regard. There is an additional warning when you try to install or run programs that you have downloaded from the web, and the firewall will block outgoing connections from unknown programs (Till you tell it to do otherwise). So that helps some, but of course the ignorant user that bypasses all that will still have a "problem" that they cannot understand.
The only way to truly prevent the problem of spyware is to prevent users from installing software at all, on ANY OS. (Er, but then my Toshiba laptop came preinstalled with spyware, so not even then...)
What spectacular Sony failure are you talking about?
This is basically an FM radio with the ability to store a few songs that you listened too over the airwaves. The recording part is only incedental to the real purpose of the device, to have a portable XM satelite receiver, plain and simple.
Most projects involve layer upon layer of image adjustments. Each adjustment may expand, then contract the gamma over and over. When you start out at 8 bits, you posterize very quickly (Lets say by quartering the brightness), reversing the gamma later on (Lets say multiplying the brightness 4 times), you've thrown away so much data that cannot be recovered, the image instantly goes to hell.
If the data starts out in 16 bit, the entire gamma can be crammed down into the lower 8 bits (which in an 8 bit image is now completely black) then expanded back to 16 bits while reteing a lot of still useful information! Starting with 8 bit data gives you zero room for movement of gamma without image degradation.
You want to end up with at least 8 bits of meaningful data before you hit your 8 bit output device, but if 5 layers of adjustments have shrunk your 8 bit data down to 4 bits, it's going to look like hell. Start with 16 bits and 5 layers of adjustments, shrinking the meaningful data down to 12 or 10 bits, you still have PLENTY of data left for good output on an 8 bit device.
I used to think that, then I started using other search engines.
These days, a huge number of epeople's total exposure to the web seems to be completely filtered through google. And if you do that, the web does look like it's going to shit.
But google isn't the central clearing house for the web, nor should it be. Go elsewhere for a while, I found that most of the other major search engines provide a lot more usable information closer to the top of the lists than google has lately.
Also, don't for get specialized portals! A lot of them don't even let the searh engines in, so you miss them.
The web is a hell of a lot larger and more varied than google makes it seem!!!
The thing I've noticed about google over the last year or so is that everything that comes up top in their lists are virtually all commercial sites.
Initially I though that that might actually be reflective of the makeup of the web, but it's not!
Searching in MSN and Yahoo reveal a much greater variety of site types beside commercial, such as academic, government and individial, "ranked" much higher in the returned list than google gives them. As if, my ghod, they actually use a real search string to page match ranking instead of some combination of that and a sites popularity.
It is often difficult to find out real information that is on the web using google becuase you are wading through hundreds of commercial site "finds" to find the one adademic site that can help you.
This varies by search sctring of course, but in general, Google seems to have primarily become a commercial web page search provider, and not a true and fair indexer of the web. I am not sure that they even did this on purpose, it's just the way it has become.
Basing any kind of page ranking on popularity may work for some, like when my mother is trying to find a certain beenie baby or something, but not for anyone seriously trying to use the web for real informational purpose.
So at this point, the more competing search engines available the better!
This stuff happens in the gaming and entertainament industry in the us all the time.
The jobs are so scarce that anyone that wants to work in this industry will gladly bend over backwards to keep the job.
Unions are compeltely powerless in the gaming and animation industries and virtually powerless in acting and support as well. The second that the usnions open their mouths, another 1000 jobs fly out of the country.
So everyone that is left here is willing to work like the dogs they hire elsewhere just to be able to have any job at all.
It has only been in the last year or two, as anyone involved in the industry knows, that truly archive ink jet materials became available.
Currently a color digital print can perform exactly as well as a color photographic process print.
The real question though is, can you keep a "digital negative" in as good a shape for as long as a film negative?
The answer is "yes", if you actively maintain that digital negative and "probably not" if you just let that 8in floppy you stored it on sit in the closet for 75 years...
But in a way, that perfectly mirrors what really happens to photographs and negative in the real world anyway. Tons of photos and negatives get thrown away every day because the person currently in charge of them just doesn't care about them any more.
I just inhereted a huge box of ancient photos collected an passed down in our family, most of the older photos are compeltely un-lableld and there are no negatives. A lot of them are severely faded and would require a ton of work to restore. Besides, I have no idea who they are and never will, furthermore, I have no descendants and no-one to pass this heap of history along to, so when I die, they will more than likely just be thrown away.
Bottom line: If someone cares, "digital negatives" will survive. If they don't, then they won't. In reality, exactly like film. We have already lost a ton of film history because of this.
The article was mostly a hype piece. It's your data, take care of it or don't. The end results depend on you, not any magical, impossible, "permanent" storage or printing process.
I mean does anyone actually go back and look at their old photos? Even after 10 years they are noticably damaged. Faded color (Blue seems to go first). 20 years worse, my 30 YO photos are virtually unsalvageable. Sure, you can still see an image, but the color is just terrible. The negative fare better though, don't lose them!
Though I do notice that something changed in the 70s. My OLDER color prints are in far better shape for some reason. But anything developed in the 70s and later are in various states of decay.
My guess is that a lot of people posting things like "Photos are the only lasting medium" are probably the same people that have never taken an actual print photo in their life, or at least not lived long enough to have any real experience with photo-fade.:)
Having just watched the newly released "directors cut" of that movie, I was surprised, though I don't know why, that it was also jam-packed with useless additions.
Mostly completely unwarrented and out of place of course. Little "future" animal scenes added here and there and several obvious added computer graphic scenes that stand out strikingly from the grittier original footage.
In only one spot did I notice that there was an actual improvement. The second motorcycle crash scene had a strong discontinuity with background debris that was fixed. Of course then entire previous car crash scene was also needlessly enhanced as well.
I/was/ impressed by the quality of the film grain removal though, nothing short of stunning. It makes the film look like it was shot on 70mm. Too bad it didn't just stop there.
The water should match the ph of your body reasonably well or it's not very healthy for you.
Drinking water that has been ROed or steam purified should have minerals and such put back into it to give it taste and make it not suck stuff out of your own body when you drink it:)
Slashdot Mirror
I've ben using (and still do) Web Washer a JS/Popup/Ad blocking proxy tool. Nice thing about it is tht it works for any browser. Un-nice thing is that it is not too website specific.
"The first order of business for an energy consumer should be to minimize energy consumption. The economics are simple: a reduction in demand will reduce costs."
This over simplified way of looking at things does not match reality.
I guarantee that if then entire US halved their energy needs overnight, you'd find that the cost of electricity per kWh would double within months. The electrical companies are charging the maximum amount that they can without starting any serious consumer outcry. It's not based on "suppply and demand" anywhere near as much as on "what the market will bear".
Although the "energy required to produce" solar cells myth it just that, a myth. What it not a myth is that it takes about 25 years to pay off a residential solar install at today's electricity/solar system costs. And that pretty much is the same thing.
Then after 25 years, the power output is down by 20% and you need to replace or add cells to keep the power up. No, they don't just die, but they do fade in efficiency slowly over time.
Till solar is 1/2 or less of it's current costs per kw of output vs electrical cost from the grid, it's not doing much good. In fact isn't it strange that solar installs are pretty much the same cost as power costs over their lifetime? Hmmm. There are market forces at work here... It's a lot easier for a manufacturer and installer to sell fewer high priced systems than a lot more lower priced systems.
Then of course there is the problem where if every house and buisness had solar, we'd find that we all would go back to candles at night because there would no longer be enough of a power grid left to take up the slack when the sun went down. Most solar installs are batteryless for several reasons, woking on the "feed the grid" during the day and "suck on the grid" at night, balancing out to even if possible. Imagine if no residense or buisness payed anything for power off the grid? How long would the grid last then?
Right now solar (as it is) works or would work only up to maybe 1 in 100 buildings before it started to cause problems like evening brownouts due to an underpowered grid when the sun was not shining.
As usual "reality" is the bitch.
We /were/ doing this, decades ago. But something like 80% of the money that was budgeted for it got "misdirected" onto other projects and the US effort languished to death. Now it is up to someone else to finish what we could not, rather /would not/ do. :(
Currently we are gladly letting other spend the money now and as of just this year, completely dismantled plans for any more US based research in this area, even though we are one of, if not the, worlds largest energy user.
I hope they really kicks our ass on it too. With something like 20 years of a head start, the hobbling of the US fusion research effort by the all too political "Energy" department is yet another of our great shames.
All joking about Paris Hilton aside, once you've typed in most of your search word(s) it does offer some interesting alternatives for more tightly defining a search, or searching for your subject on peoples pages that can't spell.
But they should probably not even start making alist till 4-5 characters are typed, before that it's just suggesting stupid things.
Also, it uses JavaScript. I have never had to "trust" google to use it before and as time goes on I have less reason to truly trust them, I don't know how it could be done without using JS but I really hope they exhausted all other options before deciding to use it. At least if you have JS turned off the search box still functions as it always did, so if this makes it into the main page, you won;t be forced to turn it on (or switch search providers) if you don't want.
Can't figure out that ordering system though, it's not alphabetical, and not string length and not frequency, is it random? As others have suggested, I too have to wonder how long before the order is determined by the amount of money they get paid.
Actually this is not like that at all.
A gay coubple being married does not affect anyone outside the gay couple. (Except nosy and intolerant people that can't keep their noses out of other peoples buisness)
In this case, a minority is directly influencing what everyone can and cannot watch on TV.
These are completely different things.
You forgot the biggest and most unfortunate reason of all.
Even when people are given control of their own fate, they are generally too lazy to do anytyhing on their own. Therefore, they feel that it must all be done for them without having to lift a finger.
Oh, and of course the minor corollary: It is far easier to bitch about something than to learn how to fix the problem youself.
Spamming has only recently become a crime anywhere and is still perfectly legal in most places.
So no, the spammer sites are mostly just places that "offend" us. We (Lycos) have made NO distinction between the 419 "CRIMINAL" spammers and spammers that do actually have a product (From what I see in my in box it seems to be about 50/50)
My arguments still stand. What about when the "Moral" "Majority" gets internet literate enough to coordinate a wide scale attack on anything they deem an afront to god? There are certainly enough of them with computers to be able to run the new "Iamforgod" screen saver and take down half the net if they wanted to.
And today we have the beginings of people finding that sort of behavior (when it suits THEM) acceptable!
You can't claim morality when it suits you personally. You need to look at the bigger picture!
A great example of EVERYTHING THAT IS HIDEOUSLY WRONG WITH THIS IDEA!!!
:(
Thank god there was actually a concrete example for all the vigilanti monkeys here screaming for blood so much they don't see that innocent people will get whacked by their activities.
It seriously disturbs me that seemingly 50% of the respondants here care nothing for other people's rights or for any possible collateral damage they might cause going after their "target".
All to "America in the 21st century" unfortunately. Makes me ashamed to be one sometimes
As long as they can do it to /. as well.
Why not get every person and every site on the net to DDos the entire farking thing off the planet? Doesn't that sound like fun?
Think about it, there is not one thing on the net that probably isn't an annoyance to at least one person out there.
If DDOSing a site you don't like becomes generally acceptable behavior, the net is in some serious trouble.
It's entire foundation of the internet being based on believing that people will generally "play nice" (as it is) is on the verge of causing it's destruction here.
Lets keep cool heads. Boycott and stop supporting the use of the lycos screen saver and get back to work on a better email protocol!
Yeah, but Kazaa is in court anyway...
That would be "Firefox+ZoneAlarm".
In reality you only need SP2 OR Firefox+ZoneAlarm though both is certainly fine as well.
How will that stop spyware?
Spyware is frequently installed by the user, not by some IE exploit. Hell some computers com efrom the manufacturer with built in spyware!
Although some soyware IS installed by IE, that is merely one of many vectors for it.
As a counter to your single point of status, I use IE and have since IE 4 came out and have never been spyware infected. Why? I spend 30 seconds on each new machine turning off active X and Java script and enabling it only for the rare instance that it is needed on "trustworthy" sites.
But then I also don't install every single new screen saver, password saver or other cutsie-poo program that comes down the internet pike like a hell of a lot of other people do too.
How are Linux and OS-X "designed" to prevent spyware?
They don't suffer because the platforms are not (yet) targets.
Both OSes allow users to install software that can access the net knowingly and that means that both OSes can host spyware.
Remember, a lot of spyware is merely piggyback functionality on other software that the user has knowingly installed. So even if a helpful firewall comes up and says "Hey, I am blocking XXX from acessing the internet" The user will simply go "Oh, yeah I installed that, I WANT it to access the internet" without knowing that it is also sending marketing info along with whatever the hell else it was doing that the user thought they wanted it to.
As soon as the number of moron users reaches a critical point on either OS there will be plenty of spyware available, don't worry.
Then it'll be Microsoft that determines what software is "Spyware" and what is not?!?
This is NOT an OS problem at all. Spyware is (as far as the OS is concerned) a legitimately installed and running program.
There is nothing in Linux or OSX that will prevent spyware on those OSes either. It's an ignorant user that installs Gator and the syware it comes with (or any of dozens of other spyware carrying programs)
That being said, XP SP2 does help in this regard. There is an additional warning when you try to install or run programs that you have downloaded from the web, and the firewall will block outgoing connections from unknown programs (Till you tell it to do otherwise). So that helps some, but of course the ignorant user that bypasses all that will still have a "problem" that they cannot understand.
The only way to truly prevent the problem of spyware is to prevent users from installing software at all, on ANY OS. (Er, but then my Toshiba laptop came preinstalled with spyware, so not even then...)
Yes, they "rigged" the show by changing the rules to allow anyone to play until they lose rather than for a maximum of one week, and it worked!
How is this DRM crippled?
What spectacular Sony failure are you talking about?
This is basically an FM radio with the ability to store a few songs that you listened too over the airwaves. The recording part is only incedental to the real purpose of the device, to have a portable XM satelite receiver, plain and simple.
"Many people" are very wrong.
Most projects involve layer upon layer of image adjustments. Each adjustment may expand, then contract the gamma over and over. When you start out at 8 bits, you posterize very quickly (Lets say by quartering the brightness), reversing the gamma later on (Lets say multiplying the brightness 4 times), you've thrown away so much data that cannot be recovered, the image instantly goes to hell.
If the data starts out in 16 bit, the entire gamma can be crammed down into the lower 8 bits (which in an 8 bit image is now completely black) then expanded back to 16 bits while reteing a lot of still useful information! Starting with 8 bit data gives you zero room for movement of gamma without image degradation.
You want to end up with at least 8 bits of meaningful data before you hit your 8 bit output device, but if 5 layers of adjustments have shrunk your 8 bit data down to 4 bits, it's going to look like hell. Start with 16 bits and 5 layers of adjustments, shrinking the meaningful data down to 12 or 10 bits, you still have PLENTY of data left for good output on an 8 bit device.
I used to think that, then I started using other search engines.
These days, a huge number of epeople's total exposure to the web seems to be completely filtered through google. And if you do that, the web does look like it's going to shit.
But google isn't the central clearing house for the web, nor should it be. Go elsewhere for a while, I found that most of the other major search engines provide a lot more usable information closer to the top of the lists than google has lately.
Also, don't for get specialized portals! A lot of them don't even let the searh engines in, so you miss them.
The web is a hell of a lot larger and more varied than google makes it seem!!!
The thing I've noticed about google over the last year or so is that everything that comes up top in their lists are virtually all commercial sites.
Initially I though that that might actually be reflective of the makeup of the web, but it's not!
Searching in MSN and Yahoo reveal a much greater variety of site types beside commercial, such as academic, government and individial, "ranked" much higher in the returned list than google gives them. As if, my ghod, they actually use a real search string to page match ranking instead of some combination of that and a sites popularity.
It is often difficult to find out real information that is on the web using google becuase you are wading through hundreds of commercial site "finds" to find the one adademic site that can help you.
This varies by search sctring of course, but in general, Google seems to have primarily become a commercial web page search provider, and not a true and fair indexer of the web. I am not sure that they even did this on purpose, it's just the way it has become.
Basing any kind of page ranking on popularity may work for some, like when my mother is trying to find a certain beenie baby or something, but not for anyone seriously trying to use the web for real informational purpose.
So at this point, the more competing search engines available the better!
This stuff happens in the gaming and entertainament industry in the us all the time.
The jobs are so scarce that anyone that wants to work in this industry will gladly bend over backwards to keep the job.
Unions are compeltely powerless in the gaming and animation industries and virtually powerless in acting and support as well. The second that the usnions open their mouths, another 1000 jobs fly out of the country.
So everyone that is left here is willing to work like the dogs they hire elsewhere just to be able to have any job at all.
It has only been in the last year or two, as anyone involved in the industry knows, that truly archive ink jet materials became available.
Currently a color digital print can perform exactly as well as a color photographic process print.
The real question though is, can you keep a "digital negative" in as good a shape for as long as a film negative?
The answer is "yes", if you actively maintain that digital negative and "probably not" if you just let that 8in floppy you stored it on sit in the closet for 75 years...
But in a way, that perfectly mirrors what really happens to photographs and negative in the real world anyway. Tons of photos and negatives get thrown away every day because the person currently in charge of them just doesn't care about them any more.
I just inhereted a huge box of ancient photos collected an passed down in our family, most of the older photos are compeltely un-lableld and there are no negatives. A lot of them are severely faded and would require a ton of work to restore. Besides, I have no idea who they are and never will, furthermore, I have no descendants and no-one to pass this heap of history along to, so when I die, they will more than likely just be thrown away.
Bottom line: If someone cares, "digital negatives" will survive. If they don't, then they won't. In reality, exactly like film. We have already lost a ton of film history because of this.
The article was mostly a hype piece. It's your data, take care of it or don't. The end results depend on you, not any magical, impossible, "permanent" storage or printing process.
Dead right!
:)
I mean does anyone actually go back and look at their old photos? Even after 10 years they are noticably damaged. Faded color (Blue seems to go first). 20 years worse, my 30 YO photos are virtually unsalvageable. Sure, you can still see an image, but the color is just terrible. The negative fare better though, don't lose them!
Though I do notice that something changed in the 70s. My OLDER color prints are in far better shape for some reason. But anything developed in the 70s and later are in various states of decay.
My guess is that a lot of people posting things like "Photos are the only lasting medium" are probably the same people that have never taken an actual print photo in their life, or at least not lived long enough to have any real experience with photo-fade.
Having just watched the newly released "directors cut" of that movie, I was surprised, though I don't know why, that it was also jam-packed with useless additions.
/was/ impressed by the quality of the film grain removal though, nothing short of stunning. It makes the film look like it was shot on 70mm. Too bad it didn't just stop there.
Mostly completely unwarrented and out of place of course. Little "future" animal scenes added here and there and several obvious added computer graphic scenes that stand out strikingly from the grittier original footage.
In only one spot did I notice that there was an actual improvement. The second motorcycle crash scene had a strong discontinuity with background debris that was fixed. Of course then entire previous car crash scene was also needlessly enhanced as well.
I
The water should match the ph of your body reasonably well or it's not very healthy for you.
:)
Drinking water that has been ROed or steam purified should have minerals and such put back into it to give it taste and make it not suck stuff out of your own body when you drink it