I had Juliano for 'Algorithms and Data Structures' (in C++) my first semester that I transferred from JC (Jan. 03)... that guy was such a joke. He seriously told the class that if he caught us discussing any lab in any way with one another that he would fail us for the semester. Heck, isn't that how it works in industry... nobody talks to one another or collaborates on software projects?
He also refused to show any actual code implementation, only pseudocode of how the algorithms worked, and would not help any student with problems in their code (he said that once we were at that level that our programming syntax, and ability to use templates should already be perfect... in a 100-level class).
This is the same guy that would bring his Boxers (dogs, not underwear) to lecture, and allow them to roam around the room while he lectured... I tell ya there's nothing like taking notes when you suddenly feel a huge paw in your lap and a drooling dog tongue lapping the side of your face.
I also had Britton for Computer Architecture... what a joke that guy was... apparently he was too obtuse to recognize all the blank stares among the students after he demonstrated a 'self-evident' problem. He also spent the entire semester making an interactive CD of his lectures so that the next semesters students could utilize it if they missed a class... the only problem was that the screen capture program he was using (he did powerpoint presentations) bogged his HP laptop down so badly that it completely disrupted the flow of teaching our class... but at least the new crop should have fared better.
The main reason CSU, Chico is such a good computer school is because the students have spent so long teaching themselves how to do stuff that it comes naturally by the time they graduate... there's no way I'd actually give CSU, Chico's college of computer science any credit for turning out good students.
It was this shit that made me switch to Economics after one semester in CSCI... a decision that I have never regretted to this day.
At least the bonus with this break-in is that we all now can get three free credit reports (I already got mine earlier this year, so now I get free updates).
Up until this period too, your student ID was your SSN... so there was no way around having to use it... and your PIN was your birthdate. Talk about a secure system!!
While Wal-Mart may make up a large chunk of CD sales, you also have to realize that this will just drive people to Best Buy, Target, etc..
Wal-Mart may be a good chunk of the pie, but they also reap a lot of residual sales from people coming into the store to buy CDs... that's also not something that Wal-Mart can ignore... 2% may be an insignificant number to you and me, but if that 2% drives another 2% in residual sales, and when you're a corporation as large as they are, that's gonna hurt.
Cutting off your eyelid would only remove about 2% of your face, but I wouldn't do it under rational circumstances.:D
And, applying the same standards, nuclear/coal/gas-turbine/petroleum also have no fuel costs.
Do you read your own posts before hitting 'submit'?
Or are you purposely trying to be obtuse?
Please point out what exactly you aren't understanding, because for all intents and purposes, solar energy is freely capturable and usable in it's raw form, whereas most other fuel sources need to be either mined, refined, or enriched to make them suitable for energy production.
Power plants must also purchase these raw materials... can you show me where I have to buy my sunlight from?
If you don't get the point by now, we're just wasting our energy (pun not intended).
The only thing I'll comment on is that internal combustion is only about 10% efficient... so you're being very generous with your 30% figure. You don't reach efficiencies that high unless you run the output (heat) of a combustion turbine into a steam turbine.
Otherwise, great post... makes me wish I had mod points today.
3.5 cents per KWH is the marginal private cost of producing that electricity... if you figure all the externalities into the cost (such as acid rain in New England, global warming, respiratory and other health problems, etc.) you'll get a much, much higher cost (the marginal social cost).
The big kicker right now in solar is that it's expected to 'fuel' the new hydrogen/electric automobile revolution, which is why you're seeing a lot of effort put into solar energy research. The only way our society will realize any gains from switching over to electric motors and fuel cells is if we have a green source of energy... what good will it be having less-polluting cars if we have to burn tons of coal to generate the hydrogen or electricity to run them.
At 5 cents per KWH, that is a 4x-5x improvement over current solar cells which produce in about the 24-cent/KWH range, which only makes them cost effective in areas with really high energy costs.
Here in California, PG&E has a rebate program that reimburses you for 50% of the cost of photovoltaics, knocking the price down to 12 cents per KWH... otherwise solar would still be a pipe dream in our state, even with the huge amount of sunshine we get.
I've spent the past few years thinking I have pretty bad credit, when in fact my credit report says that my credit is shiny clean, and my credit score is pretty good too.:D
I was going to mod you +1 Informative, but figured I'd rather give my thanks in person.:)
Oh yeah, I'm in California too, which is why I was able to take advantage of this already...
It's actually not an 'expiry' date, but a 'sell by' date... IIRC if milk is kept at 40 degrees F it'll last at least a week past that date, but you won't catch me drinking any of it after those seven days.:)
To me, his actions are akin to scheduling an 'illegal' MRI for a patient because their HMO won't pay for it. The guy appears to at least have a heart, and he's also got a lot of guts... who else grows up in Canuck-land and then decides to go to school in the deep south.
It's not like everybody is flocking to TiVO so that they can skip commercials... there's actually a pretty low adoption rate compared to what it should be for such a cool technology.
That being said, I went to buy a TiVO this Christmas, and balked when they told me that I 'had' to buy the package, which included the TiVO subscription for $12.95/mo (IIRC)... so I passed... I already pay once for television (my cable rate), so I'm not going to increase that cost just to get digital copies and instant access.
That's the thing... I mainly wanted something to record shows digitally, using a VCR+ type mechanism, but they want you to buy the whole package so that they can track your every move and sell the statistics.
Now if they'd actually remove that stupid requirement, I just might buy one... until then, I'll make due with my VCR (though I've also been eyeballing the DVD-RW recorders, which look pretty cool... and don't require a subscription).
Of course I didn't RTFA, but IMO the subscription model is really what's killing the adoption of TiVO... after all it's what killed my purchase (and who's more important than me?:D ).
A natural monopoly occurs when a company (not an industry... that suggests 'several' companies) can only become efficient once it reaches a certain size, meaning that they only become profitable once a certain economy of scale is reached. These are companies with high fixed costs, and anybody that's had some business training know that if you spread out the fixed costs over more units of production there is less fixed cost attached to each unit. In a natural monopoly, there are extremely high barriers to entry (i.e. power distribution grid, phone service grid, cable TV infrastructure, etc.), and extremely large economies of scale, so that it really only makes sense to have one player, but the government keeps tabs on them through regulation.
The main problem with natural monopoly regulation is the fact that the return they are allowed is based on the value of their assets, so it really invites inefficiency... companies spend all their time acquiring new assets rather than finding inefficiencies in their production to raise their profits, as a 'normal' business would have to do.
The government is sometimes quick to change it's tune in the face of new technology, however. AT&T went from being a regulated natural monopoly to seeing the inside of an anti-trust court in a very short time, mainly because technology caught up and there were new ways to transmit telephony data. AT&T tried to restrict access to the new technology since it owned all the current infrastructure, and got itself split up into the Baby Bells.
It's my opinion that Microsoft should be treated as a natural monopoly and be regulated, but that's food for another debate.:D
The main problem is that VirtualPC is excruciatingly slow, even on a G5 Dually (compared to an x86 PC of the same GHz).
There's just too much overhead in the x86-PPC codec... I'd estimate that VirtualPC is about 1/4 of the speed of a real PC. I wouldn't want to be Microsoft betting the farm on using the VPC code in a transitionary phase... because it wold force people to stay with x86 to get any decent performance out of their applications.
In this case, I think they just bought it because it was offered to them at a cheap price, and seemed to be a natural fit. Connectix is a venture capital group that develops products and then sells them off... I'm really surprised that they held on to VirtualPC for as long as they did.
I am stoked that Microsoft is developing VPC however, because now they can hook it into those sekret API's (sssshhhh).:D
And in a perfectly competitive market (theoretically speaking), long-term profit is 'zero' because a perfectly competitive market will produce where marginal cost equals demand. This is also where marginal cost is equal to marginal revenue (i.e. they sell it for what it costs them to make it).
That is why monopolies are 'bad' for consumers... monopolies are able to guarantee long-term profits for themselves by reducing output so that prices rise, which transfers the consumer surplus available in a perfectly competitive economy to the monopolist... and now you know why Bill Gates is the richest man in the U.S.:)
You nailed the significance in the parenthetical aside in your last paragraph.
In order to understand this story, you must consider that it took place in the ancient Fertile Crescent (in which is now the around Iraq and Turkey).
Metaphorically, Abel represents the pastoral community which had grazed their animals for hundreds, if not thousands, of years without incident in this area.
Now, we all know that the Fertile Crescent is the birthplace of modern civilization (or it's rumored to be), and the cornerstone of modern civilization is agriculture. So... Cain represents these new agriculturists.
Now read the story again... and you'll understand it better... this was originally a story told by the pastoralists about the agriculturists. It's a "God likes us better than them" story, because the pastoral community was being driven from their prime grazing lands and/or murdered by these people, as agriculture allowed their population to grow abnormally large compared to the relatively small pastoral populations.
I haven't read the Bible in quite a while, but I always found it odd that after Cain killed Abel (effectively killing 1/4 of the world's population at the time if you take it 'literally'), he was sent away from Eden as 'marked', and that any man who did anything to him would suffer '7 times the consequences', and any man that punished that man would suffer '77 times'... ad infinitum (IIRC). If there were not already other populations of people in the area, why would it matter if Cain were marked... the only ones who could ever do anything to him would be his (future) brothers (or sisters I assume).
Looking back on that passage now (and taken in context), the pastoral people believed that Cain (agriculturalists) must have been expelled from Eden (the pastoralists), because otherwise he wouldn't have to work so hard for his food (agriculture is 'really' tough work without modern technology). They also knew that you didn't mess around with these new agricultural communities because they would seek retribution (the reference to the 7x punishment).
The 'AIDS epidemic' in Africa is caused by malnutrition, and false-positives to HIV tests given by diseases that have a similar antibody structure to HIV.
Seriously... don't take my word for it, just read a 'couple' of the doctors studies and I guarantee it will change you.
I find it funny that you believe that taking a chemotherapy drug (that was ironically shelved in the 70's for being far too dangerous to use) for an indefinite period won't kill you, when in fact that's exactly what chemotherapies are designed to do. It's hoped that when you finish chemotherapy ('finish' is the key word) that you're only half-dead, while the cancer you have is fully killed off.
That's the main thing people overlook... THE HIV TEST SCREENS FOR ANTIBODIES TO HIV! Isn't it a bit strange that something you become immune to miraculously kills you years later?
You need to separate HIV from AIDS... the causative link between the two has NEVER been proven... in fact, that is still where 90% of the money is spent, trying to prove that link. Once you can separate the two maladies, and overlook all the brainwashing we've been subject to in the past 20 years, a much clearer picture will emerge.
To everyone reading this thread, I suggest you check out http://www.duesberg.com/, the website of Dr. Peter Duesberg, Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology at UC Berkeley.
I found his site when researching a paper on AIDS, and after extensive reading of the site and the associated studies, it completely changed my understanding and outlook in regards to the 'AIDS epidemic'.
Continuing in that vein, you don't need a 'cure' for HIV... the HIV test already used today tests for antibodies to HIV... in other words, your body has already fought off the virus (and won, hence the antibodies). Why would you need a 'cure' for something you're already immune to?
I'm amazed that more people haven't heard what Dr. Duesberg has to say... it could very well change the entire AIDS research industry. There's no way I could summarize everything his site in this one post, so please check it out yourself if you get the chance.
This is the quote from the Wired article that gets me...
Knauss stayed on until near the end of the iPod's development, but quit shortly before it was released because he had no confidence it would be a success.
"It was probably a mistake, but then you have to go with what you think at the time," he said.
Knauss, 33, is now contracting for Microsoft.
Just one mistake after another, it appears, for this guy...
I hope this show's on a public access station, because having Richard Stallman in your pilot episode is a sure-fire way to make sure you get cancelled right out of the chute.
Well, there's a solution to that problem... and it's a pretty simple one: Netflix and a DVD Burner.
It only costs about $1.50 per movie to replace this way (in the long-term, once you spread the fixed DVD-R burner cost over the collection of movies).
Before I get labeled a pirate, let me iterate that I bought a license to watch the movies in question... they never told me I couldn't shift media. It may sound like a half-assed justification for what I do, but I'm not about to go out and re-buy all these movies I already own.
Also, I'd say a good 50-75% of the movies I burn are straight-to-DVD-from-Master, so you get all the neat little blips, burns and hairs that weren't on the VHS tape (I guess they figure "why bother" with remastering, since some of these movies are so old.)
My wife and I still buy new DVDs as well... in fact we picked up our copy of "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Askaban" from Wally-Mart this evening... (which it's now time to watch).
Slashdot Mirror
I heard a different variation on that saying...
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner, and Liberty is giving that lamb a shotgun."
I agree that it definitely went into the crapper.
I had Juliano for 'Algorithms and Data Structures' (in C++) my first semester that I transferred from JC (Jan. 03)... that guy was such a joke. He seriously told the class that if he caught us discussing any lab in any way with one another that he would fail us for the semester. Heck, isn't that how it works in industry... nobody talks to one another or collaborates on software projects?
He also refused to show any actual code implementation, only pseudocode of how the algorithms worked, and would not help any student with problems in their code (he said that once we were at that level that our programming syntax, and ability to use templates should already be perfect... in a 100-level class).
This is the same guy that would bring his Boxers (dogs, not underwear) to lecture, and allow them to roam around the room while he lectured... I tell ya there's nothing like taking notes when you suddenly feel a huge paw in your lap and a drooling dog tongue lapping the side of your face.
I also had Britton for Computer Architecture... what a joke that guy was... apparently he was too obtuse to recognize all the blank stares among the students after he demonstrated a 'self-evident' problem. He also spent the entire semester making an interactive CD of his lectures so that the next semesters students could utilize it if they missed a class... the only problem was that the screen capture program he was using (he did powerpoint presentations) bogged his HP laptop down so badly that it completely disrupted the flow of teaching our class... but at least the new crop should have fared better.
The main reason CSU, Chico is such a good computer school is because the students have spent so long teaching themselves how to do stuff that it comes naturally by the time they graduate... there's no way I'd actually give CSU, Chico's college of computer science any credit for turning out good students.
It was this shit that made me switch to Economics after one semester in CSCI... a decision that I have never regretted to this day.
At least the bonus with this break-in is that we all now can get three free credit reports (I already got mine earlier this year, so now I get free updates).
Up until this period too, your student ID was your SSN... so there was no way around having to use it... and your PIN was your birthdate. Talk about a secure system!!
Thankfully I'm graduating this May.
Funny, even the pop-up's are mirrored. :D
While Wal-Mart may make up a large chunk of CD sales, you also have to realize that this will just drive people to Best Buy, Target, etc..
:D
Wal-Mart may be a good chunk of the pie, but they also reap a lot of residual sales from people coming into the store to buy CDs... that's also not something that Wal-Mart can ignore... 2% may be an insignificant number to you and me, but if that 2% drives another 2% in residual sales, and when you're a corporation as large as they are, that's gonna hurt.
Cutting off your eyelid would only remove about 2% of your face, but I wouldn't do it under rational circumstances.
And, applying the same standards, nuclear/coal/gas-turbine/petroleum also have no fuel costs.
Do you read your own posts before hitting 'submit'?
Or are you purposely trying to be obtuse?
Please point out what exactly you aren't understanding, because for all intents and purposes, solar energy is freely capturable and usable in it's raw form, whereas most other fuel sources need to be either mined, refined, or enriched to make them suitable for energy production.
Power plants must also purchase these raw materials... can you show me where I have to buy my sunlight from?
If you don't get the point by now, we're just wasting our energy (pun not intended).
The only thing I'll comment on is that internal combustion is only about 10% efficient... so you're being very generous with your 30% figure. You don't reach efficiencies that high unless you run the output (heat) of a combustion turbine into a steam turbine.
Otherwise, great post... makes me wish I had mod points today.
3.5 cents per KWH is the marginal private cost of producing that electricity... if you figure all the externalities into the cost (such as acid rain in New England, global warming, respiratory and other health problems, etc.) you'll get a much, much higher cost (the marginal social cost).
The big kicker right now in solar is that it's expected to 'fuel' the new hydrogen/electric automobile revolution, which is why you're seeing a lot of effort put into solar energy research. The only way our society will realize any gains from switching over to electric motors and fuel cells is if we have a green source of energy... what good will it be having less-polluting cars if we have to burn tons of coal to generate the hydrogen or electricity to run them.
At 5 cents per KWH, that is a 4x-5x improvement over current solar cells which produce in about the 24-cent/KWH range, which only makes them cost effective in areas with really high energy costs.
Here in California, PG&E has a rebate program that reimburses you for 50% of the cost of photovoltaics, knocking the price down to 12 cents per KWH... otherwise solar would still be a pipe dream in our state, even with the huge amount of sunshine we get.
The best part is the Pentium Earrings are listed under "Miscellaneous Antiques".
Wow, thanks for that link.
:D
:)
I've spent the past few years thinking I have pretty bad credit, when in fact my credit report says that my credit is shiny clean, and my credit score is pretty good too.
I was going to mod you +1 Informative, but figured I'd rather give my thanks in person.
Oh yeah, I'm in California too, which is why I was able to take advantage of this already...
It's actually not an 'expiry' date, but a 'sell by' date... IIRC if milk is kept at 40 degrees F it'll last at least a week past that date, but you won't catch me drinking any of it after those seven days. :)
That's interesting.
To me, his actions are akin to scheduling an 'illegal' MRI for a patient because their HMO won't pay for it. The guy appears to at least have a heart, and he's also got a lot of guts... who else grows up in Canuck-land and then decides to go to school in the deep south.
But you're entitled to your opinion.
TV Networks aren't going away anytime soon.
:D ).
It's not like everybody is flocking to TiVO so that they can skip commercials... there's actually a pretty low adoption rate compared to what it should be for such a cool technology.
That being said, I went to buy a TiVO this Christmas, and balked when they told me that I 'had' to buy the package, which included the TiVO subscription for $12.95/mo (IIRC)... so I passed... I already pay once for television (my cable rate), so I'm not going to increase that cost just to get digital copies and instant access.
That's the thing... I mainly wanted something to record shows digitally, using a VCR+ type mechanism, but they want you to buy the whole package so that they can track your every move and sell the statistics.
Now if they'd actually remove that stupid requirement, I just might buy one... until then, I'll make due with my VCR (though I've also been eyeballing the DVD-RW recorders, which look pretty cool... and don't require a subscription).
Of course I didn't RTFA, but IMO the subscription model is really what's killing the adoption of TiVO... after all it's what killed my purchase (and who's more important than me?
Sorry, a hooker took off with my chart when she stole my pants. I'll make sure to get another one.
Oh, and my friend was wearing my pants... not me. Honest.
Dang... you have expensive hookers where you live. Ours go down for a Lincoln, and sometimes a Washington if they're low on crack.
At least thats' what my friends tell me...
Well, you only got a 'C' on your explanation. :)
:D
A natural monopoly occurs when a company (not an industry... that suggests 'several' companies) can only become efficient once it reaches a certain size, meaning that they only become profitable once a certain economy of scale is reached. These are companies with high fixed costs, and anybody that's had some business training know that if you spread out the fixed costs over more units of production there is less fixed cost attached to each unit. In a natural monopoly, there are extremely high barriers to entry (i.e. power distribution grid, phone service grid, cable TV infrastructure, etc.), and extremely large economies of scale, so that it really only makes sense to have one player, but the government keeps tabs on them through regulation.
The main problem with natural monopoly regulation is the fact that the return they are allowed is based on the value of their assets, so it really invites inefficiency... companies spend all their time acquiring new assets rather than finding inefficiencies in their production to raise their profits, as a 'normal' business would have to do.
The government is sometimes quick to change it's tune in the face of new technology, however. AT&T went from being a regulated natural monopoly to seeing the inside of an anti-trust court in a very short time, mainly because technology caught up and there were new ways to transmit telephony data. AT&T tried to restrict access to the new technology since it owned all the current infrastructure, and got itself split up into the Baby Bells.
It's my opinion that Microsoft should be treated as a natural monopoly and be regulated, but that's food for another debate.
The main problem is that VirtualPC is excruciatingly slow, even on a G5 Dually (compared to an x86 PC of the same GHz).
:D
There's just too much overhead in the x86-PPC codec... I'd estimate that VirtualPC is about 1/4 of the speed of a real PC. I wouldn't want to be Microsoft betting the farm on using the VPC code in a transitionary phase... because it wold force people to stay with x86 to get any decent performance out of their applications.
In this case, I think they just bought it because it was offered to them at a cheap price, and seemed to be a natural fit. Connectix is a venture capital group that develops products and then sells them off... I'm really surprised that they held on to VirtualPC for as long as they did.
I am stoked that Microsoft is developing VPC however, because now they can hook it into those sekret API's (sssshhhh).
And in a perfectly competitive market (theoretically speaking), long-term profit is 'zero' because a perfectly competitive market will produce where marginal cost equals demand. This is also where marginal cost is equal to marginal revenue (i.e. they sell it for what it costs them to make it).
:)
That is why monopolies are 'bad' for consumers... monopolies are able to guarantee long-term profits for themselves by reducing output so that prices rise, which transfers the consumer surplus available in a perfectly competitive economy to the monopolist... and now you know why Bill Gates is the richest man in the U.S.
Well, if you're a Mac users, there's already OGG support for Quicktime and iTunes.
Quicktime OGG component
It's actually been out for quite a while... the only problem is that the OGG support doesn't automagically carry over to the iPod.
You nailed the significance in the parenthetical aside in your last paragraph.
:)
In order to understand this story, you must consider that it took place in the ancient Fertile Crescent (in which is now the around Iraq and Turkey).
Metaphorically, Abel represents the pastoral community which had grazed their animals for hundreds, if not thousands, of years without incident in this area.
Now, we all know that the Fertile Crescent is the birthplace of modern civilization (or it's rumored to be), and the cornerstone of modern civilization is agriculture. So... Cain represents these new agriculturists.
Now read the story again... and you'll understand it better... this was originally a story told by the pastoralists about the agriculturists. It's a "God likes us better than them" story, because the pastoral community was being driven from their prime grazing lands and/or murdered by these people, as agriculture allowed their population to grow abnormally large compared to the relatively small pastoral populations.
I haven't read the Bible in quite a while, but I always found it odd that after Cain killed Abel (effectively killing 1/4 of the world's population at the time if you take it 'literally'), he was sent away from Eden as 'marked', and that any man who did anything to him would suffer '7 times the consequences', and any man that punished that man would suffer '77 times'... ad infinitum (IIRC). If there were not already other populations of people in the area, why would it matter if Cain were marked... the only ones who could ever do anything to him would be his (future) brothers (or sisters I assume).
Looking back on that passage now (and taken in context), the pastoral people believed that Cain (agriculturalists) must have been expelled from Eden (the pastoralists), because otherwise he wouldn't have to work so hard for his food (agriculture is 'really' tough work without modern technology). They also knew that you didn't mess around with these new agricultural communities because they would seek retribution (the reference to the 7x punishment).
At least that's from what I remember.
No.
The 'AIDS epidemic' in Africa is caused by malnutrition, and false-positives to HIV tests given by diseases that have a similar antibody structure to HIV.
Seriously... don't take my word for it, just read a 'couple' of the doctors studies and I guarantee it will change you.
I find it funny that you believe that taking a chemotherapy drug (that was ironically shelved in the 70's for being far too dangerous to use) for an indefinite period won't kill you, when in fact that's exactly what chemotherapies are designed to do. It's hoped that when you finish chemotherapy ('finish' is the key word) that you're only half-dead, while the cancer you have is fully killed off.
That's the main thing people overlook... THE HIV TEST SCREENS FOR ANTIBODIES TO HIV! Isn't it a bit strange that something you become immune to miraculously kills you years later?
You need to separate HIV from AIDS... the causative link between the two has NEVER been proven... in fact, that is still where 90% of the money is spent, trying to prove that link. Once you can separate the two maladies, and overlook all the brainwashing we've been subject to in the past 20 years, a much clearer picture will emerge.
Wish I could type more, but I'm late for class.
To everyone reading this thread, I suggest you check out http://www.duesberg.com/, the website of Dr. Peter Duesberg, Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology at UC Berkeley.
I found his site when researching a paper on AIDS, and after extensive reading of the site and the associated studies, it completely changed my understanding and outlook in regards to the 'AIDS epidemic'.
Continuing in that vein, you don't need a 'cure' for HIV... the HIV test already used today tests for antibodies to HIV... in other words, your body has already fought off the virus (and won, hence the antibodies). Why would you need a 'cure' for something you're already immune to?
I'm amazed that more people haven't heard what Dr. Duesberg has to say... it could very well change the entire AIDS research industry. There's no way I could summarize everything his site in this one post, so please check it out yourself if you get the chance.
This is the quote from the Wired article that gets me...
Knauss stayed on until near the end of the iPod's development, but quit shortly before it was released because he had no confidence it would be a success.
"It was probably a mistake, but then you have to go with what you think at the time," he said.
Knauss, 33, is now contracting for Microsoft.
Just one mistake after another, it appears, for this guy...
Flamebait?
It was supposed to be +5 Funny for chrissakes...
Guess I'll include a smiley emoticon next time...
I hope this show's on a public access station, because having Richard Stallman in your pilot episode is a sure-fire way to make sure you get cancelled right out of the chute.
Maybe the producer lost a bet?
Well, there's a solution to that problem... and it's a pretty simple one: Netflix and a DVD Burner.
It only costs about $1.50 per movie to replace this way (in the long-term, once you spread the fixed DVD-R burner cost over the collection of movies).
Before I get labeled a pirate, let me iterate that I bought a license to watch the movies in question... they never told me I couldn't shift media. It may sound like a half-assed justification for what I do, but I'm not about to go out and re-buy all these movies I already own.
Also, I'd say a good 50-75% of the movies I burn are straight-to-DVD-from-Master, so you get all the neat little blips, burns and hairs that weren't on the VHS tape (I guess they figure "why bother" with remastering, since some of these movies are so old.)
My wife and I still buy new DVDs as well... in fact we picked up our copy of "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Askaban" from Wally-Mart this evening... (which it's now time to watch).