Also to note, there are posts on the bulletin that this may be a hoax on the viewing public. Just relaying that speculation.
But we already know they're not really going into space, that's the whole premise of the programme. I don't think it counts as a hoax if the potential victim already knows it's fake.
When I go to a football match I don't want to be around whiny women saying things like 'How does the offside rule work' or 'Which side are playing in blue again?'
Anyway if you're blind what do you need glasses for? Better off saving your money for a walking stick or a wheelchair.
Actually, they do sell 15" ones - LCD even, and around $400.00 USD. There's a HUGE difference in PAL/Digital vs. HDTV
At 13"? I doubt it. May as well pay £50 or so for a normal TV. HDTV is massively overrated and expensive.
Mind you, it's not just the signal, but the 5.1 digital surround sound, as well, built into the television.
I am really confused how surround sound works in a television. Unless your television is a giant machine which covers your entire room.
Whereas you can't see it from 1/2 way across the room in PAL, you can see raindrops in HD.
On 13"? I doubt it.
And you probably toss those pounds out at the stadium and/or pub rather than your own home, too.
Yeah, god forbid I want to watch an important sporting evening with 70,000 people rather than sat inside by myself like Mr Burns and drinking tinned beer.
And for the record, I do have severe sight problems. Sublexed lenses, detached retina, and severe myopia, ever so unfortunately. Thank you for asking.
Maybe a pair of glasses will be cheaper than a HDTV?
But there's no way a film this far out is going to be accepted by the mass consumers unless they can very closely relate to the characters, as evidenced by the success of Serenity.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Serenity a commercial flop?
If this was about Microsoft, rather than Google, you and your like would have no problem believing what they're saying or who they were. God forbid that Google isn't the paradise everyone says it is.
By popularity are you talking about playing or watching? Lots of yanks watch NFL but none of them actually play it. The same goes for ice hockey and F1.
Lots of people play football, even in America, but not many watch it.
This Google sycophancy has taken a new turn for the worse. What exactly will Google do that will make history? A web-based newsgroup system with 'innovative' use of javascript? Slightly more efficient database software? World record number of fanboys?
When you look at end products, google are no different to the other million or so computer companies.
What makes you think that being a good programmer would make you a good businessman? If anything the opposite will be true.
And if you're running a business you probably don't have time for programming anyway, so his skills become irrelevent as he'd have to hire someone else to do it.
Google is a more commercial-focussed search engine. Most of the results are for sites selling things or advertising things, even when you're looking to buy something. It makes sense that people with money to spare will want to use Google, whereas people after relevent information will go elsewhere.
Obviously you've never seen an HD broadcast, a video game in high-definition, or anything else.
Do they even sell 14" HDTVs? I very much doubt there'd be any visible difference. How much better is a 20" HDTV display compared to a 20" normal PAL TV with a crisp digital signal? When you're sat half way across the room watching something filmed in poor quality anyway?
FYI - I paid $1000 for a 52" HDTV with DVI input (to connect my computer) *3 years ago*!!!
Anyone who can, or is willing to spend a GRAND on a TV must be in the top 0.001% of wealth in the world. Come back to me when I can find a HDTV for £100 that doesn't require fancy cables and expensive subscription fees.
Not to even mention watching football in High Def. I can actually watch Soccer and Hockey games now and TELL what's going on!
So can I, and I also have an extra thousand pounds in my pocket. Maybe you have sight problems.
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise someone somewhere had invented a magic TV which didn't need connecting up. Last I looked, even with brand new TVs you have to plug the aerial in. Maybe yours uses some fancy wireless system to get a signal from the aeriel on your roof to your TV.
They are too dumb to realize that in order to get HDTV you need to get digital cable and watch certain channels. A lot of them also fuck up their AV wiring and don't use the component or HDMI cables necessary to get things really working properly.
I don't know what the fuck any of that means, this whole article is a mystery to me. HDMI? DVI? WTF? No wonder no-one can set it up properly. I thought the whole point of technology was that it made things easier? All you TV geeks should learn some things about user friendliness from Apple/Google.
There's nothing easy about learning ten thousand acronyms and five hundred cables. If the people who made TVs made kettles you'd need twelve different cables and a degree in water-boiling technology just to make a cup of tea.
Seriously, this is the kind of shit we need to teach in schools that we aren't. Setting up standard A/V equipment is a skill people need to have, and only geeky people ever learn it properly.
Standard? I thought we were talking about HDTV? That's not standard by any stretch of the imagination. I don't see why you can't just plug the TV into the power socket, plug in the aerial and switch on. That should be it. It's not the users fault that the manufacturers insist in making things as convoluted as possible.
If you need schools to teach people how to set up TVs then they're clearly too complicated.
There was actually another study recently, don't know how good it was, that showed that people couldn't tell which TVs were HD and which ones were not. Someone should test that a bit more and see if it's because of bad eyesight or whatever.
Or maybe HDTV is just overrated by TV manufacturers who want to scam people out of thousands of pounds for unwanted technologies. My TV is 14", I doubt I'd get much of a better viewing experience with a slightly higher resolution. We're not all dot-com millionaires with 50" plasma screens on the walls of our penthouse apartments.
So what's the point in all this HDTV? You spend thousands on a TV, then it just stretches a picture out, or has black lines on the screen? You can achieve that with a standard cheap TV but put black sellotape over the top and bottom of the screen and save yourself a huge amount of cash.
So instead of waiting until the Christmas-ish time to make everyone's gaming season merry and bright, they decided to tease us with a mediocre launch of a paltry sum of systems?
Do you realise that if they'd released it say a couple of weeks before Christmas, then several times LESS people would have been able buy one for Christmas? That's what you want?
Besides, its snowing like crazy now, its 20 degrees outside, what the hell else am I going to do?
Play football?
Seriously though, we don't need another generation of kids growing up in front of the computer getting fat and pale. Obesity's at its highest level in history, we should be condemning slothful activities in favour of more beneficial activities.
Get him playing sport instead. He'll be healthier, he'll concentrate better at his schoolwork, he'll develop more social skills.
If he wants to play computer games then fine, if he wants to buy games with his own money then let him, but don't indoctrinate him into it.
And how exactly does the game determine what's hard and what's not? An xp/level system is used because it's simple and straightforward. I can just imagine people riding up and down along the edge of cliffs all day, it'd be hilarious.
I very much doubt that anyone in the world has talked to several hundred people that even own a PSP. I mean who regularly talks to that many people anyway? Let alone that many who own a specific piece of hardware, and who have even heard of the rootkit.
Slashdot Mirror
How is it a hoax on the viewer if we know it's fake anyway? If it's a hoax on the viewer they'd be trying to get us to think it was real.
Also to note, there are posts on the bulletin that this may be a hoax on the viewing public. Just relaying that speculation.
But we already know they're not really going into space, that's the whole premise of the programme. I don't think it counts as a hoax if the potential victim already knows it's fake.
Why would they be trying to appeal to their fans, the people who already use it?
Haven't seen a used DC in a coon's age.
o n
Is this sort of language considered acceptable? This is Slashdot not a Ku Klux Klan meeting.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=co
What, girls can't like sports!?! :P
When I go to a football match I don't want to be around whiny women saying things like 'How does the offside rule work' or 'Which side are playing in blue again?'
Anyway if you're blind what do you need glasses for? Better off saving your money for a walking stick or a wheelchair.
What are girls doing at sporting events anyway?
$700 on a pair of glasses. And they say women have no business sense? LOL. You can get them for like $100 you know...
Actually, they do sell 15" ones - LCD even, and around $400.00 USD. There's a HUGE difference in PAL/Digital vs. HDTV
At 13"? I doubt it. May as well pay £50 or so for a normal TV. HDTV is massively overrated and expensive.
Mind you, it's not just the signal, but the 5.1 digital surround sound, as well, built into the television.
I am really confused how surround sound works in a television. Unless your television is a giant machine which covers your entire room.
Whereas you can't see it from 1/2 way across the room in PAL, you can see raindrops in HD.
On 13"? I doubt it.
And you probably toss those pounds out at the stadium and/or pub rather than your own home, too.
Yeah, god forbid I want to watch an important sporting evening with 70,000 people rather than sat inside by myself like Mr Burns and drinking tinned beer.
And for the record, I do have severe sight problems. Sublexed lenses, detached retina, and severe myopia, ever so unfortunately. Thank you for asking.
Maybe a pair of glasses will be cheaper than a HDTV?
If coffee's a difficult flavour to produce on a commercial scale, then how do they manage it in coffee flavoured ice-cream?
1. How do you stop the bridge falling into the river? The bits connected to the riverbed seem to just sink down.
2. Why does my game look nothing like the screenshots? There's no detail, it's ugly and slow as well.
But there's no way a film this far out is going to be accepted by the mass consumers unless they can very closely relate to the characters, as evidenced by the success of Serenity.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Serenity a commercial flop?
If this was about Microsoft, rather than Google, you and your like would have no problem believing what they're saying or who they were. God forbid that Google isn't the paradise everyone says it is.
By popularity are you talking about playing or watching? Lots of yanks watch NFL but none of them actually play it. The same goes for ice hockey and F1.
Lots of people play football, even in America, but not many watch it.
I.e. rich people.
This Google sycophancy has taken a new turn for the worse. What exactly will Google do that will make history? A web-based newsgroup system with 'innovative' use of javascript? Slightly more efficient database software? World record number of fanboys?
When you look at end products, google are no different to the other million or so computer companies.
What makes you think that being a good programmer would make you a good businessman? If anything the opposite will be true.
And if you're running a business you probably don't have time for programming anyway, so his skills become irrelevent as he'd have to hire someone else to do it.
Google is a more commercial-focussed search engine. Most of the results are for sites selling things or advertising things, even when you're looking to buy something. It makes sense that people with money to spare will want to use Google, whereas people after relevent information will go elsewhere.
Obviously you've never seen an HD broadcast, a video game in high-definition, or anything else.
Do they even sell 14" HDTVs? I very much doubt there'd be any visible difference. How much better is a 20" HDTV display compared to a 20" normal PAL TV with a crisp digital signal? When you're sat half way across the room watching something filmed in poor quality anyway?
FYI - I paid $1000 for a 52" HDTV with DVI input (to connect my computer) *3 years ago*!!!
Anyone who can, or is willing to spend a GRAND on a TV must be in the top 0.001% of wealth in the world. Come back to me when I can find a HDTV for £100 that doesn't require fancy cables and expensive subscription fees.
Not to even mention watching football in High Def. I can actually watch Soccer and Hockey games now and TELL what's going on!
So can I, and I also have an extra thousand pounds in my pocket. Maybe you have sight problems.
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise someone somewhere had invented a magic TV which didn't need connecting up. Last I looked, even with brand new TVs you have to plug the aerial in. Maybe yours uses some fancy wireless system to get a signal from the aeriel on your roof to your TV.
They are too dumb to realize that in order to get HDTV you need to get digital cable and watch certain channels. A lot of them also fuck up their AV wiring and don't use the component or HDMI cables necessary to get things really working properly.
I don't know what the fuck any of that means, this whole article is a mystery to me. HDMI? DVI? WTF? No wonder no-one can set it up properly. I thought the whole point of technology was that it made things easier? All you TV geeks should learn some things about user friendliness from Apple/Google.
There's nothing easy about learning ten thousand acronyms and five hundred cables. If the people who made TVs made kettles you'd need twelve different cables and a degree in water-boiling technology just to make a cup of tea.
Seriously, this is the kind of shit we need to teach in schools that we aren't. Setting up standard A/V equipment is a skill people need to have, and only geeky people ever learn it properly.
Standard? I thought we were talking about HDTV? That's not standard by any stretch of the imagination. I don't see why you can't just plug the TV into the power socket, plug in the aerial and switch on. That should be it. It's not the users fault that the manufacturers insist in making things as convoluted as possible.
If you need schools to teach people how to set up TVs then they're clearly too complicated.
There was actually another study recently, don't know how good it was, that showed that people couldn't tell which TVs were HD and which ones were not. Someone should test that a bit more and see if it's because of bad eyesight or whatever.
Or maybe HDTV is just overrated by TV manufacturers who want to scam people out of thousands of pounds for unwanted technologies. My TV is 14", I doubt I'd get much of a better viewing experience with a slightly higher resolution. We're not all dot-com millionaires with 50" plasma screens on the walls of our penthouse apartments.
So what's the point in all this HDTV? You spend thousands on a TV, then it just stretches a picture out, or has black lines on the screen? You can achieve that with a standard cheap TV but put black sellotape over the top and bottom of the screen and save yourself a huge amount of cash.
So instead of waiting until the Christmas-ish time to make everyone's gaming season merry and bright, they decided to tease us with a mediocre launch of a paltry sum of systems?
Do you realise that if they'd released it say a couple of weeks before Christmas, then several times LESS people would have been able buy one for Christmas? That's what you want?
Besides, its snowing like crazy now, its 20 degrees outside, what the hell else am I going to do?
Play football?
Seriously though, we don't need another generation of kids growing up in front of the computer getting fat and pale. Obesity's at its highest level in history, we should be condemning slothful activities in favour of more beneficial activities.
Get him playing sport instead. He'll be healthier, he'll concentrate better at his schoolwork, he'll develop more social skills.
If he wants to play computer games then fine, if he wants to buy games with his own money then let him, but don't indoctrinate him into it.
That setting's for forging American dollars.
And how exactly does the game determine what's hard and what's not? An xp/level system is used because it's simple and straightforward. I can just imagine people riding up and down along the edge of cliffs all day, it'd be hilarious.
I very much doubt that anyone in the world has talked to several hundred people that even own a PSP. I mean who regularly talks to that many people anyway? Let alone that many who own a specific piece of hardware, and who have even heard of the rootkit.