this law makes any transaction where the end result is a payment to an online casino illegal, so netteller, firepay, and paypal can no longer be used for this type of transaction
oh cram your ethics. if i want a job and i know i'm qualified i'm going to do what i have to do to get it. if it comes down to a decision between me a real-life high school drop-out or a guy with a bachelors they are gonna pick the bachelors guy every time. so yeah, i will unethically throw the balance into my favour because the company just wants a warm body filling a seat, and i want to be paid to be that warm body.
These services come at a hefty price tag ($75 a pop) so they are not often used, even after an interview.
I never graduated high school, but my resume says I have a bachelors in CS from a very well known university. I've never been asked to see it, and I've never been called out on it being false. I have the knowledge to back it up, and the ability to bluff my way through the "oh yeah, what did you do in college" section of the interview. I'm sorry 1 line of text in Word negates your 4 years in school, but it does. Nobody ever checks and I don't have any shortage of high paying jobs.
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a macbook 2GHz core duo w/1.25 gigs of RAM) for about 20 seconds now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 seconds. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape works great. And nothing else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite isn't straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've often seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, because of the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs slower than this 2 ghz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.
Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone wouldn't choose to use a Mac over other slower, more expensive, unstable systems.
I had a 20GB ipod for a while, and i loved it. unfortunately it had a love note etched in the back from my ex wife so I wanted to get rid of it. After I sold it i went ahead and tried a creative zen 20GB instead. it was missing a vital feature for me. the ability to shuffle by genre, like i always did on my ipod (set it to the genre in which i want to listen to, then shuffle the songs). Future zen players may have rectified it, but at the time, this was what was available. Also, I couldn't use itunes, which I was already using for storing my music on my computer.
I took it back to the shop and exchanged it for a 30GB philips gogear. that thing was slick and was able to shuffle by genre, but I had to use windows media player to sync it, and it's photo sync took HOURS. after a few weeks with it, it started acting weird (skipping songs, etc...) so I sent it back to philips for a replacement which also started doing the same thing.
Finally I said screw it, I'm going with what i know works, so i got another ipod, a 30GB photo. muuuuch nicer. i could use itunes again, photo syncing took mere minutes, i could shuffle by genre, i could use embedded album art instead of a flaky folder.jpg method with the gogear (or none with the old ipod or cretive zen). My girlfriend then expressed an interest in an ipod so I gave her my photo and got a brand new video. again, not a single problem with it, do drm woes because i steal all my music anyway (haven't bought a music cd since 1998)
itunes has smart playlists that carry over to the ipod. itunes has a slick way of finding your music in the browse panel. mass editing id3 info is easy in this. sure i could probably get all of these in multiple other apps, but they wouldn't integrate so well with the mp3 player device, and it's a pain in the ass to use 4 apps for what i can do in 1 well designed one.
again, this is all just opinion, but the poo-pooing of the ipod from people that don't even understand all of these features makes it seem like they are just the types that are "too cool for school" and don't want to use anything that's popular. they are probably also using some obscure browser on some obscure operating system listening to some obscure music encoded in some obscure format on some obscure mp3 player software.
you can believe that if you want, but real world tests shatter that myth.
when i first got the tv i put a 1080i image into it. i recorded something off of NBC on my HD DVR. i set my cable box to output 480p. looked at the picture and saw that it was very clear. then i set the cable box to output 1080i (the tv can;t do 720p, it upconverts it to 1080i) the same scene from the same source material was miles clearer than in 480p on the same tv. I used a scene from My Name is Earl where a newspaper was shown on the screen. the same material at 480p the text on the newspaper was readable in some places, but when it got smaller it got blurry. in 1080i the whole newspaper page was readable.
the difference between HD Ready and HDTV is that a TV set can't really be called an HDTV if it does not include an internal HD tuner. HD-Ready means that you can hook an HDTV source to it. you might be thinking of EDTV which are digital TVs which top out at 480p (which still look great at 30")
how do you explain CRT computer monitors that can display resolutions upwards of 1920x1080? do they not have CRT tubes? you're wrong wrong wrong.
best buy has a 27" 4:3 insignia HDTV for $378 right now and a 30" widescreen for $530.
the xbox needs the mod chip for xbox media center. the regular xbox dvd player doesn't upconvert, but the one in media center does.
the signal loss and interference in component cables in a 6 foot run are not significant.
most movies on dvd that are 2.35 instead if 16:9 will still show black bars even on an HDTV because the picture is still wider than the tv. there are no 2.35 tv's (there are some projectors that will do 2.35 anamorphic)
ok fine, the fair use argument. so what do you plan on using HDTV footage for then besides watching it? or recording it? because you can do that with D-VHS. I can also hook my laptop to my HDTV reciever with firewire and capture anything.
what is the DRM keeping you from doing? anything? ok yeah, not now, but in the future.
please point me in the direction of your criticism/parody/educational material.
I didn't think you could.
you people bitch about DRM just so you have something to bitch about.
funny. i see all this about DRM, i guess i just haven't been drinking the kool-ade but if you're not planning on copying the stuff why are you worried about DRM? besides, as long as the component outputs are enabled on your HD reciever/dvd player (and there are HD-DVD players with component output) you won;t have any DRM problems.
he;s not talking about the United States. in europe the vast majority of natively widescreen TVs are SDTV which contrary to your post is NOT synonymous with "NTSC/PAL". NTSC/PAL are SDTV but so is 480p (720x480) or 576i(720x576) which in europe are regularly transmitted in anamorphic 16:9. Anamorphic 16:9 is very common in europe, while it;s pretty much unheard of in north america, where we tend to letterbox our 16:9 content into a 4:3 frame.
$400 - 30" Philips tube based widescreen HDTV
$150 - xbox with mod chip and component video outputs
$10 a month - comcast HD DVR
$7 - HDMI cable on ebay (it carries a digital signal, so a cable is a cable is a cable)
$16 - Optical audio cable (see HDMI cable info)
the xbox upconverts dvds to 1080i and they look incredible, just as good on a tv this size as HBO HD (and don't let anyone tell you that you can't tell a difference between standard and HD on a tv this small, you so can)
no need to spend so much money unless you want a larger screen.
directv will never put out 1080p. they don't even put out 1080i. all 1080i channels distributed by DirecTV are 1440x1080 or 1280x1080. even HDNet and HDNet Movies right now, to conserve bandwidth. the mpeg 4 upgrades won't up the resolution. they will merely give them enough room to carry local channels in HD for cities all over the nation.
film and video are very different and look very different. lots of HD originates in film transfers, but another source is video. film lends itself well to soft focus, and hides a lot of details. look at older porn. when they still shot on film, butt-zits weren't very apparent. on video, they are everpresent. in HD (on video) they are even worse.
the people being told to "produce this in HD" are in the TV world, not the film world. People in the film world already think in film terms. but people in the TV world are just getting introduced to the new level of detail.
this is uninformed. my 30" tube based HDTV blows away a 27" non-HD tube based TV.
on my 30" bedroom tv and my 55" living room tv regular DVDs upconverted to 1080i with my xbox look as good as HBO-HD. i;m not bothered with HD-DVD
That's true. The real problem for Microsoft would be if Dell starts selling (and advertising) PCs with Linux. Consumers trust Dell, so if Dell says it is good, they will buy it.
consumers would stop trusting dell as soon as they got their computer and can't run all the easy to use and easy to install software that dells are supposed to be able to run because of this weird "linux" thing they have on their computer. It will never happen in the consumer market.
i don't think he meant slow in "processing speed" i think he meant slow as "it takes longer to move the mouse in several gestures to fold the windows than it does to move the mouse to one screen corner, and then the miniaturized version of the window you are looking for."
it is totally obvious to anyone with a brain that they are not going to make ALL search engines illegal. That wouldn;t make any sense. What they are doing is making search engines who's main purpose is to locate material that if distributed would be construed as copyright infringement. It's bad wording, but i see so many people (including the editor) acting like children when this comes up.
do you people (aimed at the people that think this applies to everything with a copyright, as opposed to only items which are unauthorized for distribution) ACTUALLY believe that this law would apply to a regular search engine?
Slashdot Mirror
just look at tupac! he's been releasing albums and he's been dead for 10 years. I wonder what his take is on this.
what you speak of is "money laundering" which is already illegal.
this law makes any transaction where the end result is a payment to an online casino illegal, so netteller, firepay, and paypal can no longer be used for this type of transaction
oh cram your ethics. if i want a job and i know i'm qualified i'm going to do what i have to do to get it. if it comes down to a decision between me a real-life high school drop-out or a guy with a bachelors they are gonna pick the bachelors guy every time. so yeah, i will unethically throw the balance into my favour because the company just wants a warm body filling a seat, and i want to be paid to be that warm body.
These services come at a hefty price tag ($75 a pop) so they are not often used, even after an interview.
I never graduated high school, but my resume says I have a bachelors in CS from a very well known university. I've never been asked to see it, and I've never been called out on it being false. I have the knowledge to back it up, and the ability to bluff my way through the "oh yeah, what did you do in college" section of the interview. I'm sorry 1 line of text in Word negates your 4 years in school, but it does. Nobody ever checks and I don't have any shortage of high paying jobs.
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a macbook 2GHz core duo w/1.25 gigs of RAM) for about 20 seconds now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 seconds. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape works great. And nothing else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite isn't straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've often seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, because of the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs slower than this 2 ghz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.
Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone wouldn't choose to use a Mac over other slower, more expensive, unstable systems.
shameless anectodal ipod superiority rant
I had a 20GB ipod for a while, and i loved it. unfortunately it had a love note etched in the back from my ex wife so I wanted to get rid of it. After I sold it i went ahead and tried a creative zen 20GB instead. it was missing a vital feature for me. the ability to shuffle by genre, like i always did on my ipod (set it to the genre in which i want to listen to, then shuffle the songs). Future zen players may have rectified it, but at the time, this was what was available. Also, I couldn't use itunes, which I was already using for storing my music on my computer.
I took it back to the shop and exchanged it for a 30GB philips gogear. that thing was slick and was able to shuffle by genre, but I had to use windows media player to sync it, and it's photo sync took HOURS. after a few weeks with it, it started acting weird (skipping songs, etc...) so I sent it back to philips for a replacement which also started doing the same thing.
Finally I said screw it, I'm going with what i know works, so i got another ipod, a 30GB photo. muuuuch nicer. i could use itunes again, photo syncing took mere minutes, i could shuffle by genre, i could use embedded album art instead of a flaky folder.jpg method with the gogear (or none with the old ipod or cretive zen). My girlfriend then expressed an interest in an ipod so I gave her my photo and got a brand new video. again, not a single problem with it, do drm woes because i steal all my music anyway (haven't bought a music cd since 1998)
itunes has smart playlists that carry over to the ipod. itunes has a slick way of finding your music in the browse panel. mass editing id3 info is easy in this. sure i could probably get all of these in multiple other apps, but they wouldn't integrate so well with the mp3 player device, and it's a pain in the ass to use 4 apps for what i can do in 1 well designed one.
again, this is all just opinion, but the poo-pooing of the ipod from people that don't even understand all of these features makes it seem like they are just the types that are "too cool for school" and don't want to use anything that's popular. they are probably also using some obscure browser on some obscure operating system listening to some obscure music encoded in some obscure format on some obscure mp3 player software.
you can believe that if you want, but real world tests shatter that myth.
when i first got the tv i put a 1080i image into it. i recorded something off of NBC on my HD DVR. i set my cable box to output 480p. looked at the picture and saw that it was very clear. then i set the cable box to output 1080i (the tv can;t do 720p, it upconverts it to 1080i) the same scene from the same source material was miles clearer than in 480p on the same tv. I used a scene from My Name is Earl where a newspaper was shown on the screen. the same material at 480p the text on the newspaper was readable in some places, but when it got smaller it got blurry. in 1080i the whole newspaper page was readable.
the difference between HD Ready and HDTV is that a TV set can't really be called an HDTV if it does not include an internal HD tuner. HD-Ready means that you can hook an HDTV source to it. you might be thinking of EDTV which are digital TVs which top out at 480p (which still look great at 30")
how do you explain CRT computer monitors that can display resolutions upwards of 1920x1080? do they not have CRT tubes? you're wrong wrong wrong.
look harder. you can easily find HDTVs in the $400-500 range, CRT, 30-32". best buy is where i got mine. yes my tv does 1080i.
g /categorieInPath.do?page=first&key=0/4190799E9A6F0 08D00000000828BD472/41907ABB9A6F008D00000000828BD4 72&shop=OUTLET
http://www.outlet.philips.com/b2c_redesign/catalo
best buy has a 27" 4:3 insignia HDTV for $378 right now and a 30" widescreen for $530.
the xbox needs the mod chip for xbox media center. the regular xbox dvd player doesn't upconvert, but the one in media center does.
the signal loss and interference in component cables in a 6 foot run are not significant.
most movies on dvd that are 2.35 instead if 16:9 will still show black bars even on an HDTV because the picture is still wider than the tv. there are no 2.35 tv's (there are some projectors that will do 2.35 anamorphic)
ok fine, the fair use argument. so what do you plan on using HDTV footage for then besides watching it? or recording it? because you can do that with D-VHS. I can also hook my laptop to my HDTV reciever with firewire and capture anything.
what is the DRM keeping you from doing? anything? ok yeah, not now, but in the future.
please point me in the direction of your criticism/parody/educational material.
I didn't think you could.
you people bitch about DRM just so you have something to bitch about.
my HDCP compliant TV cost $400, not $2000
the ps3 market and HDTV market are the same? how so? the HUGE majority of PS3s will be sold for playing games on a standard definition tv.
funny. i see all this about DRM, i guess i just haven't been drinking the kool-ade but if you're not planning on copying the stuff why are you worried about DRM? besides, as long as the component outputs are enabled on your HD reciever/dvd player (and there are HD-DVD players with component output) you won;t have any DRM problems.
2 very good video game systems?
he;s not talking about the United States. in europe the vast majority of natively widescreen TVs are SDTV which contrary to your post is NOT synonymous with "NTSC/PAL". NTSC/PAL are SDTV but so is 480p (720x480) or 576i(720x576) which in europe are regularly transmitted in anamorphic 16:9. Anamorphic 16:9 is very common in europe, while it;s pretty much unheard of in north america, where we tend to letterbox our 16:9 content into a 4:3 frame.
$400 - 30" Philips tube based widescreen HDTV $150 - xbox with mod chip and component video outputs $10 a month - comcast HD DVR $7 - HDMI cable on ebay (it carries a digital signal, so a cable is a cable is a cable) $16 - Optical audio cable (see HDMI cable info) the xbox upconverts dvds to 1080i and they look incredible, just as good on a tv this size as HBO HD (and don't let anyone tell you that you can't tell a difference between standard and HD on a tv this small, you so can) no need to spend so much money unless you want a larger screen.
directv will never put out 1080p. they don't even put out 1080i. all 1080i channels distributed by DirecTV are 1440x1080 or 1280x1080. even HDNet and HDNet Movies right now, to conserve bandwidth. the mpeg 4 upgrades won't up the resolution. they will merely give them enough room to carry local channels in HD for cities all over the nation.
film and video are very different and look very different. lots of HD originates in film transfers, but another source is video. film lends itself well to soft focus, and hides a lot of details. look at older porn. when they still shot on film, butt-zits weren't very apparent. on video, they are everpresent. in HD (on video) they are even worse. the people being told to "produce this in HD" are in the TV world, not the film world. People in the film world already think in film terms. but people in the TV world are just getting introduced to the new level of detail.
this is uninformed. my 30" tube based HDTV blows away a 27" non-HD tube based TV. on my 30" bedroom tv and my 55" living room tv regular DVDs upconverted to 1080i with my xbox look as good as HBO-HD. i;m not bothered with HD-DVD
taking common myths that vegetarians and vegans point out and applying them to the "GIMP does everything photoshop does" myth doesn't negate it.
i don't think he meant slow in "processing speed" i think he meant slow as "it takes longer to move the mouse in several gestures to fold the windows than it does to move the mouse to one screen corner, and then the miniaturized version of the window you are looking for."
it is totally obvious to anyone with a brain that they are not going to make ALL search engines illegal. That wouldn;t make any sense. What they are doing is making search engines who's main purpose is to locate material that if distributed would be construed as copyright infringement. It's bad wording, but i see so many people (including the editor) acting like children when this comes up.
do you people (aimed at the people that think this applies to everything with a copyright, as opposed to only items which are unauthorized for distribution) ACTUALLY believe that this law would apply to a regular search engine?
GET A CLUE
no, the knife manufacturer is the one that did not prevent the knife to be used for stabbing.
yes, i am trying to say punish the stabber, not the knife manufacturer.
analogies suck anyway.
wow my digital converter box was free from my cable company/dish network/directv
the same as the generic knife manufacturer a murder trial in which the victim was stabbed.