I find cryonics to be attractive in a "hedging the bets" kind of way. It's not so much that I think that it'll work as that the downside is relatively small if it doesn't (you're out a life insurance policy you arguably wouldn't have purchased anyway).
However, Penn Gillette said something on BS that has made me question the entire concept; paraphrased: "Even if it does work, you're just paying for your perpetual storage. Who do you think is going to be charitable enough to pay for thawing, reconstructing, and rehabbing you? Evil geniuses needing goons, that's who!"
Absurdity aside, he's kind of got a point. Seems like a gamble to count on altruism. There are things worse than death.
I don't think it would come up with most kids, because most kids learn somewhere along the line (even if they wouldn't articulate it as such) that family is a partnership, and trust is a give and take.
I think it'd come up with you, because you sound like a dick.
I imagine that a clever lawyer could point out that they're attempting to sue over a transaction of which they were an active part. If I give you something outright, it would likely be impossible for me to sue to get compensation later. If I give it to you while wearing a disguise, I'm not sure that principle doesn't apply.
A -really- clever lawyer could point out that since the RIAA has been documented as giving their stuff away, that anyone downloading from anywhere might have a reasonable belief that it was coming from the "authorized" source in disguise. I don't know that it would fly, but seems like there'd be a non-zero chance of diluting RIAA's argument in the entire body of cases.
On a side note, seems like this would give the artists cause to sue the RIAA, for distributing their work in a manner that's likely not covered by their contract (though with artist contracts in RIAA member companies, who knows--maybe they have the right to give it all away for free.)
Thanks for the correction. You're right, and I appreciate you clearing up my misconceptions. Dolby even states that decoding on the player is preferable, so that the player can mix in optional audio features such as director's commentary prior to outputting to the receiver.
The primary difference between 1.2 and 1.3 at the consumer level is that 1.3 can carry Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD to your receiver to decode, and 1.2 can't. If you buy a 1.2-only player, you'd best have a receiver that has discrete inputs for each speaker so that the DVD player can decode for you, or you won't be getting HD-quality surround out of it. You also won't be able to switch that source through an HDMI switcher.
Point being, there certainly is a tangible difference. It's a shame the salesman didn't know it to educate you properly.
No, you see, that's the source of the speedup. Office 2007 users frequently have freshly lubricated fingers due to burying them so deeply in their ears whenever Open Office is suggested as a replacement.
Sure, but why on earth does it need to be per-game? This is just a case of Nintendo not offering a centralized service and offloading it to each bit of component software, which is stupid, and based on a dumb-system/smart-cartridge model that didn't even play by the time they introduced it on the DS (which actually has some NVRAM storage).
Why not have a central friend-code, then per-game authorization instead, if you really see value in that? And personally, I'm at a loss for what the value would be for per-game authorization.
Anyway, almost all of the recent Nintendo online games let you -play- with random people, and the only reason you're saved by the 10-year-old curse monkeys is that there's no voice-over-IP capability for anyone. Friend codes only specify people you can specifically choose to message, play with, whatever, and serve the exact same purpose as a buddy list does on Xbox Live or PSN.
I'll rent it, but the critical consensus seems pretty clear. I've taken some chances with some pretty iffy games (Shadowrun, I'm looking at you), but this one's just not a buy.
I suspect the target audience of the faq are the open-source proponents (like the article submitter) who do not actually own the copyright but have recognized a possible GPL violation.
The analogy would only hold if people somehow didn't think they were dependent on the postal service to get them their mail, and needed a demonstration.
I don't support illegal activity, but people don't seem to realize or care how much dependency DRM puts on single (or singly-clustered) points of failure. Sure, Microsoft's not going down anytime soon, but other popular DRM-driven sources like Valve might. More incidents like this will illustrate the trade-off consumers are making with DRM: arguably higher availability of media, but the media itself relies on another entity to continue to be valid.
Amen to that. And if TPTB didn't have their head squarely up their asses, trying to replace parentral control, they'd be concentrating on teaching all parents what equipment and techniques they need to use to easily -monitor- their kids internet access, instead of trying to prevent it.
It's a dilution of the term, but not the actual role. What's really happened is that the "acquaintance" role has gotten a huge boost, first by IM programs, and then by social networking sites. It used to be that the only people that would stay on one's radar were actual friends and people you actively ran into on a regular basis. Now it's entirely reasonable to indefinitely keep an active contact list of acquaintances and friends who are fading to the acquaintance level.
It seems reasonable that this would have some sort of actual social effect. However, given how infrequently I talk to the acquaintances on my buddy lists, I'm not sure how significant of an effect it really is.
1080p != 1080p/24. The latter's for watching film at 24fps. 1080p is usually 30fps.
The recent update allows output to be forced to 1080p/24. I think it was supported to some extent before, but there was a possibility for the PS3 to not realize it was supported by your display (I think it's if you had a pass-through receiver in the middle) and to not use it.
If they were to bullet the Emotion Engine, I imagine they'd have a hell of a class action suit on their hands. There are no performance reasons to disable it; playing games on native hardware will always give performance better than or equal to emulation. They removed it for cost reasons.
Under what authority does the US collect a service tax? Services aren't taxable in California under the sales tax laws (with a few exceptions). If I buy a weapon from a California company, farmed on Blizzard's California services, sold to me in California, it's not interstate. The federal government has no jurisdiction there.
That said, "lifestyle discrimination" is legal in most places. More accurately, companies can discriminate based on anything not defined as illegal, and most states don't have any laws against discrimination aside from the usual protected classes (race, religion, medical, sexual preference (that's relatively recent, etc.).
This is a particular problem for smokers and other people with unpopular habits. I once had a company threaten to fire me if I didn't quit, because another employee with smoke allergies complained that the smoke clinging to my clothing was causing issues. BS or not, I don't know, but it would have been perfectly legal for them to can me over it.
Slashdot Mirror
While I don't dispute the "kills you dead" part, modern cryonics doesn't freeze you. It vitrifies the brain, avoiding the ice crystals. Read Myth #2.
http://www.alcor.org/cryomyths.html
I find cryonics to be attractive in a "hedging the bets" kind of way. It's not so much that I think that it'll work as that the downside is relatively small if it doesn't (you're out a life insurance policy you arguably wouldn't have purchased anyway).
However, Penn Gillette said something on BS that has made me question the entire concept; paraphrased: "Even if it does work, you're just paying for your perpetual storage. Who do you think is going to be charitable enough to pay for thawing, reconstructing, and rehabbing you? Evil geniuses needing goons, that's who!"
Absurdity aside, he's kind of got a point. Seems like a gamble to count on altruism. There are things worse than death.
I don't think it would come up with most kids, because most kids learn somewhere along the line (even if they wouldn't articulate it as such) that family is a partnership, and trust is a give and take.
I think it'd come up with you, because you sound like a dick.
I imagine that a clever lawyer could point out that they're attempting to sue over a transaction of which they were an active part. If I give you something outright, it would likely be impossible for me to sue to get compensation later. If I give it to you while wearing a disguise, I'm not sure that principle doesn't apply.
A -really- clever lawyer could point out that since the RIAA has been documented as giving their stuff away, that anyone downloading from anywhere might have a reasonable belief that it was coming from the "authorized" source in disguise. I don't know that it would fly, but seems like there'd be a non-zero chance of diluting RIAA's argument in the entire body of cases.
On a side note, seems like this would give the artists cause to sue the RIAA, for distributing their work in a manner that's likely not covered by their contract (though with artist contracts in RIAA member companies, who knows--maybe they have the right to give it all away for free.)
Two words:
Military School.
Sounds like your parents only brushed with the surface of custodial power.
Thanks for the correction. You're right, and I appreciate you clearing up my misconceptions. Dolby even states that decoding on the player is preferable, so that the player can mix in optional audio features such as director's commentary prior to outputting to the receiver.
The primary difference between 1.2 and 1.3 at the consumer level is that 1.3 can carry Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD to your receiver to decode, and 1.2 can't. If you buy a 1.2-only player, you'd best have a receiver that has discrete inputs for each speaker so that the DVD player can decode for you, or you won't be getting HD-quality surround out of it. You also won't be able to switch that source through an HDMI switcher.
Point being, there certainly is a tangible difference. It's a shame the salesman didn't know it to educate you properly.
No, you see, that's the source of the speedup. Office 2007 users frequently have freshly lubricated fingers due to burying them so deeply in their ears whenever Open Office is suggested as a replacement.
Until someone actually reduces the VISOR to practice by either building it or describing it in sufficient detail to build it, it isn't prior art.
Sure, but why on earth does it need to be per-game? This is just a case of Nintendo not offering a centralized service and offloading it to each bit of component software, which is stupid, and based on a dumb-system/smart-cartridge model that didn't even play by the time they introduced it on the DS (which actually has some NVRAM storage).
Why not have a central friend-code, then per-game authorization instead, if you really see value in that? And personally, I'm at a loss for what the value would be for per-game authorization.
Anyway, almost all of the recent Nintendo online games let you -play- with random people, and the only reason you're saved by the 10-year-old curse monkeys is that there's no voice-over-IP capability for anyone. Friend codes only specify people you can specifically choose to message, play with, whatever, and serve the exact same purpose as a buddy list does on Xbox Live or PSN.
The ironic part is that I'm actually quite the fan (and an owner) of the PS3. That doesn't mean every game for it is good.
I'll rent it, but the critical consensus seems pretty clear. I've taken some chances with some pretty iffy games (Shadowrun, I'm looking at you), but this one's just not a buy.
Now it can be terrible on -two- systems!
I suspect the target audience of the faq are the open-source proponents (like the article submitter) who do not actually own the copyright but have recognized a possible GPL violation.
Google's presence on that list brings its accuracy into question. I'm pretty sure they voted no.
The analogy would only hold if people somehow didn't think they were dependent on the postal service to get them their mail, and needed a demonstration.
I don't support illegal activity, but people don't seem to realize or care how much dependency DRM puts on single (or singly-clustered) points of failure. Sure, Microsoft's not going down anytime soon, but other popular DRM-driven sources like Valve might. More incidents like this will illustrate the trade-off consumers are making with DRM: arguably higher availability of media, but the media itself relies on another entity to continue to be valid.
Amen to that. And if TPTB didn't have their head squarely up their asses, trying to replace parentral control, they'd be concentrating on teaching all parents what equipment and techniques they need to use to easily -monitor- their kids internet access, instead of trying to prevent it.
In context, it read like a typo to me, that he meant $9 more. But I'd be interested in seeing that clarified as well.
re: higher infrastructure/personnel costs, those get passed on to the consumer.
Heh. Now there's a grind I might not mind.
I'm willing to bet that once you add porn into the mix, the numbers change.
It's a dilution of the term, but not the actual role. What's really happened is that the "acquaintance" role has gotten a huge boost, first by IM programs, and then by social networking sites. It used to be that the only people that would stay on one's radar were actual friends and people you actively ran into on a regular basis. Now it's entirely reasonable to indefinitely keep an active contact list of acquaintances and friends who are fading to the acquaintance level.
It seems reasonable that this would have some sort of actual social effect. However, given how infrequently I talk to the acquaintances on my buddy lists, I'm not sure how significant of an effect it really is.
1080p != 1080p/24. The latter's for watching film at 24fps. 1080p is usually 30fps.
The recent update allows output to be forced to 1080p/24. I think it was supported to some extent before, but there was a possibility for the PS3 to not realize it was supported by your display (I think it's if you had a pass-through receiver in the middle) and to not use it.
If they were to bullet the Emotion Engine, I imagine they'd have a hell of a class action suit on their hands. There are no performance reasons to disable it; playing games on native hardware will always give performance better than or equal to emulation. They removed it for cost reasons.
Under what authority does the US collect a service tax? Services aren't taxable in California under the sales tax laws (with a few exceptions). If I buy a weapon from a California company, farmed on Blizzard's California services, sold to me in California, it's not interstate. The federal government has no jurisdiction there.
As stated, this is more of a business thing.
That said, "lifestyle discrimination" is legal in most places. More accurately, companies can discriminate based on anything not defined as illegal, and most states don't have any laws against discrimination aside from the usual protected classes (race, religion, medical, sexual preference (that's relatively recent, etc.).
This is a particular problem for smokers and other people with unpopular habits. I once had a company threaten to fire me if I didn't quit, because another employee with smoke allergies complained that the smoke clinging to my clothing was causing issues. BS or not, I don't know, but it would have been perfectly legal for them to can me over it.
That's not going to be an issue with an HD Tivo; they rely on CableCard rather than using any sort of external cable box.