NASA has been using digital image storage, compression and transmission since at least the 70's.
Then again, patents can be really specific so maybe this would not count as prior art and Kodak may have even developed these systems for NASA.
The article is short on specifics, but I wonder why Sony in particular is targeted and not Nikon, Fuji, Canon or any of the other dozen digital camera manufacturers.
I recall a specifc project in Social Studies that requied the class to make an economic comparison of the G7 countries. My only source was the Encyclopedia Britannica and the information was already six years out of date. Of course, I lost marks for using out of date information. Where else could a high school student obtain up to date economic information? I wasn't about to go through every issue of Business Weekly to get it.
With the Internet, I could have that information in a few minutes, even seconds if I find a good source. Encyclopedias just cannot compete with such instantaneous and nearly cost free knowledge.
James Burke has touched on this phenomenon is his latest series of books. That the explosion and specialization of knowledge has lead to where we are today, that no one really "knows" anything anymore and that as soon as something is discovered it is obsolete. Those that will prosper the most in the future will have skills that lead to them the sources of knowledge they require without the need to retain that knowledge for themselves (his theory).
I recall that most of these seizures manifested themselves in children with no history of prior seizures, making the whole exercise of warnings pointless.
While a minute percentage of children and adults are negatively affected by flashing lights and/or images the fact remains that it is impossible to tell from one circumstance to the next when a seizure will be triggered and which individuals will be affected.
I routinely download Ghost images from a dedicated computer at home to wherever I am and I regularly exceed 5 GB/month.
I am not sure if the bandwidth limits are specific to the pricing package, but I am on the 2.5 Mb/s plan. I have yet to receive any sort of bill or indication of said limits.
Perhaps it is similar to Shaw -- they only go after those who are burden to the network. Shaw has bandwidth limits as well in their terms of service, but from what I remember they were never exactly spelled out.
Some quotes from the guy I mentioed in the cubicle next to me:
"...are you fucking retarded?"
"I am sorry, I can't fix stupidity."
"Yeah, it's the email chip. Maybe someone at the factory replaced it with an idiot chip."
"Of course it works, it's a god damn Mac."
"You're annoying me, I am cancelling your warranty."
That's all that comes to mind right now.
It's the "Kens" that make the job worth it
on
Orwellian Tech Support
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I have a "Ken" at my current support job. Sometimes I overhear the conversations and I laugh to the point of tears and suffocation. He has what I call "Tech Support Tourettes" and uses the mute button on his headset to great effect.
Whenever I start to get frustrated with calls, I simply take a five second break and listen in on "Ken". He is the office stress reliever and we have a pool going around on when he is going to kick the bucket. I think that is the only reason the company keeps him, as mental health for the rest of us.
My most memorable incident recalls a customer who had the unfortunate luck of calling in to "Ken" to complain and make legal threats. Sharp as ever, "Ken" transferred him to our "Legal Department" (we don't have one that I know of) at extension 600. Funny thing is, our extensions only go to the mid 500's, so no one was going to answer the call and the guy would wait on hold potentially forever.
Did I mention he deals exclusively with Macs? I can't imagine what would happen if moved to PC support. Probably could replace his chair with a coffin.
I was initially negative about the Xbox, it is Microsoft afterall, and I do have some opinions:
The good:
- Graphics and sound technology is the best amongst all the consoles.
- Hard drive adds unique features like custom soundtracks and no memory card saves.
- Active hack community with loads of options for those that like to tinker. MAME and other emulators just further the value of this machine.
- Unique games like Halo and Gotham Racing, specific to Xbox.
- No problems with DVD ROM drive failures. Overall it feels like a very well built machine.
- Xbox Live. A cohesive on-line gaming experience. Sony's on-line stratagem just does not appeal to me, if you can call what they have done a strategy.
---------------------
The bad:
- The size of it! It takes up an entire shelf on its own. I can fit a DVD player and a VCR in the place of one Xbox.
- Hard drive under utilized unless you have Xbox Live or are actively hacking the machine.
- The original controllers. OK, they fixed that pretty quick, but still. I do prefer my Gamecube controller; I find it far superior to the smaller Xbox controller.
- Game selection is all over the map. No comparison to the PS2 in terms of bredth and depth of game choices.
There is talk that the next machine will not play current Xbox games and I think that is very telling. In my opinion, the lack of backwards compatibilty is an admission, of sorts, that the current Xbox has not lived up to expectations. I do not believe that the PS2 would have been anywhere near as popular as it is without backwards compatibility. Compatibility is an acknowledgement of the popularity and success of the previous machine and ensured a market for the PS2.
In my current job I simply crossed out those portions of the contract that I did not agree with, namely non-compete, authorization to check my credit rating, etc. and signed the contract. I also pointed out the sections I deleted and why to the HR officer. He really didn't seem to care.
In fact, every job I have had since high school that required some form of a contract got a thorough read and some modification. Not once have I just signed anything put in front of me.
Maybe I am just lucky that no one actually reads these things after they're signed.
I admire Thomas for his commitment to fighting this patent.
It might be worthwhile to inform Goldberg Patents that you are aware of other infringements to their patent, namely Microsoft and that you are forwarding their patent complaint to Microsoft as a gesture of good will. I would explain that after the Eolas patent incident, Microsoft would surely be sensitive to such blatent patent infringement as is present in Microsoft windows and the Microsoft Gaming Network.
I have a Sega Game Gear, Sega Nomad and Gameboy Adavance. Hands down the Nomad is my favorite.
First, it plays all my old Genesis games flawlessly; it has full Genesis hardware inside. Second, it can plug into a TV to function like a full sized Genesis machine, it even includes a second joypad port on the top on the unit for two player games. I have used it on occasion during long flights and it always draws a lot of attention, well ok, from people who love old Genesis games.
The article described the Nomad screen as blurry; I have not had the same experience, perhaps earlier units had this problem. I do have an issue with the cartridge port as some carts only work intermittently.
I think the main things that killed the Nomad were size, battery life and poor market. It really came at the very end of the Genesis life cycle and everyone was looking forward to 3D gaming from the Sony PlayStation or next Nintendo machine. As I said before, old gamers are always amazed when I pull it out on a plane and start Sonic or any other Genesis game; it really came in under their radar.
I love and keep my Game Gear mainly for the nostalgia and the battery life was atrocious, but the jittery screen really was the achilles heel of the machine, in my opinion.
Maybe I will change my mind once I plunk the money down for the Gameboy Advance SP and the better screen, which was always a sore point with me on my original Gameboy Advance.
In essence, it all comes down to the EULA that accompanied the software that Jon Johansen reverse engineered in the first place.
The DVD CCA was succesful in the Supreme Court of California in establishing that the provisions of the EULA that prohibited reverse engineering were enforceable and constituted discovery by "improper means".
There are other serious precedents, namely that no one may reverse engineer a software product for the purpose of interoptability where the EULA strictly forbids it, that the EULA of any software product is enforcable and most distressing of of all, that trade secret law trumps the First Amendment (under very narrow circumstances, granted).
Even with the case dismissed, these precedents stand in the State of California, do they not?
First, Darl McFuckhead, the GPL relies on copyright as it derives its licensing authority from copyright law. Nothing in the GPL requires software under the GPL license to be in the public domain; if it were, it would not be covered by copyright and therefore not licensed.
Second, when OSS advocates talk of "free software" they talk in terms of free as in speech, not necessarily free as in beer. One thing Darl needs to wrap his head around is the fact that there is a community of computer enthusiasts who see OSS and the GPL as a way to improve their own software and the sotware of others; there is no expectation in this community that someone cannot profit from this experience. The fact that much of the software in this community is free to others is an expression of the freedom to be found here, not a soul crushing display of anti-capitalism.
Darl goes on to proselytize that because of open source software, software values have plummeted, and much of this is due to the existence of proprietary code in open source projects. This is an outrageous, over-reaching statement as any in his letter. In one fell swoop he has besmirched anyone even remotely connected to open source as pirates. If open source was as rotten to the core as Darl suggests, lawsuits would have been flying years ago and the evidence of wrong-doing so readily apparent that Darl should not be having as difficult a time as he is proving this in court.
One thing becomes immediately clear reading Darl's letter; his ideas about the economy, copyright and patents are rooted in the past. He cannot envision a future where the value of certain types of software lay in the support and service behind the software, not the software itself. We have already seen a large shift in employment from manufacturing based to service based. I am not advocating the shift, simply pointing it out and if Darl wants to move his company forward he should drop the posturing and lawsuits and embrace the opportunities that exist today because open source is not going away.
That may be true, but I surmise you could still refuse to have your paper submitted to their database by enforcing your moral rights.
I am not sure about the U.S., but in Canada you maintain moral rights, that is, the right to refuse your work to be used by others for purposes you find immoral, for life. These rights cannot be given or sold even if the original copyrighted material is sold to another, they are exclusively the author's.
Perhaps someone who knows more about copyright in Canada could comment.
First, I grew up in what I consider a conservative Christian home and I have spent a lifetime trying to overcome the misconceptions, prejudices and outright falsehoods feed to me as a child. That does not mean that ALL Christianity treats knowledge, science and scientific inquiry with the same disdain, but I certainly experienced the depths of ignorance that is possible in Christianty.
The Institute for Creation Research, ICR, a conservative Christian group, would have you believe otherwise. In fact, they would hold that you are not a true Christian unless you believe the Bible to be absolute and inerrant.
See their comments on life on other planets here:
www.icr.org/bible/bhta31.html
Also, note that I said conservative Christians, considered to be a small but influencial part of Christianity. There are many denominations to Christianity -- Baptists, Evangelicals, Catholics, Protestants, Methodists, Church of Christ, etc., so perhaps you need to look it up yourself:
Despite what you say, many Christian groups, conservative or otherwise, view exploration for life on other planets anywhere from skepticism to outright heresy and have used their influence in the current administration to steer policy that is in many ways hostile to science and independant investigation.
My comment was that I am surprised that more attention has not been drawn by religious groups on science that has the potential to bring some of their most treasured tenets into disrepute. There are implications to life on other planets beyond their scientific discovery, you can't call me ignorant for pointing that out.
What the reaction from various religous groups would be if definitive evidence was found on Mars for current or past life. Most certainly conservative Christian groups would denounce the findings with a litany of "scientific" refutations.
In a way, Bush could be seen to be in conflict with his most personal beliefs by supporting missions to Mars, especially since he enjoys wide support from the aforementioned conservative Christian groups. On the other hand, these missions may provide enough evidence to say with reasonable certainly that life did not exist on Mars.
Many here have commented that it is no big deal that the machines are labeled 9200 when, in fact, they contain a 9000.
Ask yourself this:
If the performance and end result are the same then why claim a 9200 is present when a 9000 really is? If "everyone" knows that 9000 has the same performance as the 9200 on those particular mobos then why claim a 9200?
I can only conclude that the reason these machines are labeled 9200 is to confuse those that know just enough to perceive a performance difference that does not exist.
I've asked it before and I am asking again -- how can SCO sue Google for copyright infringement when they, that is Google, are the end user of a product produced by someone else? Google did not produce the Linux software that resides on their servers.
It would be like Ford suing me because the GM trucks I bought for my fleet of delivery vehicles contain patented technology from Ford. Before anyone goes off about the difference between copyright and patents, I am simply trying to illustrate a point.
until it's revealed that Darl McBride was molested by Michael Jackson and this past abuse caused him to marry Britney Spears in a quickie Las Vegas wedding.
You need to clarify what you are talking about. Sony Net MD units no longer use MusicMatch Jukebox as the new software is now SonicStage and it still incorporates the completely unreliable check-in and out system.
SonicStage, in my opinion, is the worst piece of software I have ever used. I nearly returned my MD unit because I received constant "recording session failed" errors for no apparent reason on MP3s I just ripped from CD for the purpose of transfering to MD. If it wasn't for M3U2SB, Nero Imagedrive and Simple Burner I would not have been able to transfer ANYTHING to my MD, the software is that buggy.
I managed to find out about the Nero Imagedrive trick from reading through the reams of complaints on Sony's own message board about Net MD; it has frustrated thousands, if not millions of people.
I have never understood why society, experts or the media seem to believe that nudity harms children. Children see themselves naked everyday, why should it harm them to see someone else naked? It is absolute heresy in this age to claim otherwise.
What is worse than holding unpopular opinions is the reaction many people have to them. We jump all over those that hold opinions in the margins of society, however right or wrong they might be, and never seek to learn the reasons they hold such opinions or if there is any truth in them.
Humanity has come a long way, but as a society we seem as unreceptive to new ideas as ever.
Slashdot Mirror
NASA has been using digital image storage, compression and transmission since at least the 70's.
Then again, patents can be really specific so maybe this would not count as prior art and Kodak may have even developed these systems for NASA.
The article is short on specifics, but I wonder why Sony in particular is targeted and not Nikon, Fuji, Canon or any of the other dozen digital camera manufacturers.
I recall a specifc project in Social Studies that requied the class to make an economic comparison of the G7 countries. My only source was the Encyclopedia Britannica and the information was already six years out of date. Of course, I lost marks for using out of date information. Where else could a high school student obtain up to date economic information? I wasn't about to go through every issue of Business Weekly to get it.
With the Internet, I could have that information in a few minutes, even seconds if I find a good source. Encyclopedias just cannot compete with such instantaneous and nearly cost free knowledge.
James Burke has touched on this phenomenon is his latest series of books. That the explosion and specialization of knowledge has lead to where we are today, that no one really "knows" anything anymore and that as soon as something is discovered it is obsolete. Those that will prosper the most in the future will have skills that lead to them the sources of knowledge they require without the need to retain that knowledge for themselves (his theory).
I recall that most of these seizures manifested themselves in children with no history of prior seizures, making the whole exercise of warnings pointless.
While a minute percentage of children and adults are negatively affected by flashing lights and/or images the fact remains that it is impossible to tell from one circumstance to the next when a seizure will be triggered and which individuals will be affected.
What river separates China from India?
The Fraser.
Richmond/Delta, get it? Yeah, it's not the best joke and anyone from Vancouver has probably heard it a thousand times...
Whooooosh...there's the sound of evaporating karma.
I routinely download Ghost images from a dedicated computer at home to wherever I am and I regularly exceed 5 GB/month.
I am not sure if the bandwidth limits are specific to the pricing package, but I am on the 2.5 Mb/s plan. I have yet to receive any sort of bill or indication of said limits.
Perhaps it is similar to Shaw -- they only go after those who are burden to the network. Shaw has bandwidth limits as well in their terms of service, but from what I remember they were never exactly spelled out.
"The Phantom Console"....Freudian slip?
Now those stickers on the front of the computer really mean something...
Some quotes from the guy I mentioed in the cubicle next to me:
"...are you fucking retarded?"
"I am sorry, I can't fix stupidity."
"Yeah, it's the email chip. Maybe someone at the factory replaced it with an idiot chip."
"Of course it works, it's a god damn Mac."
"You're annoying me, I am cancelling your warranty."
That's all that comes to mind right now.
I have a "Ken" at my current support job. Sometimes I overhear the conversations and I laugh to the point of tears and suffocation. He has what I call "Tech Support Tourettes" and uses the mute button on his headset to great effect.
Whenever I start to get frustrated with calls, I simply take a five second break and listen in on "Ken". He is the office stress reliever and we have a pool going around on when he is going to kick the bucket. I think that is the only reason the company keeps him, as mental health for the rest of us.
My most memorable incident recalls a customer who had the unfortunate luck of calling in to "Ken" to complain and make legal threats. Sharp as ever, "Ken" transferred him to our "Legal Department" (we don't have one that I know of) at extension 600. Funny thing is, our extensions only go to the mid 500's, so no one was going to answer the call and the guy would wait on hold potentially forever.
Did I mention he deals exclusively with Macs? I can't imagine what would happen if moved to PC support. Probably could replace his chair with a coffin.
I was initially negative about the Xbox, it is Microsoft afterall, and I do have some opinions:
The good:
- Graphics and sound technology is the best amongst all the consoles.
- Hard drive adds unique features like custom soundtracks and no memory card saves.
- Active hack community with loads of options for those that like to tinker. MAME and other emulators just further the value of this machine.
- Unique games like Halo and Gotham Racing, specific to Xbox.
- No problems with DVD ROM drive failures. Overall it feels like a very well built machine.
- Xbox Live. A cohesive on-line gaming experience. Sony's on-line stratagem just does not appeal to me, if you can call what they have done a strategy.
---------------------
The bad:
- The size of it! It takes up an entire shelf on its own. I can fit a DVD player and a VCR in the place of one Xbox.
- Hard drive under utilized unless you have Xbox Live or are actively hacking the machine.
- The original controllers. OK, they fixed that pretty quick, but still. I do prefer my Gamecube controller; I find it far superior to the smaller Xbox controller.
- Game selection is all over the map. No comparison to the PS2 in terms of bredth and depth of game choices.
There is talk that the next machine will not play current Xbox games and I think that is very telling. In my opinion, the lack of backwards compatibilty is an admission, of sorts, that the current Xbox has not lived up to expectations. I do not believe that the PS2 would have been anywhere near as popular as it is without backwards compatibility. Compatibility is an acknowledgement of the popularity and success of the previous machine and ensured a market for the PS2.
Just my 2 Cents.
In my current job I simply crossed out those portions of the contract that I did not agree with, namely non-compete, authorization to check my credit rating, etc. and signed the contract. I also pointed out the sections I deleted and why to the HR officer. He really didn't seem to care.
In fact, every job I have had since high school that required some form of a contract got a thorough read and some modification. Not once have I just signed anything put in front of me.
Maybe I am just lucky that no one actually reads these things after they're signed.
I admire Thomas for his commitment to fighting this patent.
It might be worthwhile to inform Goldberg Patents that you are aware of other infringements to their patent, namely Microsoft and that you are forwarding their patent complaint to Microsoft as a gesture of good will. I would explain that after the Eolas patent incident, Microsoft would surely be sensitive to such blatent patent infringement as is present in Microsoft windows and the Microsoft Gaming Network.
Maybe that will get their attention.
I have a Sega Game Gear, Sega Nomad and Gameboy Adavance. Hands down the Nomad is my favorite.
First, it plays all my old Genesis games flawlessly; it has full Genesis hardware inside.
Second, it can plug into a TV to function like a full sized Genesis machine, it even includes a second joypad port on the top on the unit for two player games. I have used it on occasion during long flights and it always draws a lot of attention, well ok, from people who love old Genesis games.
The article described the Nomad screen as blurry; I have not had the same experience, perhaps earlier units had this problem. I do have an issue with the cartridge port as some carts only work intermittently.
I think the main things that killed the Nomad were size, battery life and poor market. It really came at the very end of the Genesis life cycle and everyone was looking forward to 3D gaming from the Sony PlayStation or next Nintendo machine. As I said before, old gamers are always amazed when I pull it out on a plane and start Sonic or any other Genesis game; it really came in under their radar.
I love and keep my Game Gear mainly for the nostalgia and the battery life was atrocious, but the jittery screen really was the achilles heel of the machine, in my opinion.
Maybe I will change my mind once I plunk the money down for the Gameboy Advance SP and the better screen, which was always a sore point with me on my original Gameboy Advance.
In essence, it all comes down to the EULA that accompanied the software that Jon Johansen reverse engineered in the first place.
The DVD CCA was succesful in the Supreme Court of California in establishing that the provisions of the EULA that prohibited reverse engineering were enforceable and constituted discovery by "improper means".
There are other serious precedents, namely that no one may reverse engineer a software product for the purpose of interoptability where the EULA strictly forbids it, that the EULA of any software product is enforcable and most distressing of of all, that trade secret law trumps the First Amendment (under very narrow circumstances, granted).
Even with the case dismissed, these precedents stand in the State of California, do they not?
First, Darl McFuckhead, the GPL relies on copyright as it derives its licensing authority from copyright law. Nothing in the GPL requires software under the GPL license to be in the public domain; if it were, it would not be covered by copyright and therefore not licensed.
Second, when OSS advocates talk of "free software" they talk in terms of free as in speech, not necessarily free as in beer. One thing Darl needs to wrap his head around is the fact that there is a community of computer enthusiasts who see OSS and the GPL as a way to improve their own software and the sotware of others; there is no expectation in this community that someone cannot profit from this experience. The fact that much of the software in this community is free to others is an expression of the freedom to be found here, not a soul crushing display of anti-capitalism.
Darl goes on to proselytize that because of open source software, software values have plummeted, and much of this is due to the existence of proprietary code in open source projects. This is an outrageous, over-reaching statement as any in his letter. In one fell swoop he has besmirched anyone even remotely connected to open source as pirates. If open source was as rotten to the core as Darl suggests, lawsuits would have been flying years ago and the evidence of wrong-doing so readily apparent that Darl should not be having as difficult a time as he is proving this in court.
One thing becomes immediately clear reading Darl's letter; his ideas about the economy, copyright and patents are rooted in the past. He cannot envision a future where the value of certain types of software lay in the support and service behind the software, not the software itself. We have already seen a large shift in employment from manufacturing based to service based. I am not advocating the shift, simply pointing it out and if Darl wants to move his company forward he should drop the posturing and lawsuits and embrace the opportunities that exist today because open source is not going away.
That may be true, but I surmise you could still refuse to have your paper submitted to their database by enforcing your moral rights.
I am not sure about the U.S., but in Canada you maintain moral rights, that is, the right to refuse your work to be used by others for purposes you find immoral, for life. These rights cannot be given or sold even if the original copyrighted material is sold to another, they are exclusively the author's.
Perhaps someone who knows more about copyright in Canada could comment.
The world's largest fruit mystery -- Richard Simmons. Wonder what mtDNA will reveal.
"Those with Faith know that their answers are correct, and so they look meticulously at all evidence without fear of ever being contradicted."
Those with correct answers need not rely on faith, since they have looked meticulously at all evidence without fear of contradiction.
First, I grew up in what I consider a conservative Christian home and I have spent a lifetime trying to overcome the misconceptions, prejudices and outright falsehoods feed to me as a child. That does not mean that ALL Christianity treats knowledge, science and scientific inquiry with the same disdain, but I certainly experienced the depths of ignorance that is possible in Christianty.
& oe =UTF-8&safe=off&q=christian+denominations
The Institute for Creation Research, ICR, a conservative Christian group, would have you believe otherwise. In fact, they would hold that you are not a true Christian unless you believe the Bible to be absolute and inerrant.
See their comments on life on other planets here:
www.icr.org/bible/bhta31.html
Also, note that I said conservative Christians, considered to be a small but influencial part of Christianity. There are many denominations to Christianity -- Baptists, Evangelicals, Catholics, Protestants, Methodists, Church of Christ, etc., so perhaps you need to look it up yourself:
www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8
Despite what you say, many Christian groups, conservative or otherwise, view exploration for life on other planets anywhere from skepticism to outright heresy and have used their influence in the current administration to steer policy that is in many ways hostile to science and independant investigation.
My comment was that I am surprised that more attention has not been drawn by religious groups on science that has the potential to bring some of their most treasured tenets into disrepute. There are implications to life on other planets beyond their scientific discovery, you can't call me ignorant for pointing that out.
What the reaction from various religous groups would be if definitive evidence was found on Mars for current or past life. Most certainly conservative Christian groups would denounce the findings with a litany of "scientific" refutations.
In a way, Bush could be seen to be in conflict with his most personal beliefs by supporting missions to Mars, especially since he enjoys wide support from the aforementioned conservative Christian groups. On the other hand, these missions may provide enough evidence to say with reasonable certainly that life did not exist on Mars.
Just an observation.
Many here have commented that it is no big deal that the machines are labeled 9200 when, in fact, they contain a 9000.
Ask yourself this:
If the performance and end result are the same then why claim a 9200 is present when a 9000 really is? If "everyone" knows that 9000 has the same performance as the 9200 on those particular mobos then why claim a 9200?
I can only conclude that the reason these machines are labeled 9200 is to confuse those that know just enough to perceive a performance difference that does not exist.
I've asked it before and I am asking again -- how can SCO sue Google for copyright infringement when they, that is Google, are the end user of a product produced by someone else? Google did not produce the Linux software that resides on their servers.
It would be like Ford suing me because the GM trucks I bought for my fleet of delivery vehicles contain patented technology from Ford. Before anyone goes off about the difference between copyright and patents, I am simply trying to illustrate a point.
Anyway, I don't get it.
until it's revealed that Darl McBride was molested by Michael Jackson and this past abuse caused him to marry Britney Spears in a quickie Las Vegas wedding.
You can only hope...
You need to clarify what you are talking about. Sony Net MD units no longer use MusicMatch Jukebox as the new software is now SonicStage and it still incorporates the completely unreliable check-in and out system.
SonicStage, in my opinion, is the worst piece of software I have ever used. I nearly returned my MD unit because I received constant "recording session failed" errors for no apparent reason on MP3s I just ripped from CD for the purpose of transfering to MD. If it wasn't for M3U2SB, Nero Imagedrive and Simple Burner I would not have been able to transfer ANYTHING to my MD, the software is that buggy.
I managed to find out about the Nero Imagedrive trick from reading through the reams of complaints on Sony's own message board about Net MD; it has frustrated thousands, if not millions of people.
Please clarify what you mean by SonicStage.
Thanks.
I have never understood why society, experts or the media seem to believe that nudity harms children. Children see themselves naked everyday, why should it harm them to see someone else naked? It is absolute heresy in this age to claim otherwise.
What is worse than holding unpopular opinions is the reaction many people have to them. We jump all over those that hold opinions in the margins of society, however right or wrong they might be, and never seek to learn the reasons they hold such opinions or if there is any truth in them.
Humanity has come a long way, but as a society we seem as unreceptive to new ideas as ever.