Just because the person who wrote the blurb only heard about PIPEDA this week doesn't mean it's newly enacted.
When I took an IT law course in 1999 we talked about PIPEDA and it came into effect in stages starting in 2000, first affecting government, then banks, then large companies, and so on until it applies to all companies.
As soon as you pay by some method other than cash, they tie the card to your real information. Swapping the cards around is so common that they're quite good at sorting it out as soon as you pay with plastic again on your newly traded card.
Another side effect of this is if the user has submitted a form, google will resubmit the same form with the same data, creating a duplicate record. The web designer has to have extra code to prevent that.
Any version of XP a consumer can legally get is already crippled beyond use. It has a huge bug called "product activation" which means you can not reinstall the product you supposedly bought without Microsoft's permission. This renders the product completely useless because you won't be able to re-install it in 5 or 10 years to access old data, or if somehow newer MS code is even worse.
Why is some other version with an insignificant additional crippiling newsworthy?
Crimes committed in anger and passion rarely get the death penalty. It has to have other factors to warrant capital punishment (like if it happened while committing another crime, if it was especially brutal, if it was a serial crime, etc.
That sounds exactly like my experience with an 86 Olds Regency 98. They also shopped around for cheap parts and replaced the Olds engine with a cheap Buick engine.
Less than 1 month after the warranty expired, the Transmission completely died and had to be rebuilt. I got the same sort of response that after warranty, they don't car if the car melts down. They wouldn't even appologize for it.
Then at 128,000km, the timing gear (which was made of plastic) threw off all its teeth and the flying timing chain did a lot of other damage too. The engine had to be completely rebuilt. Every time I got an oil change in the 130,000km's, they warned me that if I hadn't had the engine rebuilt recently I'd have to soon. Apparently nearly every single one of those cars had the engine self destruct withing a few thousand kms of 130k.
Now it's still on the road, on it second engine, 3rd transmission, 4th starter motor, 3rd alternator, 2nd fuel pump, etc...The last original part to go was the muffler:).
My current watch is my Casio Databank I got in elementray school in 1988. I've worn that watch every day for the past 16 years and it's still working perfectly. It's one of the metal models.
Pixar wants to fund the movies themselves, pay Disney/Buena Vista a distribution fee of 10-15% and keep most of the revenue for themselves.
That sounds like a pretty sweet deal for Disney. 10-15% of revenue from a movie that's likely to be a major hit just for using their exisiting distribution channels (which shouldn't cost them much).
The problem is that Disney is too greedy.
I don't see why pixar's contract with disney has to expire. As long as Disney is satisfied that their getting good value out of pixar, they can afford to negotiate new contracts. If pixar doesn't want to, Disney easily has the deep pockets to buy them out.
With a full wave recrifier, it will be off for tiny amount of time between pulses; almost certainly faster than the LED can turn off, and it will be on fully twice as much. Also, the human eye can't detect a 120Hz flicker, the limit is around 48Hz.
If it bothers you, spend the 10 cents to add a filter cap:).
Maybe you're a good person to talk to about this then. Why don't any apple notebooks have a PCMCIA or PC Card slot? I would have bought an iBook g4 when they came out in November except for that one issue.
It seems like their primary goal is to force me to buy a $100 airport card instead of a $20 WiFi card (the very attitude that made me switch from an Apple IIe to an IBM AT clone in the 80's). I've seen older powerbooks with PC Card slots so I was very surprised to find out they don't have them anymore. The side effects now are I can't use my CF->PCMCIA adaptor to back up my digital camera pictures and I can't use my PCMCIA floppy drive. I'm also concerned about future problems; I can get a USB port card for PCMCIA for a notebook that doesn't have USB. There will be new ports that come along in the future and I'll probably lose out on them.
Don't take this as mac bashing; I really want that iBook; it's just frustrating that it lacks such a critical feature.
As far as the PC brands: the best possible choice is not to get a brand. Usually you end up with a brand name on the box and the cheapest no-name crap they can find inside (and it's almost always proprietary so you can't upgrade and repairs are expensive). You should hand pick every component that goes into the computer (and that's where brand names come in). Then if you know how, assemble it yourself, or if you don't pay the store to do it for you; it will still be cheaper and better than any brand name PC.
Yes, but Dell must be doing something right. I'm going to buy my first mac in the next few weeks, so I've been talking to a friend who's a big mac user. He commented that if he was buying a PC, he knows the first stop is Dell. When I commented that's the worst possible choice his eyes just glazed like I didn't know what I was talking about because obviously the best PCs come from Dell.
Did you read the context of my post (and the other replies which 'got it')?
The iPod battery doesn't last for years; it lasts for about 10 hours of use. Then it has to be recharged. If I can't expect to get somewhere I can recharge my iPod within 10 hours (and then be unable to use it for the hour or so it takes to charge), then it's totally useless.
A product that takes ordinary batteries can use NiMH rechargables and then I can carry as many NiMH or alkalines as necessary for my situation.
In my case, I don't want to be bothered remembering to charge it every day when I get home. My MD player lasts for about 30 hours of use on a NiMH battery. I also carry an Alkaline spare. When the NiMH dies, I switch to the Alkaline and then when I remember in the next couple of days, I switch back to the NiMH that has been waiting in the charger since last time.
Internet's favorite Honda "Cog" commercial won't air due to the high prices for a 2-minute spot.
I often see the same annoying 30 second ad 6 times in a 30 minute show, sometimes twice in a single break.
A single 2 minute ad once during the show would be a lot more effective than the same ad 6 times, and since it's less total time, it would probably be cheaper too.
Of course not. If a $500 iPod is disposable, a $100 one certainly is.
What really annoys me is I can't carry a spare battery with me to swap if it dies when I'm out. I'll have to wait until I can recharge the battery before I can use the iPod again.
Quick question...since personal shredders are only $30, why does your company use the shredding service at all? It would probably be cheaper to outfit every employee (or at least every department) with their own shredder than pay for 2 months of that service, when you empty your personal shredders, just use ordinary recycling for the shreds.
I thought it was because of all the people so fed up with windows product activation jumping ship to apple. At least that's why I bought Apple stock 6 months ago.
If you really cooked your meat in a microwave exclusively, you'd have died of food posioning a long time ago.
Ironically you just proved your whole argument is total BS. A microwave does not reliably sterilize food, a firepit in the backyard does. Therefore the 50,000 year old technology is superior to the new technology. If you only have a microwave to cook, you can't eat. If you only have a fireplace you can.
Let's sum up:
Film
Order of magnitude cheaper
Orders of magnitude better image quality
Orders of magnitude longer lifespan for the images
Possible to use specialized films (Infra-Red, Slide, Ultra-Fine grain, very high speed, special colour saturation curves like Kodak VC or XC, etc) with no need to spend a cent on special equipment.
Batteries last for thousands of exposures vs dozens for digital.
Virtually no depreciation on equipment value vs 50% year for digital.
Digital
You can preview your images on a little 1.5" screen.
No cost for pictures you screw up
Images already in a digital format so you can transmit them without having to waste time scanning them or finishing a whole roll.
That is very one-side in favor of film. Even if in a few years digital can rival film for image quality, all the other points will still be true. Digital is only useful for people who need to get their pictures submitted to a publisher fast, children who love taking thousands of pictures of everything (and they should be encouraged to do so; digital is a good way to do it), and beginners who can can take lots of pictures to practice before they graduate to film.
Here you go... That one is $40 but there are compareable ones for $30 at costco. I find it amusing that you won't say what you got for $80.
The best argument you can make is that for $110 I could pick up a relatively cheap used 35mm P&S
So now you're saying it costs the same money for a digital or comparable film hardware? Not even the strongest digital supporter will buy that BS.
Oh, and by the way, the disortion is simply a "fisheye" effect which can also be a desirable effect depending on the theme.
There's a big difference between distortion caused by a crappy lens and fisheye distortion. You implied the former. A 35mm focal length lens on a 35mm camera will not have any fisheye distortion. It sure isn't a property of a fixed focal length lens, and it has nothing at all to do with arpeture.
This posting just proves you have no idea what you're talking about.
2)... Well.. a lower end model (new) would be 2 to $4,000. A high end Sinar would run you over $10,000.
How much is a 20 year old 8x10 camera worth today used in optically perfect condtion? Well...a little more than it cost brand new because. Film cameras are a good investment; the price holds firm. When I bought my 2.3MP camera for $400, my 9 year old nikon was also worth $400, and I bought it brand new for $400. Today on ebay, I can get about $70 for my digital and $300 for my Nikon (digital has eroded the price of the used camera market a bit).
So even allowing for that $4000 large format camera, you're still taking a $20,000 depreciation hit with the digital camera that doesn't exist with the film camera. You can't say wait 3 years to buy the camera either; think about what the world would have lost if Adams had spent years waiting for the price of his camera to drop instead of taking pictures. Buying a $4000 digital camera instead of the $4000 film camera and planning to upgrade to a better digital in 3 years also isn't an answer; for this 3 years, his prints would have had an inferior quality which also would have been a great loss.
3) Quality: 140MP in an 8x10 format would be 10837x13546 pixels. That works out to be 1355 dpi. I think thats well above acceptable resolution.
This is a totally false arguement, if I'm comparing apples and oranges, you're comparing apples and elephants. You don't shoot 8x10 film to make an 8x10 print. You use it for poster or mural sized enlargements. Blowing up a 35mm negative to 8x10 is equivalent magnification to blowing up an 8x10 negative to 64x80. At that size, your 140MP gives you 170 DPI (assuming your numbers are correct). That's well below acceptable resolution. It certainly won't compare to a 35mm negative printed at 8x10.
Throughout all your BSing, you still haven't answered the key question. You're arguing that spending $25,000 on a digital camera will give results just as good as the $4000 film camera. I'm arguing that the film camera will take better pictures and they'll last a lot longer. Even if you're totally right and I'm totally wrong, why should anyone spend $25,000 to get something that will lose 80% of its value in 3 years and be just as good as they could get for $4,000?
Jason ProfQuotes
Slashdot Mirror
Just because the person who wrote the blurb only heard about PIPEDA this week doesn't mean it's newly enacted.
When I took an IT law course in 1999 we talked about PIPEDA and it came into effect in stages starting in 2000, first affecting government, then banks, then large companies, and so on until it applies to all companies.
Jason
ProfQuotes
As soon as you pay by some method other than cash, they tie the card to your real information. Swapping the cards around is so common that they're quite good at sorting it out as soon as you pay with plastic again on your newly traded card.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Another side effect of this is if the user has submitted a form, google will resubmit the same form with the same data, creating a duplicate record. The web designer has to have extra code to prevent that.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Any version of XP a consumer can legally get is already crippled beyond use. It has a huge bug called "product activation" which means you can not reinstall the product you supposedly bought without Microsoft's permission. This renders the product completely useless because you won't be able to re-install it in 5 or 10 years to access old data, or if somehow newer MS code is even worse.
Why is some other version with an insignificant additional crippiling newsworthy?
Jason
ProfQuotes
Crimes committed in anger and passion rarely get the death penalty. It has to have other factors to warrant capital punishment (like if it happened while committing another crime, if it was especially brutal, if it was a serial crime, etc.
Jason
ProfQuotes
They don't need jurisdiction over the servers, just over the people using them.
Jason
ProfQuotes
The same way liquid is a different state of matter. It's really just a hot solid.
Jason
ProfQuotes
That sounds exactly like my experience with an 86 Olds Regency 98. They also shopped around for cheap parts and replaced the Olds engine with a cheap Buick engine.
:).
Less than 1 month after the warranty expired, the Transmission completely died and had to be rebuilt. I got the same sort of response that after warranty, they don't car if the car melts down. They wouldn't even appologize for it.
Then at 128,000km, the timing gear (which was made of plastic) threw off all its teeth and the flying timing chain did a lot of other damage too. The engine had to be completely rebuilt. Every time I got an oil change in the 130,000km's, they warned me that if I hadn't had the engine rebuilt recently I'd have to soon. Apparently nearly every single one of those cars had the engine self destruct withing a few thousand kms of 130k.
Now it's still on the road, on it second engine, 3rd transmission, 4th starter motor, 3rd alternator, 2nd fuel pump, etc...The last original part to go was the muffler
Jason
ProfQuotes
My current watch is my Casio Databank I got in elementray school in 1988. I've worn that watch every day for the past 16 years and it's still working perfectly. It's one of the metal models.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Pixar wants to fund the movies themselves, pay Disney/Buena Vista a distribution fee of 10-15% and keep most of the revenue for themselves.
That sounds like a pretty sweet deal for Disney. 10-15% of revenue from a movie that's likely to be a major hit just for using their exisiting distribution channels (which shouldn't cost them much). The problem is that Disney is too greedy.
I don't see why pixar's contract with disney has to expire. As long as Disney is satisfied that their getting good value out of pixar, they can afford to negotiate new contracts. If pixar doesn't want to, Disney easily has the deep pockets to buy them out.
If the fluorescent tube didn't flicker, then why does it cause a beat freqency with a monitor when the monitor set to 60Hz (in North America)?
An LED is a diode, so you don't need an additional one to build a half wave rectifier.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Wihtout a rectifier it is off 50% of the time.
:).
With a full wave recrifier, it will be off for tiny amount of time between pulses; almost certainly faster than the LED can turn off, and it will be on fully twice as much. Also, the human eye can't detect a 120Hz flicker, the limit is around 48Hz.
If it bothers you, spend the 10 cents to add a filter cap
Jason
ProfQuotes
A standard fluorescent bulb flickers at 60 Hz.
With 4 diodes (at a few cents each) you can build a full wave rectifier that will let you connect an LED to AC power without flicker.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Maybe you're a good person to talk to about this then. Why don't any apple notebooks have a PCMCIA or PC Card slot? I would have bought an iBook g4 when they came out in November except for that one issue.
It seems like their primary goal is to force me to buy a $100 airport card instead of a $20 WiFi card (the very attitude that made me switch from an Apple IIe to an IBM AT clone in the 80's). I've seen older powerbooks with PC Card slots so I was very surprised to find out they don't have them anymore. The side effects now are I can't use my CF->PCMCIA adaptor to back up my digital camera pictures and I can't use my PCMCIA floppy drive. I'm also concerned about future problems; I can get a USB port card for PCMCIA for a notebook that doesn't have USB. There will be new ports that come along in the future and I'll probably lose out on them.
Don't take this as mac bashing; I really want that iBook; it's just frustrating that it lacks such a critical feature.
As far as the PC brands: the best possible choice is not to get a brand. Usually you end up with a brand name on the box and the cheapest no-name crap they can find inside (and it's almost always proprietary so you can't upgrade and repairs are expensive). You should hand pick every component that goes into the computer (and that's where brand names come in). Then if you know how, assemble it yourself, or if you don't pay the store to do it for you; it will still be cheaper and better than any brand name PC.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Yes, but Dell must be doing something right. I'm going to buy my first mac in the next few weeks, so I've been talking to a friend who's a big mac user. He commented that if he was buying a PC, he knows the first stop is Dell. When I commented that's the worst possible choice his eyes just glazed like I didn't know what I was talking about because obviously the best PCs come from Dell.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Did you read the context of my post (and the other replies which 'got it')?
The iPod battery doesn't last for years; it lasts for about 10 hours of use. Then it has to be recharged. If I can't expect to get somewhere I can recharge my iPod within 10 hours (and then be unable to use it for the hour or so it takes to charge), then it's totally useless.
A product that takes ordinary batteries can use NiMH rechargables and then I can carry as many NiMH or alkalines as necessary for my situation.
In my case, I don't want to be bothered remembering to charge it every day when I get home. My MD player lasts for about 30 hours of use on a NiMH battery. I also carry an Alkaline spare. When the NiMH dies, I switch to the Alkaline and then when I remember in the next couple of days, I switch back to the NiMH that has been waiting in the charger since last time.
Internet's favorite Honda "Cog" commercial won't air due to the high prices for a 2-minute spot.
I often see the same annoying 30 second ad 6 times in a 30 minute show, sometimes twice in a single break.
A single 2 minute ad once during the show would be a lot more effective than the same ad 6 times, and since it's less total time, it would probably be cheaper too.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Of course not. If a $500 iPod is disposable, a $100 one certainly is.
What really annoys me is I can't carry a spare battery with me to swap if it dies when I'm out. I'll have to wait until I can recharge the battery before I can use the iPod again.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Only when the Antibubbles encounter the bubbles.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Quick question...since personal shredders are only $30, why does your company use the shredding service at all? It would probably be cheaper to outfit every employee (or at least every department) with their own shredder than pay for 2 months of that service, when you empty your personal shredders, just use ordinary recycling for the shreds.
Jason
ProfQuotes
And that is why Apple has had its best year
I thought it was because of all the people so fed up with windows product activation jumping ship to apple. At least that's why I bought Apple stock 6 months ago.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Ironically you just proved your whole argument is total BS. A microwave does not reliably sterilize food, a firepit in the backyard does. Therefore the 50,000 year old technology is superior to the new technology. If you only have a microwave to cook, you can't eat. If you only have a fireplace you can.
Let's sum up:
Film
Digital
That is very one-side in favor of film. Even if in a few years digital can rival film for image quality, all the other points will still be true. Digital is only useful for people who need to get their pictures submitted to a publisher fast, children who love taking thousands of pictures of everything (and they should be encouraged to do so; digital is a good way to do it), and beginners who can can take lots of pictures to practice before they graduate to film.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Here you go... That one is $40 but there are compareable ones for $30 at costco. I find it amusing that you won't say what you got for $80.
The best argument you can make is that for $110 I could pick up a relatively cheap used 35mm P&S So now you're saying it costs the same money for a digital or comparable film hardware? Not even the strongest digital supporter will buy that BS.
Oh, and by the way, the disortion is simply a "fisheye" effect which can also be a desirable effect depending on the theme.
There's a big difference between distortion caused by a crappy lens and fisheye distortion. You implied the former. A 35mm focal length lens on a 35mm camera will not have any fisheye distortion. It sure isn't a property of a fixed focal length lens, and it has nothing at all to do with arpeture.
This posting just proves you have no idea what you're talking about.
2) ... Well.. a lower end model (new) would be 2 to $4,000. A high end Sinar would run you over $10,000.
How much is a 20 year old 8x10 camera worth today used in optically perfect condtion? Well...a little more than it cost brand new because. Film cameras are a good investment; the price holds firm. When I bought my 2.3MP camera for $400, my 9 year old nikon was also worth $400, and I bought it brand new for $400. Today on ebay, I can get about $70 for my digital and $300 for my Nikon (digital has eroded the price of the used camera market a bit).
So even allowing for that $4000 large format camera, you're still taking a $20,000 depreciation hit with the digital camera that doesn't exist with the film camera. You can't say wait 3 years to buy the camera either; think about what the world would have lost if Adams had spent years waiting for the price of his camera to drop instead of taking pictures. Buying a $4000 digital camera instead of the $4000 film camera and planning to upgrade to a better digital in 3 years also isn't an answer; for this 3 years, his prints would have had an inferior quality which also would have been a great loss.
3) Quality: 140MP in an 8x10 format would be 10837x13546 pixels. That works out to be 1355 dpi. I think thats well above acceptable resolution.
This is a totally false arguement, if I'm comparing apples and oranges, you're comparing apples and elephants. You don't shoot 8x10 film to make an 8x10 print. You use it for poster or mural sized enlargements. Blowing up a 35mm negative to 8x10 is equivalent magnification to blowing up an 8x10 negative to 64x80. At that size, your 140MP gives you 170 DPI (assuming your numbers are correct). That's well below acceptable resolution. It certainly won't compare to a 35mm negative printed at 8x10.
Throughout all your BSing, you still haven't answered the key question. You're arguing that spending $25,000 on a digital camera will give results just as good as the $4000 film camera. I'm arguing that the film camera will take better pictures and they'll last a lot longer. Even if you're totally right and I'm totally wrong, why should anyone spend $25,000 to get something that will lose 80% of its value in 3 years and be just as good as they could get for $4,000? Jason
ProfQuotes