Your fighting an arguement I did not make, so I really do not know how to respond to most of this post.
My post was intended to be a humorous way of saying the following: I typically find that personalities defined by methods of transportation are not worth expressing in the first place.
Im glad you like your car -- I can honestly say I have no qualms with you owning that car... I wish you only the best with that car.... Not sure where you got the impression that I felt otherwise.;)
Except that when you take into account the "hidden" costs of owning a gas guzzler..... then SUVs and their ilk *are* more expensive.
I think perhaps you misread my post, for I was actually trying to say that gas-guzzlers were more expensive... This is true in sheer dollar terms, but also, as you mentioned, it is compounded when you add on other "invisible" costs such as those to the environment. We are definitely in agreement here.:)
But I bet they contribute a lot of money to make sure the government doesn't raise taxes on gasoline.
I am actually very interested in this and do wonder why prices of gasoline are so much more expensive elsewhere compared to the U.S. I always figured it could involve oil company payoffs (such as you mentioned) but also that we have "friendly" governments in places like Saudi Arabia always maneuvering to be first in line to sell to the world's number 1 buyer. When Iraq asked the rest of the oil-producing world to boycott US oil sales for one month, not one country agreed to participate. I think its clear where their true loyalties are.
In the end, if our government's policies are for sale then the problem goes much further than the oil companies. Another topic I am passionate about is the end of the two-party system, but that is a topic for another day.;) Again, I have no love for the oil companies. I just think the root of the problem is cultural in nature, as there are very efficient cars freely available for purchase right here in the US. Unfortunately, they are not "cool" and people are willing to pay much, much more for something far more damaging.
There is a lot of difference between a 2 seater insight with little trunk space due to the huge batteries and an SUV meant to carry something.
Yes there is a big difference -- but i was not trying to convince people that a small hybrid is the ideal car for everyone... Moreso, simply that there is a huge selection of vehicles available that fall between a small hybrid and, say, a Lincoln Navigator.
Some people buy big cars to move stuff around in - most buy them for other, less utility-based reasons... Either way, I still fail to see how the oil companies are responsible for the decision. (That was the point of my post)
I think what the American people like in their cars would come a distant 2nd place to the oil companies that would complain about the US gas guzzlers being removed. I dont understand how US cars seem to be just designed to drink fuel.
Believe me, I have no love for the oil companies... And as a hybrid owner, I like to at least think that I care a little more about these issues than your average joe does, but I cant help but feel that simply blaming the oil companies is an oversimplification, and ultimately just an excuse.
If you look at the variety of cars that are available to consumers today, it is astounding... You have entire fleets of different types of gas-guzzling SUVs, mid-size cars, large cars, compacts, sub-compacts, jeeps, vans, sports cars, mini-sports cars, etc. For any one type of car, you literally have your choice from dozens, if not hundreds, of different models.
How then does it become the oil companies fault when people go out and actively purchase these monster SUVs? As I mentioned before, I bought an awesome (IMHO, at least;) Honda hybrid-car for about half the price of an SUV... I get great gas mileage, it handles beautifully --- whats the problem? How does an oil company affect me making the decision to buy (or not to buy) a sensible car like this one? How was it that I somehow avoided their influence, whereas many others do not?
It would be one thing if the gas-guzzlers were cheaper than the fuel-sippers -- then you could argue that your average american simply could not afford to be environmentally responsible... but it is the other way around! In reality, this is a cultural problem... Americans tend to want "bigger-better-more"... The oil companies at capitalizing on this fact - but they are not the source of the problem.
It's not the basic experiment that is trivial. It's the "over the Internet" part. The story would have gotten no coverage had the experimenters been in adjacent rooms.
Probably true, but so what? The ultimate point of the experiment is that they are working on reproducing the sense of touch over a distance X... X might be just into the next room, or it might be across the ocean. The Internet is the means by which the latter is possible, and hence is important to the article - but the focus is on the remote touch aspects of the technology, not the Internet.
Of course, we all know the real reason why they do this "dramatic" display across the ocean instead of via a wire to the next room is that they are hoping to increase public interest in their studies (i.e. get funds). The fact that it is over the ocean makes it seem a lot more impressive and works much more effectively on the imagination. If this fact bothers you so much that you cant see how cool this experiement is regardless - as I said before, "lighten up":)
...Why is it that "scientists have done x over the Internet" is automatically newsworthy?
Ahh come on, lighten up:) Two people getting direct, intricate touch feedback from each other while on seperate continents is pretty cool, not to mention a first for humanity...
I know this particular experiment seems trivial, but all first steps are... Give this another 50 years and you will see much cooler applications (including but not limited to all the pr0n ideas made here)
By "not that complex" I meant in terms of the end-user experience... The original post had mentioned that going with a Serial-ATA solution is like "reinventing the wheel" -- I simply meant to say as far as the end-user is concerned, Serial ATA is not any more complex, and in fact might be simpler to setup than IDE or SCSI.
I am sure the inner workings are very complex and I respect that - I just am not particularly concerned with it as I am not an engineer.
How is Serial ATA re-inventing the wheel? It is not that complex - and in fact, seems to me to be a natural progression... Faster speeds, and much more importantly, gets rid of those ribbon cables. Everytime I see one of those stupid cables I cant help but think this is one piece of technology we will be laughing at in 10 years (and if not, we *should* be)
Yes, SCSI is a better solution available "right now" - but this article isnt recommending us to go buy Serial ATA now... It is a simple explanation, a heads-up, concerning technology looming on the short-term horizon.
They want the new Federal law, which would only forbid sending mail with forged headers but not other noxious practices like opt-out only lists- to superceed stronger state laws.
It is still a positive step... Without forged headers it is much easier to know who to boycott.
If you sold a friend an old copy of Photoshop that was on a damaged disc, they would have the right to do exactly what I did - copy the disc for that version from someone else to obtain a working copy.
Well lets put it this way... Had my friend contacted Adobe and told them about the transaction and subsequent problem, do you think they would have shipped out a new photoshop CD for him - or would they have told him the problem lies with the guy who sold him the disc? I would bet on the latter...
Simply put, there is a distinction between buying a retail-priced product and a used/repackaged discount item from a "blowout" store. Most often, when you buy used/repackaged products at such markdowns they are not considered under warranty by the manufacturer. Now, had you gone into Best Buy and payed $400 bucks only to get home and find a faulty disc - then I would cheerfully agree that it would be ok to copy another disc as a replacement... Adobe themselves (if not Best Buy) would have given you a new CD anyways - your way is simply quicker and easier for you. (That is why the act is justified).
An example of this distinction: If I walk into Joe's Happy Mart and buy a used Honda Civic sitting in the lot for $250 - and then go home only to find it is a lemon, do you think Honda would in effect owe me another car of the same quality that I would get at a Honda dealer? Of course not - Honda would in no way recognize that sale... They would direct me to Happy Joe to see if I can work something out - if not, that is my problem.
On the flip side, Honda now sells used cars marked as Honda Certified. This means that Honda themselves have looked at the product and are, in effect, stamping their seal of approval... By paying a little more for the Honda-Certified used car, I would then also be awarded some protection in the event of product failure (read: it would have some sort of warranty attached to it)
As for the working serial number - I have deleted/installed Photoshop from my trusty Photoshop 5 (didnt like version 6) disc about 20 times since I got it a couple years ago... The serial key works repeatedly - unlike MS with WinXP they do not check to see if your number has been installed before and require an explanation to re-use the key... Your serial key could have been used many times by the original owner and there is no way to tell now.
I'm not willing to pay again for a product I own, so I used CloneCD to dupe a friend's disc.
Look, Im not taking sides on the whole pirating issue - but your logic is clearly flawed.
You bought the game used... If it was damaged, then your problem lies with the "cheap blowout store" - not with the game developer.
By your logic, I could technically sell a friend a 5 year old, scratched-up, non-working Photoshop CD for one dollar... And when, lo and behold, the CD doesnt work correctly, he then has the green light to pirate Photoshop for the rest of his life because "he already owns it"...
Again, Im not taking sides on the issue or whether its ok to pirate games/photoshop/whatever - just didnt think your argument made sense.
Its like Ford saying their trucks are better than Chevy, and Chevy saying their trucks are better than Ford.
This strategy has existed for decades and I find it not funny nor worth getting your panties in a bunch about.
My panties are most certainly not in a bunch, but I can definitely see the humor in this new MS ad. Not because both Apple and MS are both saying that their product is superior to the other, but because MS has specifically copied Apple's current ad campaign in an obvious way.
A similar example would be if Discover copied Mastercard's "priceless" campaign.
Little Timmy's first baseball glove: 40 dollars.
New batting glove: 25 dollars.
Looking into dad's eyes after his first home-run: Beyond price.
Discover.
Personally, I've never known anyone that played Tomb Raider for the puzzles, and I'm not attracted to the large-breasted charicature in center-screen, so I simply don't play.
Really? I thought the first tomb-raider was quite good. Not only were the graphics really good (for the time of course) but it was just fun doing backflips over wolves and simultaneously firing off double pistols.:)
I bought the next two sequels, but more or less just became less and less interested because it felt like you were doing the same kinds of puzzles/fights again and again. I think *that* is the downfall of the series - not Laura's appearance.
Consider this : given the fact that both are so refined already, if both worked together, you'd have a UI that easily bypasses anything MS can come up
I agree - But it would be essential that the two groups have a unified vision and focus as they progressed. Otherwise, the project could easily become bogged down as each group argued feature X versus feature Y, or how the project was deviating from "the way it should be"...
After all, it is not possible to just "stick products together" like this and come out with a product equal to the sum of its parts.
Bull! - Her album could just as easily turn out to be "ear splitting" or "shitty," or myriad other adjectives... You dont know that its going "crap" necessarily.
Yeah I hear you on the whole cable issue... In my case its AT&T, not Time Warner, that "owns" the cable in our city... However, I think that is a seperate issue because in order for there to be competition, the industry would have to be nationalized... After all, you cant have rival companies all laying their own cables all over the place - that would be a fiasco. This is a tough question - one that I dont have a ready answer to.
However, I am still am not convinced that AOL on the desktop is dangerous in this same regard, because the customer retains their right to make choices... There is no reason why you *have* to run AOL on the desktop. Lumping Time-Warner's cable monopoly in your area is not a valid reason to think AOL is a monopoly on the desktop. In order for you to make this claim, you will have to explain why you are compelled to sign up to AOL even though you do not wish to.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone uses ideas from other peoples' work. Even Akira Kurosawa did.
Very true... Ran is based on Shakespeare's King Lear.
Eeeasssssyyy buddy.... Put doowwwnnn the pool cue...
Your fighting an arguement I did not make, so I really do not know how to respond to most of this post.
;)
My post was intended to be a humorous way of saying the following: I typically find that personalities defined by methods of transportation are not worth expressing in the first place.
Im glad you like your car -- I can honestly say I have no qualms with you owning that car... I wish you only the best with that car.... Not sure where you got the impression that I felt otherwise.
Except that when you take into account the "hidden" costs of owning a gas guzzler ..... then SUVs and their ilk *are* more expensive.
:)
;) Again, I have no love for the oil companies. I just think the root of the problem is cultural in nature, as there are very efficient cars freely available for purchase right here in the US. Unfortunately, they are not "cool" and people are willing to pay much, much more for something far more damaging.
I think perhaps you misread my post, for I was actually trying to say that gas-guzzlers were more expensive... This is true in sheer dollar terms, but also, as you mentioned, it is compounded when you add on other "invisible" costs such as those to the environment. We are definitely in agreement here.
But I bet they contribute a lot of money to make sure the government doesn't raise taxes on gasoline.
I am actually very interested in this and do wonder why prices of gasoline are so much more expensive elsewhere compared to the U.S. I always figured it could involve oil company payoffs (such as you mentioned) but also that we have "friendly" governments in places like Saudi Arabia always maneuvering to be first in line to sell to the world's number 1 buyer. When Iraq asked the rest of the oil-producing world to boycott US oil sales for one month, not one country agreed to participate. I think its clear where their true loyalties are.
In the end, if our government's policies are for sale then the problem goes much further than the oil companies. Another topic I am passionate about is the end of the two-party system, but that is a topic for another day.
There is a lot of difference between a 2 seater insight with little trunk space due to the huge batteries and an SUV meant to carry something.
Yes there is a big difference -- but i was not trying to convince people that a small hybrid is the ideal car for everyone... Moreso, simply that there is a huge selection of vehicles available that fall between a small hybrid and, say, a Lincoln Navigator.
Some people buy big cars to move stuff around in - most buy them for other, less utility-based reasons... Either way, I still fail to see how the oil companies are responsible for the decision. (That was the point of my post)
I think what the American people like in their cars would come a distant 2nd place to the oil companies that would complain about the US gas guzzlers being removed. I dont understand how US cars seem to be just designed to drink fuel.
;) Honda hybrid-car for about half the price of an SUV... I get great gas mileage, it handles beautifully --- whats the problem? How does an oil company affect me making the decision to buy (or not to buy) a sensible car like this one? How was it that I somehow avoided their influence, whereas many others do not?
... Americans tend to want "bigger-better-more" ... The oil companies at capitalizing on this fact - but they are not the source of the problem.
Believe me, I have no love for the oil companies... And as a hybrid owner, I like to at least think that I care a little more about these issues than your average joe does, but I cant help but feel that simply blaming the oil companies is an oversimplification, and ultimately just an excuse.
If you look at the variety of cars that are available to consumers today, it is astounding... You have entire fleets of different types of gas-guzzling SUVs, mid-size cars, large cars, compacts, sub-compacts, jeeps, vans, sports cars, mini-sports cars, etc. For any one type of car, you literally have your choice from dozens, if not hundreds, of different models.
How then does it become the oil companies fault when people go out and actively purchase these monster SUVs? As I mentioned before, I bought an awesome (IMHO, at least
It would be one thing if the gas-guzzlers were cheaper than the fuel-sippers -- then you could argue that your average american simply could not afford to be environmentally responsible... but it is the other way around! In reality, this is a cultural problem
You are right...in that particular model, I don't think the Big Oil companies will let that go for too long.
No, that is just how all hybrids work. The Honda Insight (which I currently own) works the same way. There is nothing "Big Oil" can do about it.
I want a car that expresses my personality.
There you have it... Proof that elaborate marketing campaigns work wonders.
It's not the basic experiment that is trivial. It's the "over the Internet" part. The story would have gotten no coverage had the experimenters been in adjacent rooms.
:)
Probably true, but so what? The ultimate point of the experiment is that they are working on reproducing the sense of touch over a distance X... X might be just into the next room, or it might be across the ocean. The Internet is the means by which the latter is possible, and hence is important to the article - but the focus is on the remote touch aspects of the technology, not the Internet.
Of course, we all know the real reason why they do this "dramatic" display across the ocean instead of via a wire to the next room is that they are hoping to increase public interest in their studies (i.e. get funds). The fact that it is over the ocean makes it seem a lot more impressive and works much more effectively on the imagination. If this fact bothers you so much that you cant see how cool this experiement is regardless - as I said before, "lighten up"
...Why is it that "scientists have done x over the Internet" is automatically newsworthy?
:) Two people getting direct, intricate touch feedback from each other while on seperate continents is pretty cool, not to mention a first for humanity...
Ahh come on, lighten up
I know this particular experiment seems trivial, but all first steps are... Give this another 50 years and you will see much cooler applications (including but not limited to all the pr0n ideas made here)
Ahh I love replying to ACs ;)
By "not that complex" I meant in terms of the end-user experience... The original post had mentioned that going with a Serial-ATA solution is like "reinventing the wheel" -- I simply meant to say as far as the end-user is concerned, Serial ATA is not any more complex, and in fact might be simpler to setup than IDE or SCSI.
I am sure the inner workings are very complex and I respect that - I just am not particularly concerned with it as I am not an engineer.
... without re-inventing the wheel
How is Serial ATA re-inventing the wheel? It is not that complex - and in fact, seems to me to be a natural progression... Faster speeds, and much more importantly, gets rid of those ribbon cables. Everytime I see one of those stupid cables I cant help but think this is one piece of technology we will be laughing at in 10 years (and if not, we *should* be)
Yes, SCSI is a better solution available "right now" - but this article isnt recommending us to go buy Serial ATA now... It is a simple explanation, a heads-up, concerning technology looming on the short-term horizon.
They want the new Federal law, which would only forbid sending mail with forged headers but not other noxious practices like opt-out only lists- to superceed stronger state laws.
It is still a positive step... Without forged headers it is much easier to know who to boycott.
If you sold a friend an old copy of Photoshop that was on a damaged disc, they would have the right to do exactly what I did - copy the disc for that version from someone else to obtain a working copy.
Well lets put it this way... Had my friend contacted Adobe and told them about the transaction and subsequent problem, do you think they would have shipped out a new photoshop CD for him - or would they have told him the problem lies with the guy who sold him the disc? I would bet on the latter...
Simply put, there is a distinction between buying a retail-priced product and a used/repackaged discount item from a "blowout" store. Most often, when you buy used/repackaged products at such markdowns they are not considered under warranty by the manufacturer. Now, had you gone into Best Buy and payed $400 bucks only to get home and find a faulty disc - then I would cheerfully agree that it would be ok to copy another disc as a replacement... Adobe themselves (if not Best Buy) would have given you a new CD anyways - your way is simply quicker and easier for you. (That is why the act is justified).
An example of this distinction: If I walk into Joe's Happy Mart and buy a used Honda Civic sitting in the lot for $250 - and then go home only to find it is a lemon, do you think Honda would in effect owe me another car of the same quality that I would get at a Honda dealer? Of course not - Honda would in no way recognize that sale... They would direct me to Happy Joe to see if I can work something out - if not, that is my problem.
On the flip side, Honda now sells used cars marked as Honda Certified. This means that Honda themselves have looked at the product and are, in effect, stamping their seal of approval... By paying a little more for the Honda-Certified used car, I would then also be awarded some protection in the event of product failure (read: it would have some sort of warranty attached to it)
As for the working serial number - I have deleted/installed Photoshop from my trusty Photoshop 5 (didnt like version 6) disc about 20 times since I got it a couple years ago... The serial key works repeatedly - unlike MS with WinXP they do not check to see if your number has been installed before and require an explanation to re-use the key... Your serial key could have been used many times by the original owner and there is no way to tell now.
I'm not willing to pay again for a product I own, so I used CloneCD to dupe a friend's disc.
...
Look, Im not taking sides on the whole pirating issue - but your logic is clearly flawed.
You bought the game used... If it was damaged, then your problem lies with the "cheap blowout store" - not with the game developer.
By your logic, I could technically sell a friend a 5 year old, scratched-up, non-working Photoshop CD for one dollar... And when, lo and behold, the CD doesnt work correctly, he then has the green light to pirate Photoshop for the rest of his life because "he already owns it"
Again, Im not taking sides on the issue or whether its ok to pirate games/photoshop/whatever - just didnt think your argument made sense.
Its like Ford saying their trucks are better than Chevy, and Chevy saying their trucks are better than Ford.
This strategy has existed for decades and I find it not funny nor worth getting your panties in a bunch about.
My panties are most certainly not in a bunch, but I can definitely see the humor in this new MS ad. Not because both Apple and MS are both saying that their product is superior to the other, but because MS has specifically copied Apple's current ad campaign in an obvious way.
A similar example would be if Discover copied Mastercard's "priceless" campaign.
Little Timmy's first baseball glove: 40 dollars.
New batting glove: 25 dollars.
Looking into dad's eyes after his first home-run: Beyond price.
Discover.
Personally, I've never known anyone that played Tomb Raider for the puzzles, and I'm not attracted to the large-breasted charicature in center-screen, so I simply don't play.
:)
Really? I thought the first tomb-raider was quite good. Not only were the graphics really good (for the time of course) but it was just fun doing backflips over wolves and simultaneously firing off double pistols.
I bought the next two sequels, but more or less just became less and less interested because it felt like you were doing the same kinds of puzzles/fights again and again. I think *that* is the downfall of the series - not Laura's appearance.
Wow... I had a dream!
*golf clap*
Consider this : given the fact that both are so refined already, if both worked together, you'd have a UI that easily bypasses anything MS can come up
...
I agree - But it would be essential that the two groups have a unified vision and focus as they progressed. Otherwise, the project could easily become bogged down as each group argued feature X versus feature Y, or how the project was deviating from "the way it should be"
After all, it is not possible to just "stick products together" like this and come out with a product equal to the sum of its parts.
Speed never killed anyone.
That is simply not true.
Hmmm... Sony allows mod chips, stock goes up. Microsoft doesn't allow modchips, stock goes down.
What a silly conclusion... As if there aren't a million other reasons why stocks fluctuate on a given day.
... You need a hobby.
Heheh... Its slang, but believe me, its used as an adjective quite often.
What if Celine's latest album is crap?
That kind of question is a priori.
Bull! - Her album could just as easily turn out to be "ear splitting" or "shitty," or myriad other adjectives... You dont know that its going "crap" necessarily.
Yeah I hear you on the whole cable issue... In my case its AT&T, not Time Warner, that "owns" the cable in our city... However, I think that is a seperate issue because in order for there to be competition, the industry would have to be nationalized... After all, you cant have rival companies all laying their own cables all over the place - that would be a fiasco. This is a tough question - one that I dont have a ready answer to.
However, I am still am not convinced that AOL on the desktop is dangerous in this same regard, because the customer retains their right to make choices... There is no reason why you *have* to run AOL on the desktop. Lumping Time-Warner's cable monopoly in your area is not a valid reason to think AOL is a monopoly on the desktop. In order for you to make this claim, you will have to explain why you are compelled to sign up to AOL even though you do not wish to.