Get over yourself! Children of the cold war are numb to the holocaust. Look at our music, our theatrical dramatizations. We will always joke about the potential annihilation of earth, even when we are 90 yrs old and nobody understands us, or our perspective. What can you say when you learn that the "bomb drills" you took part in, to duck and cover were just a way to organize the kids into a "seating chart" where after the blast, they could tell which shadow on the pavement was which kid.
Well, honestly, I will probably buy the third extended release, just like I did with the first two movies, sit down and watch the whole thing, the appendicies stuff, and then rewatch the movie with the cast comentary. Then, when the box set comes out, I will look at it hard for more stuff, and if it is there, you could bet your $$ that I will buy it too, especially if it is a high definition version (not that it really means much to me, I have a standard TV, but it might be the excuse to the wife to buy a HD one. hehehe).
Truth is, I am really curious to see what other work Jackson has in mind beyond King Kong and the Hobbit.
Well, that is part of the problem here you said Patent, as opposed to Copyright. GM/Ford/Chrysler can modify and patent the hell out of each others engines for decades. But if I ran the replace command and replaced "Harry Potter" with "The Amazing Grendol" to tell the same story in a different way, that violates copyright, while it would not violate a patent. You can modify an internal combustion engine and sell it as your own under patent law, this has been proven time and time again. SCO is trying to say that since Linux's story is so similar to theirs, they must own it. Even though, there is no proof that the alleged modification of their story happened. Copyright law makes this problem worse than it should be, in my opinion.
Even under patent law, when a component of a system if found to infringe, the royalties paid are not the price of the entire system, but fair market value of the components found to infringe. SCO charging $700 for the cost of the infringed code components is ludicrous and is not fair market value when with Win XP, you can get the whole OS for only $300, not just comparable components. Even when MS blatantly infringed code back in DOS 6.x, the infringeing code components were not awarded at fee rates higher than the sales cost of the whole OS.
Even in the really remote chance that SCO has a legal leg to stand on, their fee is exhorbitantly high anyways. Kinda interesting that Santa Cruz Operating systems is using the stereotyped Californian legal theory of sue for everything, even when you are probably wrong.
It is ALWAYS very dangerous to legislate must do goals like this. Whole beneficial programs can be scrapped to enforce some Idealistic Goal. Look at what Title 9 did to mens sports for example. This may blow up in our face. As much as I would love to get us out of LEO and on to greater things, this sort of legislation may hinder more than help.
The space shuttle was designed in 1974. We have stayed with the same design since then obviously since we are not flying anything else. So, hence the technology is about 30 years old. This costs us money, and lots of it. Why?!?!? Because with expendable launch vehicles there was a steady demand for and existing design, the companies would compete for the next design with innovation and improvements. (This is the capitalist interaction that a lot of/. 'ers whine about not happing now). Well, since we re-use the same old thing for thirty years, only refitting it with replacement parts. Our space program has stagnated by design. Thus while every man made product under the sun in the great nation of ours has improved over the last 30 years, space launch has not. We still launch with the same old shuttle, and due to a reduce demand, the atlas and titan rockets with some improvements are the alternate for unmanned stuff. Some people will argue that we don't need to change the design because the old ones work fine. If that is the case then shut up and quit bitching about the launch costs ($5,000 to $10,000 / lb)
We fail because, we regulate an industry with such restrictive laws that make innovation impossible for all but the well established businesses that pre-exist the regulations. Lockheed, Boeing, Rockedyne, General Dynamic, etc all fit the pre-existing regulations category. People like X-prize winners spend more time and money reading the rules, and jumping through hoops, and trying to find legal sources of Hydrogen peroxide, than they do trying to innovate. Thus, it is economically not feasible to innovate. You blow your budget at a.com burn rate just trying to read the rules and regs and filing forms and other beurocratic bullshit, while you still haven got permission to test fire your new idea. X-prize competitors valiantly try to improve the world of space launch, and the dragon they fight (federal regulation by FAA and the CFR's) is not the one they should be (defeating gravity so we can have cheaper launch costs). The government rules make regular parts and other normally off the shelf things expensive too! Just compare the cost of buying regular components vs various quality and reliability certified components that come off the same assembly line in the same run.
Why people die is because we use the same spacevehicle for both man and non-man rated duties. There is no benefit to have the shuttle design we currently have. There is no gained benefit for using it the way we do. Cargo should be launched in a non-man rated section of the launch vehicle like we launched the Lunar Excursion Module for the Apollo missions. It (the cargo area, not the LEM itself) was not man rated, so space, weight, and other factors could be optimized. The LEM cargo area was ditched while the LEM was extracted for its duty. The shuttle is entirely man rated. A failure anywhere on the shuttle is a failure on a man rated system that puts the crew in jeopardy. The Apollo mission could have catastrophically lost the cargo area and successfully returned the crew since the man rated portion of the spacecraft was totally compartmentalized from the cargo. The mission would have failed and been aborted, but everyone would have lived. The concept of a reuseable space vehicle works only if the job can be completed more economically by reusing/recycleing the vehicle as opposed to a one time use item. Re-using a man rated space craft at any level of complexity has inherent risk, as you are hoping that you have not used up all of the service life of the by re-use craft. Service life is a VERY hard thing to estimate. Take your car to your mechanic and ask him what month of what year it will last you to. If he tells you a date, he is lying. Now, re-use of a low complexity space vehicle like an Apollo capsule will be easy due to the low complexity. Re-use of a large multipurpose, multilaunch, high complexity space vehicle is fundamentally risky.
Re-use of space vehicles and launch vehicles should be re-evaluated for all
This culture is not strictly a NASA fault. Managers of DOE cleanup programs arbitrarily set artificial schedules with unrelated budgets on a regular basis. They dissagree with the engineered result they recieved as a result of their train wreck style of management and say that someone goofed instead of having the balls to confront their management with the inadequacies of the situation, environment, and their own managment approach. This is the way of things in contracted and non contracted government projects. NASA only made the news when it had casualties result on a high profile project precipitated from years of this style of managing.
The cost of science is hard to predict. Managers fundamentally do not like that. They want a clean $ in for benefit return. This mentality follows all the way up the chain to the people who run the system (voters,politicians, take your pick). They look at the system as a machine and say it is broken when a g.i.g.o. situation yields unfavorable results. So, open up the hood, change parts, and start it up again. Does that solve the g.i.g.o. factor? NO! We have to live with it though. This problem is unlikely to ever go away. Even if we increase NASA's budget, build newer and better spacecraft, and live on the Moon, we will always have this cultural problem that is not just a problem in NASA.
Look at power deregulation for example. The system is regulated for years and they start to see problems down the track, so the government (read managers) jump from the train, deregulation tries to change course but can't (at least not as fast or aseconomically as needed) and we get a train wreck. (high power costs and grid failures, really nothing new to be honest). SO, now people are blaming deregulation for the failures when they got a g.i.g.o situation.
If you power the stirling engine to operate in reverse it will make a very efficient cooling system. (same order of efficiency as in engine operation roughly 25% to 35%) The people at www.stirlingtech.com make cryogenic coolers (77 kelvin operating temp) this way.
Using a stiring engine for heat recovery would likely be counter productive as your cold sink is too small to help drive the engine, this is the cooling problem you are trying to solve in the first place with the chip not cooling enough.
The drawback is to get the efficiency at that small of a scale, the cost will be fairly high. The engines can be made small enough, but for a price probably far too high for the general market. Say about $2,500 each. Then you have to shield the rest of the computer from the NeFeB linear motor/oscillator magnets used to drive the engine in reverse. Another thing is the drawback that thay are probably shock sensitive. So a good whack could cost a fortune to the average pocket book.
Once you comprimise the efficiency to the point of about say 8%, you might as well just give up on the stirling idea and go with a Peltier device since they are solid state and fairly cheap (20$~100$) and already off the shelf.
The high efficiency capabilities of the stirling engine are about the only reason you would want to use one in the first place, so the option is really not available it would seem for a cost effective and mass produced market.
I find that the best tea black additive is a moderate combination of Whisky, Lemon, and Honey.
The British originally put milk into their fine bone china cups before putting the tea in to prevent thermal shocking their china. People do it now for flavor I guess. I have never been a fan of milk, but I can respect other's diversity of tastes.
I am surprised that no one has mentioned the uses of Tea as a brownian motion generator for the improbability drive.
Try to make lemonade with your lemons. Now the North (drop the west part) passage will open up. With the warming of the northern hemisphere, north central asia will have warmer weather and they may be able to grow somthing. They will have shipping lanes to ship the food with, and maybe Siberians can get suntans too.
Just think, this could open up new vacation opportunities! "Explore the Siberian Outback!"
Hypothetically, if a person performs a historical analysis of sedition, rebellion, guerilla warfare, populistic uprising, and the like, for the methods used, the effectiveness of the methods, and suggests that certain modern tools might find application based upon the findings of the analysis. And then publishes this as a guide for the defense against tyrranical governments oppressing their citizenry. Where or what threat is this sort of document to a government for by and of a people? My arguement is based in the censorship aspect of this article (not that the subject individual may have wanted to cause problems). Censorship of ideas because a government feels threatened raises fundamental questions about efficient application of laws and justice. The government whose sole task is to serve the citizens can have conflicting interests when it chooses to censor concepts from the citizens it serves. This sets up the general mode that the government is smarter than the citizens who it serves. Often such situations have in the past evolved into controlling and freedom robbing regimes the citizens regret to have created. Again, my arguement is not to justify the said individual's behavior, but to discuss the government's approach and tools. Censorship is a dangerous thing. I just ask for a vigilant citizenry.
Why is it, that when someone describes in layman terms some basic exothermic chemistry, they are public enemy number 1? Should we hang the acedemics for teaching this chemistry? I am concerned about the wider scale of such generalized concepts in which people are categorized as criminals for learning and retaining knowledge that makes other's feel threatened. From cell phone cloning, to virus generation, to installing NOS on a car, and flying a non FAA Wright Flyer replica. People are increasingly punished for creativity, when they should be punished only for the dangerous and harmful actions they commit. I do not care that I was hit with a rock tied to a stick (tomohawk)only that I was attacked and hit in the first place.
Lets see, perpendicular storage technology
Computer: What is #24 across?
Hard Drive: AUTOEXEC.bat
Computer: And #17 down?
Hard Drive: Control.ini
Computer: Well that doesn't make sense. (BSOD)
This is very interesting. Copyright and other intellectual property cases are to be prosecuted at the owner's level of effort in Civil Court. But when something becomes a criminal case, the government changes which court system you use, You go to the Criminal Courts. In criminal court, the government has to ensure certain things are available if needed such as a jury of your peers. Often times, the government has to offer legal council, and the government is always footing the bill for the prosecution in a criminal case as no other body has legitimacy in that role. This also creates a double standard in the world of intellectual property where copyrights are policed and defended by the government, while patents and trademarks are still owner policed and defended. With criminal cases, jail time, or publicly funded parole policing systems are almost always a result, while civil court simply determines awards that one party pays another in most cases. What we should do is explain to our governmental representation that this additional cost will severely cut into their pork projects, and constipate the judicial system with teenage felons whole swapped Britney Spears, while pissing off their now angry and voting parents. With this perspective in hand, a measure like this could be defeated.
Yes, and after a little investigation, it was discovered that those things on the wright flyer were not antigravity devices either, but simply canvas stretched over a frame. When will people realize that it is the mundane things in new applications that make the difference between a 3 day train ride and a 7 hour flight? I become irritated when "experts" refuse to even acknowledge ingenious innovation. I hope that when the X-prize winning flight happens, they don't say something like "thats not a space ship, it is just a product of a junkyard wars fanatic." because I think that there will be lessons learned that both NASA and Industry could benefit from, if they only payed attention.
In my memory of things, they always want to blame something, and dont want to take resposibility for stuff. From AD&D being devil worship perverting young minds to take the blame away from bad parenting of a heroin addicted teen, to KISS meaning kids in satans service and blaming heavy metal rock for the behavior of bad people, to claiming Harry Potter and Sabrina the teenage witch are warping our childeren, to lazer tag teaching childeren firearm combat skills, to cops and robbers encouraging children to become authoritarian cops, or anti-authoritarian criminals. Stating that coin operated video games teach childeren to gamble, that wine coolers encourage underage drinking, that car racing games and movies encourage reckless driving in teens. What other excuses are there? How about McDonalds made me fat! Or the president didnt call that a sex act! Maybe this one, the lawyers and their friends told me that I didn't have to pay for what I stole, as long as I can convince the court otherwise. Or maybe, Bill Gates and the crooked CEO's can blame Monopoly for their behavior. How about Red China or the Homeland Defense Agency (et.al.) blaming the book 1984 for their totalitarian ideas! Maybe Osama Binladen and the Taliban have an excuse too. Maybe, they played too much Risk and wanted to build up a New Persian Empire. I would blame the hippies for what I see as extremely irresponsible politics, but then, I would be making them into a scape goat too. Video Games are just the next victim. Though I am curious what excuse reality TV is going to be used for. Can anyone else add to the list?
If we can ban games for the anti law enforcement content, can we ban games with content of overzealous law enforcement knuckleheads who take the law into their own hands? After all, I would like to reduce the number of people in society who when asked about their career aspirations pretty much said "I want to be a cop so I can shoot people". (like many football players at my highschool)
Thankyou Govn. Gary Locke!
Re:Skip back 8 seconds
on
TiVo For Radio?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Audio files of NPR shows are typically available at the NPR.org web site the following day. They even keep audio archives.
I am a user for the past 15 years.
Well lets see here,
Hardware mods and security mods. To create more annoying incompatibilities with other software, to further their market mind control abilities.
Bells and whistles out your ears to slow your system down to the crawl of an 8086 while you pay $$$ for the new high end Intel thus artificially increaseing a need for the next new hopped up INTEL chip. So the self feeding cycle ensues. New OS bells and whistles to slow it down.
I have given up trying to 'work the system' to do what I want with Win 2k and Win eXtra Pain. You claim you have documentation available. I paid out $200 for an OS that didn't come with a manual. I am forced to use a web page for a reference on how to get the thing to work.
MS threatens they want to charge subscriptions to keep the os current, or else. O great, more of my money for a product that has been reducing my confidence level with each revision.
Yes, I know some developers who develop software for MS products. I know MS employees who work for Big Bill.
As for running an enertainment system.
I have a stereo system! A nice one too, it'll wake the neighborhood. I have a palm pilot, nice one too, it keeps me on schedule. I have music, good stuff too, it gets the blood pumping. Why would I think about buying MS's version when mine works perfectly fine?
If MS cannot keep their original product reasonably priced, with reasonable standards to manipulate the system, and reasonable explanations, and reasonable interfaces with other hardware and software. I will take my $$$ and go elsewhere. I am NOT going to buy more of their product in NEW fields they have little expereince in, if they cannot keep their stuff together in their 'own game' which at one time WAS operating systems.
I play games, check email, and do budget stuff on my computer. If I can get the games I want to operate on Linux, I think I will jump ship, next time MS makes a system that I 'cannot operate without'.
They consistently claim that open source software risks being a rube-goldberg device kluge job. It is ironic they say that when that is exactly how I have felt about the Windows OS since win '95 came out. How could Linux be any worse?
Slashdot Mirror
go watch Dr. Strangelove or something.
Truth is, I am really curious to see what other work Jackson has in mind beyond King Kong and the Hobbit.
Even under patent law, when a component of a system if found to infringe, the royalties paid are not the price of the entire system, but fair market value of the components found to infringe. SCO charging $700 for the cost of the infringed code components is ludicrous and is not fair market value when with Win XP, you can get the whole OS for only $300, not just comparable components. Even when MS blatantly infringed code back in DOS 6.x, the infringeing code components were not awarded at fee rates higher than the sales cost of the whole OS.
Even in the really remote chance that SCO has a legal leg to stand on, their fee is exhorbitantly high anyways. Kinda interesting that Santa Cruz Operating systems is using the stereotyped Californian legal theory of sue for everything, even when you are probably wrong.
What, you found some historic space race info. Neat, how is this news? I knew about this stuff when I was 8 years old. A long time ago...
It is ALWAYS very dangerous to legislate must do goals like this. Whole beneficial programs can be scrapped to enforce some Idealistic Goal. Look at what Title 9 did to mens sports for example. This may blow up in our face. As much as I would love to get us out of LEO and on to greater things, this sort of legislation may hinder more than help.
Really? I don't eat in my office Jacuzzi. Though a slushy drink sounds good.
We fail because, we regulate an industry with such restrictive laws that make innovation impossible for all but the well established businesses that pre-exist the regulations. Lockheed, Boeing, Rockedyne, General Dynamic, etc all fit the pre-existing regulations category. People like X-prize winners spend more time and money reading the rules, and jumping through hoops, and trying to find legal sources of Hydrogen peroxide, than they do trying to innovate. Thus, it is economically not feasible to innovate. You blow your budget at a .com burn rate just trying to read the rules and regs and filing forms and other beurocratic bullshit, while you still haven got permission to test fire your new idea. X-prize competitors valiantly try to improve the world of space launch, and the dragon they fight (federal regulation by FAA and the CFR's) is not the one they should be (defeating gravity so we can have cheaper launch costs). The government rules make regular parts and other normally off the shelf things expensive too! Just compare the cost of buying regular components vs various quality and reliability certified components that come off the same assembly line in the same run.
Why people die is because we use the same spacevehicle for both man and non-man rated duties. There is no benefit to have the shuttle design we currently have. There is no gained benefit for using it the way we do. Cargo should be launched in a non-man rated section of the launch vehicle like we launched the Lunar Excursion Module for the Apollo missions. It (the cargo area, not the LEM itself) was not man rated, so space, weight, and other factors could be optimized. The LEM cargo area was ditched while the LEM was extracted for its duty. The shuttle is entirely man rated. A failure anywhere on the shuttle is a failure on a man rated system that puts the crew in jeopardy. The Apollo mission could have catastrophically lost the cargo area and successfully returned the crew since the man rated portion of the spacecraft was totally compartmentalized from the cargo. The mission would have failed and been aborted, but everyone would have lived. The concept of a reuseable space vehicle works only if the job can be completed more economically by reusing/recycleing the vehicle as opposed to a one time use item. Re-using a man rated space craft at any level of complexity has inherent risk, as you are hoping that you have not used up all of the service life of the by re-use craft. Service life is a VERY hard thing to estimate. Take your car to your mechanic and ask him what month of what year it will last you to. If he tells you a date, he is lying. Now, re-use of a low complexity space vehicle like an Apollo capsule will be easy due to the low complexity. Re-use of a large multipurpose, multilaunch, high complexity space vehicle is fundamentally risky.
Re-use of space vehicles and launch vehicles should be re-evaluated for all
They tried, but they could not get a good test to validate the design, there was too much background noise.
Are there any optical interferometry software packages out there for amature astronomers to use?
What would the benefit(s?) be of going to such a system?
The cost of science is hard to predict. Managers fundamentally do not like that. They want a clean $ in for benefit return. This mentality follows all the way up the chain to the people who run the system (voters,politicians, take your pick). They look at the system as a machine and say it is broken when a g.i.g.o. situation yields unfavorable results. So, open up the hood, change parts, and start it up again. Does that solve the g.i.g.o. factor? NO! We have to live with it though. This problem is unlikely to ever go away. Even if we increase NASA's budget, build newer and better spacecraft, and live on the Moon, we will always have this cultural problem that is not just a problem in NASA.
Look at power deregulation for example. The system is regulated for years and they start to see problems down the track, so the government (read managers) jump from the train, deregulation tries to change course but can't (at least not as fast or aseconomically as needed) and we get a train wreck. (high power costs and grid failures, really nothing new to be honest). SO, now people are blaming deregulation for the failures when they got a g.i.g.o situation.
It really is a stupid user g.i.g.o. type problem.
Using a stiring engine for heat recovery would likely be counter productive as your cold sink is too small to help drive the engine, this is the cooling problem you are trying to solve in the first place with the chip not cooling enough.
The drawback is to get the efficiency at that small of a scale, the cost will be fairly high. The engines can be made small enough, but for a price probably far too high for the general market. Say about $2,500 each. Then you have to shield the rest of the computer from the NeFeB linear motor/oscillator magnets used to drive the engine in reverse. Another thing is the drawback that thay are probably shock sensitive. So a good whack could cost a fortune to the average pocket book.
Once you comprimise the efficiency to the point of about say 8%, you might as well just give up on the stirling idea and go with a Peltier device since they are solid state and fairly cheap (20$~100$) and already off the shelf.
The high efficiency capabilities of the stirling engine are about the only reason you would want to use one in the first place, so the option is really not available it would seem for a cost effective and mass produced market.
The British originally put milk into their fine bone china cups before putting the tea in to prevent thermal shocking their china. People do it now for flavor I guess. I have never been a fan of milk, but I can respect other's diversity of tastes.
I am surprised that no one has mentioned the uses of Tea as a brownian motion generator for the improbability drive.
Just think, this could open up new vacation opportunities! "Explore the Siberian Outback!"
Hypothetically, if a person performs a historical analysis of sedition, rebellion, guerilla warfare, populistic uprising, and the like, for the methods used, the effectiveness of the methods, and suggests that certain modern tools might find application based upon the findings of the analysis. And then publishes this as a guide for the defense against tyrranical governments oppressing their citizenry. Where or what threat is this sort of document to a government for by and of a people? My arguement is based in the censorship aspect of this article (not that the subject individual may have wanted to cause problems). Censorship of ideas because a government feels threatened raises fundamental questions about efficient application of laws and justice. The government whose sole task is to serve the citizens can have conflicting interests when it chooses to censor concepts from the citizens it serves. This sets up the general mode that the government is smarter than the citizens who it serves. Often such situations have in the past evolved into controlling and freedom robbing regimes the citizens regret to have created. Again, my arguement is not to justify the said individual's behavior, but to discuss the government's approach and tools. Censorship is a dangerous thing. I just ask for a vigilant citizenry.
Why is it, that when someone describes in layman terms some basic exothermic chemistry, they are public enemy number 1? Should we hang the acedemics for teaching this chemistry? I am concerned about the wider scale of such generalized concepts in which people are categorized as criminals for learning and retaining knowledge that makes other's feel threatened. From cell phone cloning, to virus generation, to installing NOS on a car, and flying a non FAA Wright Flyer replica. People are increasingly punished for creativity, when they should be punished only for the dangerous and harmful actions they commit. I do not care that I was hit with a rock tied to a stick (tomohawk)only that I was attacked and hit in the first place.
Lets see, perpendicular storage technology Computer: What is #24 across? Hard Drive: AUTOEXEC.bat Computer: And #17 down? Hard Drive: Control.ini Computer: Well that doesn't make sense. (BSOD)
This is very interesting. Copyright and other intellectual property cases are to be prosecuted at the owner's level of effort in Civil Court. But when something becomes a criminal case, the government changes which court system you use, You go to the Criminal Courts. In criminal court, the government has to ensure certain things are available if needed such as a jury of your peers. Often times, the government has to offer legal council, and the government is always footing the bill for the prosecution in a criminal case as no other body has legitimacy in that role. This also creates a double standard in the world of intellectual property where copyrights are policed and defended by the government, while patents and trademarks are still owner policed and defended. With criminal cases, jail time, or publicly funded parole policing systems are almost always a result, while civil court simply determines awards that one party pays another in most cases. What we should do is explain to our governmental representation that this additional cost will severely cut into their pork projects, and constipate the judicial system with teenage felons whole swapped Britney Spears, while pissing off their now angry and voting parents. With this perspective in hand, a measure like this could be defeated.
Yes, and after a little investigation, it was discovered that those things on the wright flyer were not antigravity devices either, but simply canvas stretched over a frame. When will people realize that it is the mundane things in new applications that make the difference between a 3 day train ride and a 7 hour flight? I become irritated when "experts" refuse to even acknowledge ingenious innovation. I hope that when the X-prize winning flight happens, they don't say something like "thats not a space ship, it is just a product of a junkyard wars fanatic." because I think that there will be lessons learned that both NASA and Industry could benefit from, if they only payed attention.
In my memory of things, they always want to blame something, and dont want to take resposibility for stuff. From AD&D being devil worship perverting young minds to take the blame away from bad parenting of a heroin addicted teen, to KISS meaning kids in satans service and blaming heavy metal rock for the behavior of bad people, to claiming Harry Potter and Sabrina the teenage witch are warping our childeren, to lazer tag teaching childeren firearm combat skills, to cops and robbers encouraging children to become authoritarian cops, or anti-authoritarian criminals. Stating that coin operated video games teach childeren to gamble, that wine coolers encourage underage drinking, that car racing games and movies encourage reckless driving in teens. What other excuses are there? How about McDonalds made me fat! Or the president didnt call that a sex act! Maybe this one, the lawyers and their friends told me that I didn't have to pay for what I stole, as long as I can convince the court otherwise. Or maybe, Bill Gates and the crooked CEO's can blame Monopoly for their behavior. How about Red China or the Homeland Defense Agency (et.al.) blaming the book 1984 for their totalitarian ideas! Maybe Osama Binladen and the Taliban have an excuse too. Maybe, they played too much Risk and wanted to build up a New Persian Empire. I would blame the hippies for what I see as extremely irresponsible politics, but then, I would be making them into a scape goat too. Video Games are just the next victim. Though I am curious what excuse reality TV is going to be used for. Can anyone else add to the list?
If we can ban games for the anti law enforcement content, can we ban games with content of overzealous law enforcement knuckleheads who take the law into their own hands? After all, I would like to reduce the number of people in society who when asked about their career aspirations pretty much said "I want to be a cop so I can shoot people". (like many football players at my highschool) Thankyou Govn. Gary Locke!
Audio files of NPR shows are typically available at the NPR.org web site the following day. They even keep audio archives.
So, Prometheus brings fire to humanity and humanity decides to ban fire when some people got burnt.
Lets throw rocks at prometheus! Back to the Cave!
I am a user for the past 15 years. Well lets see here, Hardware mods and security mods. To create more annoying incompatibilities with other software, to further their market mind control abilities. Bells and whistles out your ears to slow your system down to the crawl of an 8086 while you pay $$$ for the new high end Intel thus artificially increaseing a need for the next new hopped up INTEL chip. So the self feeding cycle ensues. New OS bells and whistles to slow it down. I have given up trying to 'work the system' to do what I want with Win 2k and Win eXtra Pain. You claim you have documentation available. I paid out $200 for an OS that didn't come with a manual. I am forced to use a web page for a reference on how to get the thing to work. MS threatens they want to charge subscriptions to keep the os current, or else. O great, more of my money for a product that has been reducing my confidence level with each revision. Yes, I know some developers who develop software for MS products. I know MS employees who work for Big Bill. As for running an enertainment system. I have a stereo system! A nice one too, it'll wake the neighborhood. I have a palm pilot, nice one too, it keeps me on schedule. I have music, good stuff too, it gets the blood pumping. Why would I think about buying MS's version when mine works perfectly fine? If MS cannot keep their original product reasonably priced, with reasonable standards to manipulate the system, and reasonable explanations, and reasonable interfaces with other hardware and software. I will take my $$$ and go elsewhere. I am NOT going to buy more of their product in NEW fields they have little expereince in, if they cannot keep their stuff together in their 'own game' which at one time WAS operating systems. I play games, check email, and do budget stuff on my computer. If I can get the games I want to operate on Linux, I think I will jump ship, next time MS makes a system that I 'cannot operate without'. They consistently claim that open source software risks being a rube-goldberg device kluge job. It is ironic they say that when that is exactly how I have felt about the Windows OS since win '95 came out. How could Linux be any worse?
Typically with Microsoft, opting out means using a competitor's software instead.
I just never really pictured a big brother with a bad haircut and glasses, it was always a John Ashcroft or a man in black image.