Why? Galileo claimed the Earth revolves around the Sun, which at the time was quite controversial and extraordinary. However, simply observing the planetary motions proved him right. Nothing extraordinary there.
In this catch-phrase, "extraoridinary evidence" means "extraordinarily strong evidence", not "unusual evidence".
I mean, a paperbak costs what, 7, 8 bucks? You spend that in a movie that lasts a couple of hourse but can't be bothered to pay that for a book that woll last you for years, that you can share with friends and family and reread as much as you want?
If I could get one of those Murphy's-Law kind of laws named after me, it would be this: People who like to copy software always claim they'd buy it if it were half the price. When it was $40 games, I heard they should be $20. When it was $20 CDs, I heard they should be $10. When it was $15 DVDs, I heard they should be $7.50. (OK, I made that one up.) Now apparently $7 paperbacks should be $2.
The second generation of both variants have been released.
No, the Series 2 DirectTivo has not been released yet; it's just the standalone Series 2 that's out, available from TiVo itself or at Best Buy, starting very recently -- like, a week ago. Best Buy is the only B&M chain carrying the new standalones.
The editing process is a very creative one, and one that is as crucial to the content as the writing and producing (o ye of little memory, can't you recall the videos of partying arabs shown after September 11 that had a date stamp of 1994?)
why do DVDs cost the same but take many times more effort, money, and manpower into production?
Why are you convinced this is true? The movie has already been made; the commentary extras may or may not take as long to produce as it does to produce an hour of original recorded music. I don't know how long it takes to properly transfer a movie to video, which you do have to add into the DVD production cost.
Sadly, the standalone TiVos, which must do their own a/v encoding in realtime, are said to degrade the subtle phase information on Pro Logic soundtracks, and the surround degrades (but is not eliminated). I haven't run A/B tests with my own ears on this. Other than that, the sound quality is excellent, to my non-golden ears.
The DirecTiVos support DD 5.1, where the satellite programming is encoded with that.
A couple of years ago, I stumbled across an old "Walt Disney Presents" from the 50's or early 60'sl with a discussion of this. They really spend time on the plausibility and the twist that makes it "believable"
Probably "The Plausible Impossible". There's also a book called (maybe) "The Art of Disney", which talks about the concepts of "squash" and "stretch" in characters when they move.
If you insist that you can do anything you want with anything you own, it's hard to see where the prohibition (which you agree with) against redistribution can come from. You rip the CD, which you own, to your hard drive, which you own; then you take a blank CD-R, which you own, put it in your CD burner, which you own, and end up with a copy, which you own -- so you should be able to give that copy away.
Alternatively, if you think -- as you say you do -- that you can't resistribute because you only own the objects, not the music, that lets in a possibility that maybe they can tell you that you can't rip the CD either.
I believe that if we as a free society were to register all known pedophiles in a national database with pictures, this system could ipso facto provide massive benefits for the endangered young of our nation.
Around here (Boston area), all the big cases are of previously-unknown pedophiles -- usually well-known in their communities as everybody's pal. Public cameras wouldn't do a thing to help.
As the saying sort of goes, "Let their mother worry about it." The idea "I want to see all files *.c in this tree that have the string 'funcname' in them", for instance, comes up all the time in real life; if I used the other combinations you imply a lot, I might have an opinion about them too.
Windows has spoiled people to think that thought isn't required when using a computer.
I've been using Unix systems since 1977; I don't need your advice on how much thinking is appropriate, thanks.
Just like you could (in some strange fashion) consider grep a plugin to find when used like this:
find . -iname blah.txt -exec grep -i hello {} \;
That doesn't mean grep should be embedded in find. In fact, if it was, you yourself would likely cry out in horror (or so we would hope).
Well, I'll tell you...I often want to essentially combine grep and find, and if there was one command that did it more easily than the "find" command you give, I'd use it in a heartbeat. Would it be an elegant program design? Maybe not. But when I'm using it, I don't care how it's designed.
Yup...that means I like the Windows Find applet. Sue me.
I cannot imagine why anyone would watch a show baed on what channel it is on. Don't they know how to read a TV listing and use the remote control.
If the channels have strong and meaningful brands, it makes a lot of sense. For instance, I've been watching The Chronicle on SciFi. Would I have noticed that if it were on Lifetime? More to the point, if I did, wouldn't I have figured it wasn't something I wanted to see?
I have to think that if it were possible to sue over this, someone would have sued MacroVision by now over their DVD copy protection.
About 10 years ago, I sent an affidavit to a guy who was preparing a class action suit against Macrovision for what they do to VHS tapes, making them unplayable on some older TVs. I never heard any more about it, though.
Yeah, I keep seeing references to this esteemed legal theory, but it's obviously false. By this logic, I can go into a convenience store that's got video surveillance, shoot everyone dead, and leave. Because the video tape "can't be a witness". You're making a systematic confusion between the prosecution -- which is the government, just like always -- and the witnesses.
On the other matters: are you saying that if a cop showed up to hand-deliver your photo-ticket, that would make a difference?
I think you're subscribing to legal quackery here.
Slashdot Mirror
You're allowed to close your eyes for a "reasonable amount of time", no more.
What if I just happen to blink......really....slowly.....?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Why? Galileo claimed the Earth revolves around the Sun, which at the time was quite controversial and extraordinary. However, simply observing the planetary motions proved him right. Nothing extraordinary there.
In this catch-phrase, "extraoridinary evidence" means "extraordinarily strong evidence", not "unusual evidence".
I mean, a paperbak costs what, 7, 8 bucks? You spend that in a movie that lasts a couple of hourse but can't be bothered to pay that for a book that woll last you for years, that you can share with friends and family and reread as much as you want?
If I could get one of those Murphy's-Law kind of laws named after me, it would be this: People who like to copy software always claim they'd buy it if it were half the price. When it was $40 games, I heard they should be $20. When it was $20 CDs, I heard they should be $10. When it was $15 DVDs, I heard they should be $7.50. (OK, I made that one up.) Now apparently $7 paperbacks should be $2.
The second generation of both variants have been released.
No, the Series 2 DirectTivo has not been released yet; it's just the standalone Series 2 that's out, available from TiVo itself or at Best Buy, starting very recently -- like, a week ago. Best Buy is the only B&M chain carrying the new standalones.
The editing process is a very creative one, and one that is as crucial to the content as the writing and producing (o ye of little memory, can't you recall the videos of partying arabs shown after September 11 that had a date stamp of 1994?)
False.
why do DVDs cost the same but take many times more effort, money, and manpower into production?
Why are you convinced this is true? The movie has already been made; the commentary extras may or may not take as long to produce as it does to produce an hour of original recorded music. I don't know how long it takes to properly transfer a movie to video, which you do have to add into the DVD production cost.
Yeah, that guy's downloading, but the other guy's uploading, and he's being capped, which is common if not universal for home broadband connectivity.
IIRC, stolen from a Family Guy gag. (Or maybe it went the other way around?)
Nope. It's attbi.com, according to their own information. I'd post a url but I'm not sure you can see it from outside their network.
Sadly, the standalone TiVos, which must do their own a/v encoding in realtime, are said to degrade the subtle phase information on Pro Logic soundtracks, and the surround degrades (but is not eliminated). I haven't run A/B tests with my own ears on this. Other than that, the sound quality is excellent, to my non-golden ears.
The DirecTiVos support DD 5.1, where the satellite programming is encoded with that.
A couple of years ago, I stumbled across an old "Walt Disney Presents" from the 50's or early 60'sl with a discussion of this. They really spend time on the plausibility and the twist that makes it "believable"
Probably "The Plausible Impossible". There's also a book called (maybe) "The Art of Disney", which talks about the concepts of "squash" and "stretch" in characters when they move.
If you insist that you can do anything you want with anything you own, it's hard to see where the prohibition (which you agree with) against redistribution can come from. You rip the CD, which you own, to your hard drive, which you own; then you take a blank CD-R, which you own, put it in your CD burner, which you own, and end up with a copy, which you own -- so you should be able to give that copy away.
Alternatively, if you think -- as you say you do -- that you can't resistribute because you only own the objects, not the music, that lets in a possibility that maybe they can tell you that you can't rip the CD either.
A signature is a wonderful thing, get a signature on the document, the customer can't complain.
That's a lovely theory. In reality, it has two drawbacks:
1. The developers are stuck writing a program that they know will not solve the user's problem. But, dammit, they have a signed piece of paper!
2. The customer will never give you any more business.
I believe that if we as a free society were to register all known pedophiles in a national database with pictures, this system could ipso facto provide massive benefits for the endangered young of our nation.
Around here (Boston area), all the big cases are of previously-unknown pedophiles -- usually well-known in their communities as everybody's pal. Public cameras wouldn't do a thing to help.
Hey, I didn't know that. I haven't checked out new features of grep since God knows when.
/dev/null {} \;
In passing, in the original example
find . -iname blah.txt -exec grep -i hello {} \;
I usually really want
find . -iname '*.txt' -exec grep -i hello
to get the names of the matching file names, which makes it even worse. Plus you get a grep process for each file, which seems pretty clunky.
And at this point I'll admit I don't recognize the -iname option at all; I just know -name.
Okay, what about egrep, fgrep, sed, awk, tr, chmod, chown, gzip, rm, dos2unix, cp, mv, perl, ispell, sort, cat, cut, bash, ...ad nauseum
As the saying sort of goes, "Let their mother worry about it." The idea "I want to see all files *.c in this tree that have the string 'funcname' in them", for instance, comes up all the time in real life; if I used the other combinations you imply a lot, I might have an opinion about them too.
Windows has spoiled people to think that thought isn't required when using a computer.
I've been using Unix systems since 1977; I don't need your advice on how much thinking is appropriate, thanks.
Just like you could (in some strange fashion) consider grep a plugin to find when used like this:
find . -iname blah.txt -exec grep -i hello {} \;
That doesn't mean grep should be embedded in find. In fact, if it was, you yourself would likely cry out in horror (or so we would hope).
Well, I'll tell you...I often want to essentially combine grep and find, and if there was one command that did it more easily than the "find" command you give, I'd use it in a heartbeat. Would it be an elegant program design? Maybe not. But when I'm using it, I don't care how it's designed.
Yup...that means I like the Windows Find applet. Sue me.
Your second sentence: it would be desirable to "get over this border crap between countries and learn to live as one race".
Your first sentence: if you disagree with my taste in TV, you're an idiot.
Gosh, I wonder if there's any tension between those two points of view.
And now the the 0! question has been handled in the subthread, let's dwell on the paradox that is 0 to the 0th power.
We know that 0 to the anything-th is 0.
We know that anything to the 0th is 1.
So 0 to the 0th is....
What was the topic -- Nerd Clue?
FYI -- Millenium is/was on FX, including the pilot.
I cannot imagine why anyone would watch a show baed on what channel it is on. Don't they know how to read a TV listing and use the remote control.
If the channels have strong and meaningful brands, it makes a lot of sense. For instance, I've been watching The Chronicle on SciFi. Would I have noticed that if it were on Lifetime? More to the point, if I did, wouldn't I have figured it wasn't something I wanted to see?
I have to think that if it were possible to sue over this, someone would have sued MacroVision by now over their DVD copy protection.
About 10 years ago, I sent an affidavit to a guy who was preparing a class action suit against Macrovision for what they do to VHS tapes, making them unplayable on some older TVs. I never heard any more about it, though.
Too bad they couldn't reuse those in 2000, for some reason or other.
Yeah, I keep seeing references to this esteemed legal theory, but it's obviously false. By this logic, I can go into a convenience store that's got video surveillance, shoot everyone dead, and leave. Because the video tape "can't be a witness". You're making a systematic confusion between the prosecution -- which is the government, just like always -- and the witnesses.
On the other matters: are you saying that if a cop showed up to hand-deliver your photo-ticket, that would make a difference?
I think you're subscribing to legal quackery here.