Re:cripes not this again....
on
Biofeedback Gaming
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
OK, a disclaimer first: I think this is as weak as anyone, though I wouldn't call it gay like one poster above did, since that would be an insult to gays.
However, the site claims to measure not just heart rate and skin conductivity, but the tiny variations in the time interval between heart beats as well. To wit:
The Journey's biofeedback component measures a player's galvanic skin response (GSR) and heart rate variability. GSR measures sweat gland activity. Increased perspiration indicates increased autonomic nervous system activation, which is associated with increased energy--both positive, like excitement, and negative, like nervousness.
Heart-rate variability is calculated from the differences in heart rate from one heartbeat to another. No two are exactly the same, and you need a device more sophisticated than just taking your pulse to determine it. Greater heart rate variability is the healthy goal, and the game requires greater variability in certain areas in order to move ahead in the game. According to Whitehouse, examining heart rate variability is the fastest growing area in biofeedback because it provides important means of working with our own physiology.
Whether or not this variation means a damn or not has not been determined as far as I can tell (there are no studies cited on the site, just the incredibly long null statement: "examining heart rate variability is the fastest growing area in biofeedback because it provides important means of working with our own physiology". Eh? Hmm, so this activity is the fastest growing because it's important, but why is it important, empirically speaking?)
And more importantly, assuming heart rate variablity is meaningful and interprable (possible, I guess), whether or not their game includes hardware precise enough to measure it, what that precision is (samples/sec on heart?) and/or how much the hardware costs, is indeterminate.
Does anyone have more info or a link to a review more useful than those vague, qualitative testimonials?
In the face of pressure from the tv industry, Replay may be dropping the 30 second skip feature and Tivo doesn't even have it unless you do the little hack and even then it's a pain in the butt.
Please read your reference more carefully. Lots of posts in the thread you cited tried (apparently in vain) to clarify your error. ReplayTV/DM is not considering removing 30-second skip. Even the article summary is clear on this:
"Wired News is reporting that the new owners of ReplayTV are considering dropping the Commercial Advance and Send Show options features." I had bad luck with that function chopping out bits of show anyway. Between that and the 30 second skip function, I'm surprised ReplayTV has lasted this long!
Again, ReplayTV has two features that are useful for avoiding commercials: (1) Commercial Advance, which automagically skips commercials in recorded or timeshifted live TV, with no button pressing or any other sort of user intervention and (2) a 30-second skip button that the user can press to advance past commercials (also works in multiples of 30s by pressing a number key before skip, so 2 + skip = 1 minute advance).
Moreover, reading the actual article you referred to would have revealed to you that ReplayTV/DM is not planning to remove any features from existing models, so commercial advance, 30-second skip, and internet show-sharing are here to stay for existing models. ReplayTV/DM is, however, considering not including commerical advance and/or internet file sharing on future models. There is no talk of removing 30-second skip from future ReplayTV models. Got all that?
Also, the Tivo has no internet file sharing or automatic commercial advance, but the 30-second skip, which isn't enabled by default, is pretty trivial to enable (button-pressing only required, no opening the box or anything else that you might find scary, or reasonably call a pain in the butt).
All that said, I'd me more likely to buy a ReplayTV now than a few months ago. D&M bought 'em, so they're not going anywhere (so the service is not in jeapordy). Software updates with new features for existing models are on the way according to D&M. Heck, D&M even sent out a letter recently to those who bought ReplayTV a few months ago with the rebates, and indicated that they will be honoring the rebates. Future ReplayTV models may be less feature packed (I love commercial advance, personally). And, refurbed units with lifetime service included are available for incredible prices.
before this gets out of hand (there's already 3 or 4 references to pellet guns, bb guns, etc., and this one is modded up insightful), please rtfa and make your jokes reasonable.
or show me the pellet gun with a range of 1.5km.
you know, I can understand the jokesters trying to get in fast without reading the fine article, but why are the mods so anxious to mod something up as insightful, when they haven't taken the time to learn if it really is or not?
Ok, so then when you need info on one of those resumes you do a word search through lots of compressed files? I don't think so...
You don't? I do. htdig with gzip/zip and word doc reading addons does a great job of looking inside all sorts of files for me all the time, compressed or not.
Simulated murder is the same as real murder? Are you fsking insane? That is, are you one of those rare persons over the age of 5 who truly cannot differentiate fantasy from reality? I am honestly shocked by your statement, and I sincerely hope that I am misunderstanding, or you made a mistake, or something.
Please help me understand our outrageous claim, and tell me where you live and work so I can avoid all contact with you.
Re:The situation's aren't comparable.
on
RIAA vs The Economy
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Easy there tiger. Re-read my comment, take a deep breath, and think for a second before you launch another poorly-aimed vitriolic diatribe. Exactly what part of my logic is flawed, again? Maybe you meant to reply to some other post?
I did not say that I (or anyone) was a freedom fighter. I did not say that the RIAA was unjust. You are so angry (why?) that you're completely missing my (valid) point.
To reiterate a key phrase:
I'm not saying it was or is incumbent on the RIAA to do so, but it certainly would have behooved them to do so . . . [arguments to support this position].
You do know what incumbent and behooved mean, don't you? Your post would seem to indicate otherwise. If necessary, please see dictionary.com or a similar reference for clarification. Understanding is key to effective argument.
See, I was trying to point out that the RIAA had an opportunity to nip this whole p2p debacle in the bud a long time ago. I didn't say they had a responsibility to do so (I even went out of my way to point that out). I didn't say that their failure to do so justifies anything. I do think they made a bad business decision (based on fear and ignorance, mostly) and are now flailing about while desperately clutching a failed business model (bitten asses or not), and seeking legislative support for their own bad decisions.
You don't have to agree with me but, if you diasagree, it would be more useful (for both of us), if you'd address my points rather than flaming. Your hateful nonsense is just as (or more) silly and ineffective as the p2p fanboy self-righteous justification that you so vehemently attack.
Re:The situation's aren't comparable.
on
RIAA vs The Economy
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Good points and an excellent clarification, but I have to take issue with this:
You CANNOT compete with someone taking YOUR PRODUCT and giving it away for free.
Yes, you can, at least in this example. You can provide faster, more reliable, higher quality, verified products in a convenient medium chock full of value added aspects (music suggestions, news, special features, artwork, video, etc.) at a reasonable price.
I'm not saying it was or is incumbent on the RIAA to do so, but it certainly would have behooved them to do so rather than try to kill the distribution channel altogether and maintain the status quo. Being legal, and having a huge head start on content, they could have swamped the P2P's into usenet-binaries-like obscurity instead of helping thrust them into the mainstream by failing to fill the huge, obvious vacuum that Napster trickled into before it was shut down and replaced by more slippery P2P's like Kazaalite. Now it's too late.
Opportunity only knocks once (if at all).
Re:They just blame Digital Photography.
on
RIAA vs The Economy
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The war on pot started as a gift to DuPont to stop hemp from competing with their new product: plastic.
Relevant, interesting, and only slightly different from the way I understand it. I thought it was actually nylon. At least that's what I surmise from the excellently supported arguments in Jack Herer's The Emperor Wears No Clothes. Or, maybe you mean plastic fibers, which I suppose is what nylon really is? (Is it?)
Either way, the following excerpts are interesting examples of the inverse (converse?) of what this story is about: a company manipulating legilation to create a better market for an otherwise not-as-attractive product. Contrast this with the RIAA blaming market conditions (or technological advancement) for their lack of profits. Which is worse?
After the 1937 Marijuana Tax law, new DuPont "plastic fibers," under license since 1936 from the German company I.G. Farben (patent surrenders were part of Germany's World War I reparation payments to America), replaced natural hempen fibers. (Some 30% of I.G. Farben, under Hitler, was owned and financed by America's DuPont.) DuPont also introduced Nylon (invented in 1935) to the market after they'd patented it in 1938.
By using 100% hemp or mixing hemp with cotton, you will be able to pass on your shirts, pants and other clothing to your grandchildren. Intelligent spending could essentially replace the use of petrochemical synthetic fibers such as nylon and polyester with tougher, cheaper, cool, absorbent, breathing, biodegradable, natural fibers.
It's interesting to note that on April 29, 1937, two weeks after the Marihuana Tax Act was introduced, DuPont's foremost scientist, Wallace Hume Carothers, the inventor of nylon for DuPont, the world's number one organic chemist, committed suicide by drinking cyanide. Carothers was dead at age 41. . .
An almost unlimited tonnage of natural fiber and cellulose would have become available to the American farmer in 1937, the year DuPont patented nylon and the polluting wood-pulp paper sulfide process. All of hemp's potential value was lost.
Nylon fibers were developed between 1926-1937 by the noted Harvard chemist Wallace Carothers, working from German patents. These polyamides are long fibers based on observed natural products. Carothers, supplied with an open-ended research grant from DuPont, made a comprehensive study of natural cellulose fibers. He duplicated natural fibers in his labs and polyamides - long fibers of a specific chemical process - were developed. (Curiously, Wallace Carothers committed suicide one week after the House Ways and Means Committee, in April of 1937, had the hearings on cannabis and created the bill that would eventually outlaw hemp.)
I try so hard not to be a pedant -- I really do. I've ignored this oh-so-common mistake oh-so-many times, but after that inane article (or, should I say artical?), I can't resist any more.
It's practicAL not practicLE!
Every time I see practicle, it takes several seconds for me to be sure the author isn't referring to some sort of new subatomic particle with practical applications. Sigh. Please stop!
[car ads] all focus on the experience, which I find quite shocking and sad, because it is so thoughtless.
Thinking about something besides what you think is important is not thoughtless. It's just different. Believe it or not, your view just might not be absolutely correct, and others' views might not be absolutely incorrect.
Maybe environmentally friendly cars will be mainstream soon, but it doesn't seem like most people care.
Ever see an ad for one of those new hybrid vehicles? Somebody cares, I guess.
Maybe you live in a place where living without cars is impractical. I don't, there are lots of taxis and I can walk anywhere
Yay for you.
I like to walk a lot, and I walk to work every day.
Yay again. Had enough? I have.
This morning I was hit by a car, crossing the street on my right of way.
Mistake #1: there is no such thing as right-of-way. You have the right to go as long as the way is clear. I'm not saying it was your fault (though that's certainly possible, pedestrians, especially pompous ones, are often oblivious to reality, focusing on fantasies such as "right-of-way"), but it sounds like you could use an attitude adjustment. Consider this a free lesson. Be careful.
I wasn't seriously hurt, but I was hurt and it is jolting; fortunately I wasn't hit by an SUV or I could have been pushed under it.
Also fortunately you weren't hit by a pontiac fiero, or you could have had your legs broken off underneath you, been spun around, smacked your skull on the pavement, and been badly burned as it burst into flames. Or a pinto, in which case you might have been exploded. Point? I mean, besides you hate SUV's. I got that one, and I don't care.
Cars are big
Water is wet. Fire is hot. Birds go tweet. And?
(especially for one person, which they usually contain)
Oh, ok, and this. I see. You think I have too much space in my Jetta, do you? More than I deserve, right? Are you ever wrong about anything? This might be a first.
, dangerous, environmentally unfriendly beasts (especially compared to alternatives) that create a self centered environment.
Which alternatives are better for 20-mile travel through snow? Snowmobiles? Dog sleds?
An industry does not care about the by products of their sales, they just want to make more cash.
That's why they call it industry and not charity. See above references to water, fire, and birds.
People could be more conscious about their choices, and learn to enjoy getting exercise and saving fuel & pollution, and that should be a mainstream thought, not "buy bigger cars," which is where we seem to be now.
Pompous envrionmentalist whackos could be less arrogant about their own selfish, equally subjective ideas about what is good and what is bad, and what should be a mainstream thought.
Preserve [the environmental resources required to produce and operate cars] for whom?
Right. Because human beings are the only ones that matter.
Finally! Someone to take us all to task for ignoring the crude-oil needs of the spotted owl! I mean, who are we to deprive the majestic eagle of it's native tar-pit habitat? How can we deny the crude ore needs of the wild bison?! How much longer must the jackrabbits be denied the fuel for their caddilacs that they so richly deserve but can scant afford to drive out of their hovels? Why!? Why!!!!? Why!!!!!?:)
Well, then you might wanna consider consuming a bit less, or have a few of your 12+? siblings help carry it home.
I mean, even 5 bags would be impossible for me to carry any reasonable distance.
Not-so-recent advancements in the area of affixing a large, lightweight folding receptacle atop a wheeled chassis greatly simplify this task. Do you drive your luggage to the gate at the airport?
And what about safety? I certainly would not feel safe as a young woman walking a mile to my home with an arm full of crap. Perfect target.
Riiight. Broad daylight in post-Giuliani NYC: grocery-lugging girlies are getting hit left and right amid the throngs of uncaring onlookers. And carjackings never happen in the burbs.
everytime you buy something like a fridge or a TV or something big like that, you have to get it delivered? That must be expensive.
It's usually included in the cost, or minimal addon ($20-30), in a city. How much does it cost to *always* maintain a vehicle large enough to carry a fridge for the few times you need such a monstrosity transported?
Thanks, but how about a good one, like one that supports your original claim in some way:
Speed trapping isn't legal in most states (hidden out of view)
I was afraid this was too good to be true. If you have any real info to back up this claim, please post it. I just wasted 30 minutes of my life parsing through mildly interesting, but basically useless info on state speed trap regulations. I should have stopped right after I learned that my state (MA) has no useful anti-speed-trap laws (only limits on speeding duration required to warrant a ticket in cases where no limits are posted, which is pretty much nowhere that I drive), but I wanted to see if indeed most states restrict hidden speed traps.
Then I noticed that this site doesn't even list speed trap limits for even half of the states, so estabilishing that most limit them somehow would be impossible using this website. Boy am I slow. Or maybe just trying to avoid real work?:)
In fact, I can't find any real limits on that site except for California, which seems to state that you can't get a speeding ticket no matter what -- "speed traps" as they define them seem to be ANY speed monitoring, and all types seem to be forbidden, IANAL, and I must be misunderstanding this California law as stated. Nevertheless, according to this site, it is not true that most sites forbid speed traps. Sigh..
So, to avoid a total loss, here's a quick non-legalese summary of what your suggested site does offer . . .
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona - lists conditions where local authorities may and shall alter maximum limits, restrictions on number of speed limit changes per road distance, etc. No restrictions on speed traps being hidden or not are listed.
Arkansas, Missouri - shows procedure for claiming abuse of police power, and (interestingly) in one way or another limits the percentage of local municipal revenue than can come from speeding fines, and/or forces excess speeding ticket income to go to schools or libraries.
Mass. - only limits speed detection methodology in cases where no limit is posted. So, basically, no limits in most places that matter.
Michigan, Texas - no limits, just restrictions on where speeding ticket revenues must be spent (schools, libraries, usually)
Minnesota, New Jersey - no limits whatsoever (at least not on this website)
Finally, here's the California bit, which is the only interesting one. Any lawyer mind helping sort this out?
CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE SECTION
40801. No peace officer or other
person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating
or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation
of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence
as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution
under this code.
40802. (a) A speed trap
is either of the following:
(1) A particular section of a highway
measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated,
or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may
be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel
the known distance.
(2) A particular section of a highway
with a prima facie speed limit that is provided by this code or
by local ordinance under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision
(a) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357,
22358, or 22358.3, if that prima facie speed limit is not justified
by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within five years
prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the
speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device
that measures the speed of moving objects. This paragraph does not
apply to a local street, road, or school zone.
(1) For purposes of this section,
a local street or road is defined by the
Re:I knew I should have patented that!
on
DVRs for Cop Cars
·
· Score: 1
Speed trapping isn't legal in most states (hidden out of view)
HUH!?!? Please provide a link, source, additional info on which states etc. I can't believe this, but I'm hoping it's true, so please back up this claim.
The major downside is probably more video of people at their utter worst prior to and during arrest, a la Cops
er, and how is this a downside? video of people at their utter worst is great entertainment. cops is the most enjoyable when the people are most insane. Psychoanalyze if you must, but I like it.
Over the past 6 or 7 years I've used a palm (handspring visor, to be more precise) hundreds of times, in every Best Buy (and Circuit City, MicroCenter, etc.) in the Boston area to record prices. I've never had anyone even look at me funny.
Maybe it's related to how guilty (or difficult to remove) you look, but I really doubt that happened to anyone ever (note the once-removed story -- it's always a 'friend of mine' in these types of stories.)
In any case, what kind of wuss would leave without making a fuss and forcing them to call the police over something so ridiculous? I could be using my palm to look up my friend's number to call and ask which video card to buy. Fsck them if they don't like it.
Or, maybe this particular Best Buy was located in an airplane and the event happened during takeoff or landing. Or your friend lied to you. One or the other.
Re:What I've been looking for?
on
TiVo Basic
·
· Score: 1
replay tv can do what you want with an open source pc program called dvarchive over fast ethernet (wireless or wired).
there's no info in the article as to whether this device does it or not. but if it has a modem (and not ethernet) as most stock tivo's, it wouldn't be fast enough to transfer any video.
Sorry, this is *trolly*. Feed the troll I shall . . .
When you think about it, companies offering rebates could have as well simply lowered the price of the product and make more convinient for consumers.
If you think this is completely true, then you don't understand the time value of money (basic ecnomics and simple math). $100 today != $100 next month. Don't believe me? Ask your credit card company.
However, they *know* that most people: (1) forget to send them, (2) lose them, (3) fill them incorrectly (even a misspell of a city name is "wrong" for them, (4) or simply cannot fill them because the box where the product came in (and that had the barcode scan number on it) has been long gone in the trash.
(1) yep (2) right and (3) yes, as was pointed out by so many posters so many times before you. (4) - if you're buying a product with a rebate, you might consider checking the box for UPC, and even pay attention to the clerk scanning it (or where they look to get the numbers to type in -- whatever). If you don't know how to fill in the rebate form, ASK before you buy. Find the UPC, the serial number, etc. in advance.
In other words, it's a way for them to screw you. I have to admit I only received *one* check in my entire life out of a rebate, and it arrived so long after the purchase that I had already forgotten about it.
In more accurate other words, it's a way for you to screw yourself. Most properly-submitted rebates are fulfilled (at least in my experience, and all those in the discussions at fatwallet.com on the topic). Those that aren't are from dead or dying companies (not much you can do there), or outright fraud, which usually results in a class-action lawsuit, such as the IOMega case that turned out to be extra juicy compared to the original rebate.
My thought is that any self-respected company who *trully* cares about customers, should simply drop rebates and lower the price of the products (even if not by as much as the value of the actual rebates).
My thought is that any company that wants to stay in business and make money can do rebates and still be perceived to *trully* care about the customers -- perhaps even more than otherwise. It's just a voluntary short-term loan from consumers -- you don't have to agree to the deal. If you're living paycheck-to-paycheck, you probably shouldn't be loaning money to companies.
Best Buy now stores the extended warranty info in their database and you need no form or receipt to get service (and several other stores are following suit).
That said, I always avoid extended warranties except on cellphones. Best Buy's cellphone warranty is pretty liberal -- for $40 ($20 for some cheaper phones, I think) you can, for any reason, get a new phone and trade in your old warranted one (broken or not) for credit of the original, not current, value of your old phone.
They want you to send them the barcode from
the box. Fine. But if they don't acknowledge the
receipt, you are screwed. Because you don't have
the original anymore!
Uh, no. A copy of the filled-in rebate form, UPC, and receipt will usually do the trick. They have no record? You (certified) mail them a copy of the rebate kit you photocopied (or simply scanned, to save paper only print if needed). They'll suddenly find thier record, and mail you the rebate.
And BTW
you don't
have to
hit return
so much.
The form
will word
wrap for you.
Slashdot Mirror
However, the site claims to measure not just heart rate and skin conductivity, but the tiny variations in the time interval between heart beats as well. To wit:
Whether or not this variation means a damn or not has not been determined as far as I can tell (there are no studies cited on the site, just the incredibly long null statement: "examining heart rate variability is the fastest growing area in biofeedback because it provides important means of working with our own physiology". Eh? Hmm, so this activity is the fastest growing because it's important, but why is it important, empirically speaking?)
And more importantly, assuming heart rate variablity is meaningful and interprable (possible, I guess), whether or not their game includes hardware precise enough to measure it, what that precision is (samples/sec on heart?) and/or how much the hardware costs, is indeterminate.
Does anyone have more info or a link to a review more useful than those vague, qualitative testimonials?
In the face of pressure from the tv industry, Replay may be dropping the 30 second skip feature and Tivo doesn't even have it unless you do the little hack and even then it's a pain in the butt.
Please read your reference more carefully. Lots of posts in the thread you cited tried (apparently in vain) to clarify your error. ReplayTV/DM is not considering removing 30-second skip. Even the article summary is clear on this:
"Wired News is reporting that the new owners of ReplayTV are considering dropping the Commercial Advance and Send Show options features." I had bad luck with that function chopping out bits of show anyway. Between that and the 30 second skip function, I'm surprised ReplayTV has lasted this long!
Again, ReplayTV has two features that are useful for avoiding commercials: (1) Commercial Advance, which automagically skips commercials in recorded or timeshifted live TV, with no button pressing or any other sort of user intervention and (2) a 30-second skip button that the user can press to advance past commercials (also works in multiples of 30s by pressing a number key before skip, so 2 + skip = 1 minute advance).
Moreover, reading the actual article you referred to would have revealed to you that ReplayTV/DM is not planning to remove any features from existing models, so commercial advance, 30-second skip, and internet show-sharing are here to stay for existing models. ReplayTV/DM is, however, considering not including commerical advance and/or internet file sharing on future models. There is no talk of removing 30-second skip from future ReplayTV models. Got all that?
Also, the Tivo has no internet file sharing or automatic commercial advance, but the 30-second skip, which isn't enabled by default, is pretty trivial to enable (button-pressing only required, no opening the box or anything else that you might find scary, or reasonably call a pain in the butt).
All that said, I'd me more likely to buy a ReplayTV now than a few months ago. D&M bought 'em, so they're not going anywhere (so the service is not in jeapordy). Software updates with new features for existing models are on the way according to D&M. Heck, D&M even sent out a letter recently to those who bought ReplayTV a few months ago with the rebates, and indicated that they will be honoring the rebates. Future ReplayTV models may be less feature packed (I love commercial advance, personally). And, refurbed units with lifetime service included are available for incredible prices.
before this gets out of hand (there's already 3 or 4 references to pellet guns, bb guns, etc., and this one is modded up insightful), please rtfa and make your jokes reasonable.
or show me the pellet gun with a range of 1.5km.
you know, I can understand the jokesters trying to get in fast without reading the fine article, but why are the mods so anxious to mod something up as insightful, when they haven't taken the time to learn if it really is or not?
Ok, so then when you need info on one of those resumes you do a word search through lots of compressed files? I don't think so...
You don't? I do. htdig with gzip/zip and word doc reading addons does a great job of looking inside all sorts of files for me all the time, compressed or not.
Nice try FUD-master.
Assault is assault and murder is murder, simulated or otherwise.
<kyle's mom's voice>Wha-Wha-WHAT?!?!</kyle's mom's voice>
Simulated murder is the same as real murder? Are you fsking insane? That is, are you one of those rare persons over the age of 5 who truly cannot differentiate fantasy from reality? I am honestly shocked by your statement, and I sincerely hope that I am misunderstanding, or you made a mistake, or something.
Please help me understand our outrageous claim, and tell me where you live and work so I can avoid all contact with you.
Easy there tiger. Re-read my comment, take a deep breath, and think for a second before you launch another poorly-aimed vitriolic diatribe. Exactly what part of my logic is flawed, again? Maybe you meant to reply to some other post?
I did not say that I (or anyone) was a freedom fighter. I did not say that the RIAA was unjust. You are so angry (why?) that you're completely missing my (valid) point.
To reiterate a key phrase:
I'm not saying it was or is incumbent on the RIAA to do so, but it certainly would have behooved them to do so . . . [arguments to support this position].
You do know what incumbent and behooved mean, don't you? Your post would seem to indicate otherwise. If necessary, please see dictionary.com or a similar reference for clarification. Understanding is key to effective argument.
See, I was trying to point out that the RIAA had an opportunity to nip this whole p2p debacle in the bud a long time ago. I didn't say they had a responsibility to do so (I even went out of my way to point that out). I didn't say that their failure to do so justifies anything. I do think they made a bad business decision (based on fear and ignorance, mostly) and are now flailing about while desperately clutching a failed business model (bitten asses or not), and seeking legislative support for their own bad decisions.
You don't have to agree with me but, if you diasagree, it would be more useful (for both of us), if you'd address my points rather than flaming. Your hateful nonsense is just as (or more) silly and ineffective as the p2p fanboy self-righteous justification that you so vehemently attack.
Good points and an excellent clarification, but I have to take issue with this:
You CANNOT compete with someone taking YOUR PRODUCT and giving it away for free.
Yes, you can, at least in this example. You can provide faster, more reliable, higher quality, verified products in a convenient medium chock full of value added aspects (music suggestions, news, special features, artwork, video, etc.) at a reasonable price.
I'm not saying it was or is incumbent on the RIAA to do so, but it certainly would have behooved them to do so rather than try to kill the distribution channel altogether and maintain the status quo. Being legal, and having a huge head start on content, they could have swamped the P2P's into usenet-binaries-like obscurity instead of helping thrust them into the mainstream by failing to fill the huge, obvious vacuum that Napster trickled into before it was shut down and replaced by more slippery P2P's like Kazaalite. Now it's too late.
Opportunity only knocks once (if at all).
Relevant, interesting, and only slightly different from the way I understand it. I thought it was actually nylon. At least that's what I surmise from the excellently supported arguments in Jack Herer's The Emperor Wears No Clothes . Or, maybe you mean plastic fibers, which I suppose is what nylon really is? (Is it?)
Either way, the following excerpts are interesting examples of the inverse (converse?) of what this story is about: a company manipulating legilation to create a better market for an otherwise not-as-attractive product. Contrast this with the RIAA blaming market conditions (or technological advancement) for their lack of profits. Which is worse?
consider yourself corrected. you're wrong. and dumb. maxwell is vomiting in his grave. you're at fault.
I try so hard not to be a pedant -- I really do. I've ignored this oh-so-common mistake oh-so-many times, but after that inane article (or, should I say artical?), I can't resist any more.
It's practicAL not practicLE!
Every time I see practicle, it takes several seconds for me to be sure the author isn't referring to some sort of new subatomic particle with practical applications. Sigh. Please stop!
I mean is it worth fighting wars over
Sure! Especially really easy ones. Duh.
[car ads] all focus on the experience, which I find quite shocking and sad, because it is so thoughtless.
Thinking about something besides what you think is important is not thoughtless. It's just different. Believe it or not, your view just might not be absolutely correct, and others' views might not be absolutely incorrect.
Maybe environmentally friendly cars will be mainstream soon, but it doesn't seem like most people care.
Ever see an ad for one of those new hybrid vehicles? Somebody cares, I guess.
Maybe you live in a place where living without cars is impractical. I don't, there are lots of taxis and I can walk anywhere
Yay for you.
I like to walk a lot, and I walk to work every day.
Yay again. Had enough? I have.
This morning I was hit by a car, crossing the street on my right of way.
Mistake #1: there is no such thing as right-of-way. You have the right to go as long as the way is clear. I'm not saying it was your fault (though that's certainly possible, pedestrians, especially pompous ones, are often oblivious to reality, focusing on fantasies such as "right-of-way"), but it sounds like you could use an attitude adjustment. Consider this a free lesson. Be careful.
I wasn't seriously hurt, but I was hurt and it is jolting; fortunately I wasn't hit by an SUV or I could have been pushed under it.
Also fortunately you weren't hit by a pontiac fiero, or you could have had your legs broken off underneath you, been spun around, smacked your skull on the pavement, and been badly burned as it burst into flames. Or a pinto, in which case you might have been exploded. Point? I mean, besides you hate SUV's. I got that one, and I don't care.
Cars are big
Water is wet. Fire is hot. Birds go tweet. And?
(especially for one person, which they usually contain)
Oh, ok, and this. I see. You think I have too much space in my Jetta, do you? More than I deserve, right? Are you ever wrong about anything? This might be a first.
, dangerous, environmentally unfriendly beasts (especially compared to alternatives) that create a self centered environment.
Which alternatives are better for 20-mile travel through snow? Snowmobiles? Dog sleds?
An industry does not care about the by products of their sales, they just want to make more cash.
That's why they call it industry and not charity. See above references to water, fire, and birds.
People could be more conscious about their choices, and learn to enjoy getting exercise and saving fuel & pollution, and that should be a mainstream thought, not "buy bigger cars," which is where we seem to be now.
Pompous envrionmentalist whackos could be less arrogant about their own selfish, equally subjective ideas about what is good and what is bad, and what should be a mainstream thought.
Preserve [the environmental resources required to produce and operate cars] for whom?
:)
Right. Because human beings are the only ones that matter.
Finally! Someone to take us all to task for ignoring the crude-oil needs of the spotted owl! I mean, who are we to deprive the majestic eagle of it's native tar-pit habitat? How can we deny the crude ore needs of the wild bison?! How much longer must the jackrabbits be denied the fuel for their caddilacs that they so richly deserve but can scant afford to drive out of their hovels? Why!? Why!!!!? Why!!!!!?
What if one days worth of stuff *is* 12 bags?
Well, then you might wanna consider consuming a bit less, or have a few of your 12+? siblings help carry it home.
I mean, even 5 bags would be impossible for me to carry any reasonable distance.
Not-so-recent advancements in the area of affixing a large, lightweight folding receptacle atop a wheeled chassis greatly simplify this task. Do you drive your luggage to the gate at the airport?
And what about safety? I certainly would not feel safe as a young woman walking a mile to my home with an arm full of crap. Perfect target.
Riiight. Broad daylight in post-Giuliani NYC: grocery-lugging girlies are getting hit left and right amid the throngs of uncaring onlookers. And carjackings never happen in the burbs.
everytime you buy something like a fridge or a TV or something big like that, you have to get it delivered? That must be expensive.
It's usually included in the cost, or minimal addon ($20-30), in a city. How much does it cost to *always* maintain a vehicle large enough to carry a fridge for the few times you need such a monstrosity transported?
that what makes my old 4cyl Fiero fast and fuel effecient
:)
. . . not to mention fire-y! (literally) got marshmallows in the trunk?
i weigh 130 pounds and i'd die if i had to pedal a bike up a hill, jerk.
so, are you 4'2", "differently abled", or what?
Speed trapping isn't legal in most states (hidden out of view)
I was afraid this was too good to be true. If you have any real info to back up this claim, please post it. I just wasted 30 minutes of my life parsing through mildly interesting, but basically useless info on state speed trap regulations. I should have stopped right after I learned that my state (MA) has no useful anti-speed-trap laws (only limits on speeding duration required to warrant a ticket in cases where no limits are posted, which is pretty much nowhere that I drive), but I wanted to see if indeed most states restrict hidden speed traps.
Then I noticed that this site doesn't even list speed trap limits for even half of the states, so estabilishing that most limit them somehow would be impossible using this website. Boy am I slow. Or maybe just trying to avoid real work?
In fact, I can't find any real limits on that site except for California, which seems to state that you can't get a speeding ticket no matter what -- "speed traps" as they define them seem to be ANY speed monitoring, and all types seem to be forbidden, IANAL, and I must be misunderstanding this California law as stated. Nevertheless, according to this site, it is not true that most sites forbid speed traps. Sigh..
So, to avoid a total loss, here's a quick non-legalese summary of what your suggested site does offer . . .
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona - lists conditions where local authorities may and shall alter maximum limits, restrictions on number of speed limit changes per road distance, etc. No restrictions on speed traps being hidden or not are listed.
Arkansas, Missouri - shows procedure for claiming abuse of police power, and (interestingly) in one way or another limits the percentage of local municipal revenue than can come from speeding fines, and/or forces excess speeding ticket income to go to schools or libraries.
Mass. - only limits speed detection methodology in cases where no limit is posted. So, basically, no limits in most places that matter.
Michigan, Texas - no limits, just restrictions on where speeding ticket revenues must be spent (schools, libraries, usually)
Minnesota, New Jersey - no limits whatsoever (at least not on this website)
Finally, here's the California bit, which is the only interesting one. Any lawyer mind helping sort this out?
CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE SECTION
40801. No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under this code.
40802. (a) A speed trap is either of the following:
(1) A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.
(2) A particular section of a highway with a prima facie speed limit that is provided by this code or by local ordinance under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357, 22358, or 22358.3, if that prima facie speed limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects. This paragraph does not apply to a local street, road, or school zone.
(1) For purposes of this section, a local street or road is defined by the
Speed trapping isn't legal in most states (hidden out of view)
HUH!?!? Please provide a link, source, additional info on which states etc. I can't believe this, but I'm hoping it's true, so please back up this claim.
The major downside is probably more video of people at their utter worst prior to and during arrest, a la Cops
er, and how is this a downside? video of people at their utter worst is great entertainment. cops is the most enjoyable when the people are most insane. Psychoanalyze if you must, but I like it.
it's working, but slowly. just wait, and keep your window open as long as you can (after download completes). thanks :)
Sorry, I call bullshit.
Over the past 6 or 7 years I've used a palm (handspring visor, to be more precise) hundreds of times, in every Best Buy (and Circuit City, MicroCenter, etc.) in the Boston area to record prices. I've never had anyone even look at me funny.
Maybe it's related to how guilty (or difficult to remove) you look, but I really doubt that happened to anyone ever (note the once-removed story -- it's always a 'friend of mine' in these types of stories.)
In any case, what kind of wuss would leave without making a fuss and forcing them to call the police over something so ridiculous? I could be using my palm to look up my friend's number to call and ask which video card to buy. Fsck them if they don't like it.
Or, maybe this particular Best Buy was located in an airplane and the event happened during takeoff or landing. Or your friend lied to you. One or the other.
replay tv can do what you want with an open source pc program called dvarchive over fast ethernet (wireless or wired).
there's no info in the article as to whether this device does it or not. but if it has a modem (and not ethernet) as most stock tivo's, it wouldn't be fast enough to transfer any video.
Sorry, this is *trolly*. Feed the troll I shall . . .
When you think about it, companies offering rebates could have as well simply lowered the price of the product and make more convinient for consumers.
If you think this is completely true, then you don't understand the time value of money (basic ecnomics and simple math). $100 today != $100 next month. Don't believe me? Ask your credit card company.
However, they *know* that most people: (1) forget to send them, (2) lose them, (3) fill them incorrectly (even a misspell of a city name is "wrong" for them, (4) or simply cannot fill them because the box where the product came in (and that had the barcode scan number on it) has been long gone in the trash.
(1) yep (2) right and (3) yes, as was pointed out by so many posters so many times before you. (4) - if you're buying a product with a rebate, you might consider checking the box for UPC, and even pay attention to the clerk scanning it (or where they look to get the numbers to type in -- whatever). If you don't know how to fill in the rebate form, ASK before you buy. Find the UPC, the serial number, etc. in advance.
In other words, it's a way for them to screw you. I have to admit I only received *one* check in my entire life out of a rebate, and it arrived so long after the purchase that I had already forgotten about it.
In more accurate other words, it's a way for you to screw yourself. Most properly-submitted rebates are fulfilled (at least in my experience, and all those in the discussions at fatwallet.com on the topic). Those that aren't are from dead or dying companies (not much you can do there), or outright fraud, which usually results in a class-action lawsuit, such as the IOMega case that turned out to be extra juicy compared to the original rebate.
My thought is that any self-respected company who *trully* cares about customers, should simply drop rebates and lower the price of the products (even if not by as much as the value of the actual rebates).
My thought is that any company that wants to stay in business and make money can do rebates and still be perceived to *trully* care about the customers -- perhaps even more than otherwise. It's just a voluntary short-term loan from consumers -- you don't have to agree to the deal. If you're living paycheck-to-paycheck, you probably shouldn't be loaning money to companies.
Best Buy now stores the extended warranty info in their database and you need no form or receipt to get service (and several other stores are following suit).
That said, I always avoid extended warranties except on cellphones. Best Buy's cellphone warranty is pretty liberal -- for $40 ($20 for some cheaper phones, I think) you can, for any reason, get a new phone and trade in your old warranted one (broken or not) for credit of the original, not current, value of your old phone.
They want you to send them the barcode from the box. Fine. But if they don't acknowledge the receipt, you are screwed. Because you don't have the original anymore!
Uh, no. A copy of the filled-in rebate form, UPC, and receipt will usually do the trick. They have no record? You (certified) mail them a copy of the rebate kit you photocopied (or simply scanned, to save paper only print if needed). They'll suddenly find thier record, and mail you the rebate.
And BTW
you don't
have to
hit return
so much.
The form
will word
wrap for you.