Fuck that. I can't watch *just* one show at a time. I often have picture in picture up, one show in the window and one on the main screen. When I'm at the computer, I have my tuner to get cable on the desktop while I'm reading slashdot. And when I'm playing gta on the good tv, I'll turn on the tv in the next room to a show I wanna watch and just crank the volume (admittedly, the gta radio is good, but there's only so many times you can listen to the full soundtrack).
Some men do. I collect commercials, personally. I've used my eyetv to record a good many commercials, and have a little over 1 gb in my collection. Of course, I am a) weird and b) studying film.
My high-school theatre techy told us about how much better beta was than vhs. He then went on to tell us how he inherited his grandfather's (massive) beta porn collection. And that was back when it took money to make porn... Now that joe blow (pun) with a $500 camera and a $500 pc can make professional looking porn, I'd say both formats are gonna do just fine...
So it's gonna take 2 EE grad students and the 2 Russian hackers they know over irc. It's more complicated, but it will be done. Not out of necessity, most likely just to show that it can be done.
You utterly missed the point on this one. The deadline is not to providing digital availability of all channels. It is "to give up their analog channels and start broadcasting only in digital by 2009." (First paragraph of the article). Yes, every channel will be available digitally, but, unlike in Canada, they *WON'T* be available in analog. That is the whole point of the switch: to use less bandwidth by switching to digital ONLY.
So yes, analog sets *are* going to go dark. No, Canada has not had "this", specifically, in effect at all, as you still have analog broadcasts in addition to the digital ones.
Sorry to sound so angry, something about the post just irked me.
The Mythbusters did an investigation of Pyramid power the other day. It was pretty entertaining. They actually found, in one case, that an apple half placed under the pyramid survived much better than its counterpart a foot away. Turns out it was cause they cut the apple with their woodshop's circular saw (in other words, majorly un-sterilized...)
My intro film professor actually told us in class that the only reason we had such wonderful cameras to start out with (cheap 1 chip sonys) was because of the homemade porn industry. But that we weren't allowed to make any of our own. Or at least that we wouldn't be getting credit for it.
Who the hell wants to be a lackey with an M.S. doing someone else's research for them? The reason we have so many Ph.D.s is that everyone wants to be the next Einstein or Darwin. They want to be recognized as the guy that changed science as we know it with their amazing discovery. And they're not gonna get that by being "staff scientists" doing an experiment someone else designed and the results of which will have someone else's name on it. The problem is not too many Ph.D.s, its too many smart, driven people who want to do something great for the world (or at least do something that'll make them famous and get the high paying job).
In Texas, at least, it doesn't matter what you score on the breathalyzer. All the policeman has to do is testify that you were without your full mental faculties and you're busted. So if you get out of the car and stumble or sway a little bit, which gets caught in the camera that's *always* on, you're busted, even if you score a 0.07 BAC.
Let's say we kill off a major species of plankton. Who cares? It's just plankton... It's not like we eat it or anything... Then, ten years later, we realize that that was a major food source for a major eating fish for us. Woops... The problem is, things in the ecoSYSTEM work together, as a...system. We kill off one thing, it has consequences on others, often times that we don't see ahead of time. We're very bad about that. Allowing ourselves to willy-nilly kill off species is going to cause massive problems for us. Maybe not tomorrow, but give it 10 years and it could cause some serious shit.
Yes, stuff dies out and goes extinct. Eventually we will, too. To think anything different is pretty fucking arrogant. But to think we can start changing things and killing stuff off and not expect something bad to happen to us as a consequence is just stupid.
If you're looking for good service, Nextel is the way to go. My friend has Nextel. He also works in an underground, plated, shielded physics lab. And he can get service inside. Well, at least when the door is open. But even then, none of his colleagues can get a signal anywhwere on his floor.
I don't know, IBM's been pretty good about being nice to the small guy recently. Of course, a lot of it has to do with linux becoming a big part of its business plan as of late. Opening up large numbers of their copyrights to the GPL was a pretty good start, I think.
Yeah, but they didn't get caught. While that sounds kinda stupid on the one hand, it makes a huge difference on the other hand.
The guy who wrote the bittorrent protocol is a brilliant man who wanted to do something new and amazing. This guy just wanted a free copy of OS 10.4. He's not exactly a developer, nor is he breaking the law in an attempt to start a revolution. He's more of a petty theif that just didn't feel like paying for something than the wild revolutionary.
We respect the merry pranksters and absinthe chuggin bohemians. We don't respect the junkies on the sidewalk and the stoners working in the back of McDonald's.
The EFF has a good argument, but it also brings up a lot of problems.
Plus, I remember there being a California law about it being illegal to give out info you knowingly got from someone who broke an NDF or something like that, which would put all those websites in the wrong. Apple, then, would have just as good an argument, if not better.
I hate people who think like this. "We fucked up Earth, let's go somewhere else now." NO!
Maybe if we put as much time, energy, and MONEY into fixing the Earth, cleaning it up, finding more environmentally friendly solutions for things from energy to food packaging, then we might actually could stay here for a while longer. And enjoy it. When you trash your room after a party, do you just move out? No. You clean it up. Let's try doing that before we think about colonizing a new planet or two.
Took economics. Never heard of a "spillover service." I think what you're talking about, though, is a "public good." The Fire Department is a public good. Roads usually are. Same with "police departments."
A public good, according to wikipedia, a) can be enjoyed by someone while not reducing someone else's enjoyment and b) cannot exclude people once it is created. Normal radio is a good example of a public good. I can listen to a radio station and you can listen to the same radio station in the next room without any loss in quality from me, and the radio station cannot exclude either of us from listening (of course, XM and Sirius have found ways to do exactly that...).
A road is usually a public good, too. I say usually because it is possible to have private roads and/or toll roads, which don't meet the provision of non-exclusivity. Normal roads are generally considered to be public goods, though. If I'm on the road, you can still be on the road without any loss of use, and, legally, we can't be excluded. However, if a road with space for 100 cars (and I'm talking actual surface area, the size of the concrete is exactly the same surface area as 100 cars takes up when packed together) is used by 100 cars, then it can't be used by the 101st person. It's still considered a public good, though. You can disagree if you want to, but if you do, then fire departments and police aren't public goods either, as if every fire fighter is out fighting a fire and another fire springs up, there is no one left to fight that one. I think the reason its considered a public good is that, once one of those cars gets off or one of those fires gets put out, the good is still there to be used by that next person, undiminished.
So why is wireless not a public good? If it is legally required to be on open hubs, then it is no different in radio in that anyone can use it, and it is no different in roads in terms of bandwidth usage. Sure, if they restrict access, then it is no longer a public good, just like XM. But so long as it is legally required to be open, then it still meets the criteria for a public good. Sure, you have to have special equipment to take advantage of it, but the same goes for radio and tv broadcasts.
Whether I think wireless should be provided or not is not part of this discussion. I'm just pointing out that next time, before you berate someone for not knowing something and then try to explain it, make sure you know what you're talking about first.
There's city, legally, with its own city council etc. a few blocks from me within my city. The entire place is 2 blocks long-wise by 8 blocks short-wise. Every lot in the place is valued at over $1 million dollars. Trust me, the number of people in that city without wireless already is *not* a minority.
So why can't this city of 100 or so have a municipal wireless network? People need it about as much as trash pickup. It can't be much more inconvienient to just drive your trash to a local collection point than to have loads of wires all over the place.
Obviously, the people could just form a co-op. They all get together, pay the co-op a certain amount of money per home, and the co-op sets up the wireless network. So why not be efficient and use the same infrastructure that already takes care of water and trash to take of wireless?
Even in a big city, I don't see how providing wireless will automatically lead to vote buying and minority subsidizing. We've got computers people can use in libraries already. Why not check out computers with wireless? Anyone can use them. You can't subsidize something that's already free. Or are libraries a luxury too?
I got addicted to solitaire. Admitedly, it was a handheld video version, but that was just so I didn't have to lug cards around and worry about wind and such.
I'd try to go to sleep at night, but I'd imagine I was still playing, complete with crap deals that don't ever let you win...
I'm not about to go out and tack on shit to an import, but if I'm restoring an old car, the job ain't done until the leathers shiny and the chrome practically blinds passersby. And it's not always what's under the hood. A big Mercedes sedan can often outperform a small sportscar, but I'd still take an RX-6 over the AMG sedan...
Since when has the Bush administration cared about violating international treaties? For that matter, since when has the Bush administration cared about violating the U.S. Constitution...
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rather the laptop... At 800x600, on, say, a 6 foot wall? Wouldn't be much (if any) better than an old big screen with SD.
Fuck that. I can't watch *just* one show at a time. I often have picture in picture up, one show in the window and one on the main screen. When I'm at the computer, I have my tuner to get cable on the desktop while I'm reading slashdot. And when I'm playing gta on the good tv, I'll turn on the tv in the next room to a show I wanna watch and just crank the volume (admittedly, the gta radio is good, but there's only so many times you can listen to the full soundtrack).
Some men do. I collect commercials, personally. I've used my eyetv to record a good many commercials, and have a little over 1 gb in my collection. Of course, I am a) weird and b) studying film.
Its an activity taking place ___________. The part about having beer afterward is implied.
Though, my being in college might have clouded my reality a bit...
My high-school theatre techy told us about how much better beta was than vhs. He then went on to tell us how he inherited his grandfather's (massive) beta porn collection. And that was back when it took money to make porn... Now that joe blow (pun) with a $500 camera and a $500 pc can make professional looking porn, I'd say both formats are gonna do just fine...
So it's gonna take 2 EE grad students and the 2 Russian hackers they know over irc. It's more complicated, but it will be done. Not out of necessity, most likely just to show that it can be done.
You utterly missed the point on this one. The deadline is not to providing digital availability of all channels. It is "to give up their analog channels and start broadcasting only in digital by 2009." (First paragraph of the article). Yes, every channel will be available digitally, but, unlike in Canada, they *WON'T* be available in analog. That is the whole point of the switch: to use less bandwidth by switching to digital ONLY. So yes, analog sets *are* going to go dark. No, Canada has not had "this", specifically, in effect at all, as you still have analog broadcasts in addition to the digital ones. Sorry to sound so angry, something about the post just irked me.
The Mythbusters did an investigation of Pyramid power the other day. It was pretty entertaining. They actually found, in one case, that an apple half placed under the pyramid survived much better than its counterpart a foot away. Turns out it was cause they cut the apple with their woodshop's circular saw (in other words, majorly un-sterilized...)
My intro film professor actually told us in class that the only reason we had such wonderful cameras to start out with (cheap 1 chip sonys) was because of the homemade porn industry. But that we weren't allowed to make any of our own. Or at least that we wouldn't be getting credit for it.
Who the hell wants to be a lackey with an M.S. doing someone else's research for them? The reason we have so many Ph.D.s is that everyone wants to be the next Einstein or Darwin. They want to be recognized as the guy that changed science as we know it with their amazing discovery. And they're not gonna get that by being "staff scientists" doing an experiment someone else designed and the results of which will have someone else's name on it. The problem is not too many Ph.D.s, its too many smart, driven people who want to do something great for the world (or at least do something that'll make them famous and get the high paying job).
In Texas, at least, it doesn't matter what you score on the breathalyzer. All the policeman has to do is testify that you were without your full mental faculties and you're busted. So if you get out of the car and stumble or sway a little bit, which gets caught in the camera that's *always* on, you're busted, even if you score a 0.07 BAC.
That's a stupid argument.
Let's say we kill off a major species of plankton. Who cares? It's just plankton... It's not like we eat it or anything... Then, ten years later, we realize that that was a major food source for a major eating fish for us. Woops... The problem is, things in the ecoSYSTEM work together, as a...system. We kill off one thing, it has consequences on others, often times that we don't see ahead of time. We're very bad about that. Allowing ourselves to willy-nilly kill off species is going to cause massive problems for us. Maybe not tomorrow, but give it 10 years and it could cause some serious shit.
Yes, stuff dies out and goes extinct. Eventually we will, too. To think anything different is pretty fucking arrogant. But to think we can start changing things and killing stuff off and not expect something bad to happen to us as a consequence is just stupid.
If you're looking for good service, Nextel is the way to go. My friend has Nextel. He also works in an underground, plated, shielded physics lab. And he can get service inside. Well, at least when the door is open. But even then, none of his colleagues can get a signal anywhwere on his floor.
At which point I'm assuming she went and changed boyfriends?
I don't know, IBM's been pretty good about being nice to the small guy recently. Of course, a lot of it has to do with linux becoming a big part of its business plan as of late. Opening up large numbers of their copyrights to the GPL was a pretty good start, I think.
Yeah, but they didn't get caught. While that sounds kinda stupid on the one hand, it makes a huge difference on the other hand.
The guy who wrote the bittorrent protocol is a brilliant man who wanted to do something new and amazing. This guy just wanted a free copy of OS 10.4. He's not exactly a developer, nor is he breaking the law in an attempt to start a revolution. He's more of a petty theif that just didn't feel like paying for something than the wild revolutionary.
We respect the merry pranksters and absinthe chuggin bohemians. We don't respect the junkies on the sidewalk and the stoners working in the back of McDonald's.
The EFF has a good argument, but it also brings up a lot of problems.
Plus, I remember there being a California law about it being illegal to give out info you knowingly got from someone who broke an NDF or something like that, which would put all those websites in the wrong. Apple, then, would have just as good an argument, if not better.
I hate people who think like this. "We fucked up Earth, let's go somewhere else now." NO!
Maybe if we put as much time, energy, and MONEY into fixing the Earth, cleaning it up, finding more environmentally friendly solutions for things from energy to food packaging, then we might actually could stay here for a while longer. And enjoy it. When you trash your room after a party, do you just move out? No. You clean it up. Let's try doing that before we think about colonizing a new planet or two.
They control our roads and our mail system. Are those communications media?
Took economics. Never heard of a "spillover service." I think what you're talking about, though, is a "public good." The Fire Department is a public good. Roads usually are. Same with "police departments."
A public good, according to wikipedia, a) can be enjoyed by someone while not reducing someone else's enjoyment and b) cannot exclude people once it is created. Normal radio is a good example of a public good. I can listen to a radio station and you can listen to the same radio station in the next room without any loss in quality from me, and the radio station cannot exclude either of us from listening (of course, XM and Sirius have found ways to do exactly that...).
A road is usually a public good, too. I say usually because it is possible to have private roads and/or toll roads, which don't meet the provision of non-exclusivity. Normal roads are generally considered to be public goods, though. If I'm on the road, you can still be on the road without any loss of use, and, legally, we can't be excluded. However, if a road with space for 100 cars (and I'm talking actual surface area, the size of the concrete is exactly the same surface area as 100 cars takes up when packed together) is used by 100 cars, then it can't be used by the 101st person. It's still considered a public good, though. You can disagree if you want to, but if you do, then fire departments and police aren't public goods either, as if every fire fighter is out fighting a fire and another fire springs up, there is no one left to fight that one. I think the reason its considered a public good is that, once one of those cars gets off or one of those fires gets put out, the good is still there to be used by that next person, undiminished.
So why is wireless not a public good? If it is legally required to be on open hubs, then it is no different in radio in that anyone can use it, and it is no different in roads in terms of bandwidth usage. Sure, if they restrict access, then it is no longer a public good, just like XM. But so long as it is legally required to be open, then it still meets the criteria for a public good. Sure, you have to have special equipment to take advantage of it, but the same goes for radio and tv broadcasts.
Whether I think wireless should be provided or not is not part of this discussion. I'm just pointing out that next time, before you berate someone for not knowing something and then try to explain it, make sure you know what you're talking about first.
There's city, legally, with its own city council etc. a few blocks from me within my city. The entire place is 2 blocks long-wise by 8 blocks short-wise. Every lot in the place is valued at over $1 million dollars. Trust me, the number of people in that city without wireless already is *not* a minority.
So why can't this city of 100 or so have a municipal wireless network? People need it about as much as trash pickup. It can't be much more inconvienient to just drive your trash to a local collection point than to have loads of wires all over the place.
Obviously, the people could just form a co-op. They all get together, pay the co-op a certain amount of money per home, and the co-op sets up the wireless network. So why not be efficient and use the same infrastructure that already takes care of water and trash to take of wireless?
Even in a big city, I don't see how providing wireless will automatically lead to vote buying and minority subsidizing. We've got computers people can use in libraries already. Why not check out computers with wireless? Anyone can use them. You can't subsidize something that's already free. Or are libraries a luxury too?
I don't have a clue what's he's thinking, but I do know I want in on it! The possibilities of the vat of Cheez-Whiz alone, even...
I got addicted to solitaire. Admitedly, it was a handheld video version, but that was just so I didn't have to lug cards around and worry about wind and such.
I'd try to go to sleep at night, but I'd imagine I was still playing, complete with crap deals that don't ever let you win...
I, as a car buff, disagree. Slightly.
I'm not about to go out and tack on shit to an import, but if I'm restoring an old car, the job ain't done until the leathers shiny and the chrome practically blinds passersby. And it's not always what's under the hood. A big Mercedes sedan can often outperform a small sportscar, but I'd still take an RX-6 over the AMG sedan...
Since when has the Bush administration cared about violating international treaties? For that matter, since when has the Bush administration cared about violating the U.S. Constitution...