If you believe acquiring a mod chip and taking apart your console to install it is somehow just as easy as clicking a link in eMule, there's really nothing else I can say.
Pre-modded means... it's already installed for you.
And yes, it's actually easier than downloading an app, installing it, and learning how to use it considering all you need to do is simply go to the site that sells pre-modded system, click "Buy" under "pre-modded ps2/xbox", type in your info, and you're done.
Few days later, you get the system.. ready to go.
Considering you usually burn a game/music to disc anyway, downloading and burning an image to DVD shouldn't be a prob.
Piracy is no more difficult on consoles than anything else. You just need the mod-chip and a DVD burner. There's quite a few sites out there that let you buy pre-modded consoles for relatively cheap.
As for HL2, if you have the game on your HD, you can play it. The crack to circumvent steam checks has been available for quite some time. You should know that. Unless the game itself streams from a company's server, there's no way you can block access to it.
Arguing for piracy? Not necessarily FOR it, but I don't really care either way. People have been saying for ages that piracy will ruin this and that industry. Remember they said that about VHS, casettes, usenet, and P2P.
Nothing has gone anywhere. Hasn't happened and it won't happen. It's just one of those things that you can accept, or you can choose to spend millions upon millions of dollars trying to stop it, but in the end you spend more stopping it than just cutting your losses.
I can't say the same for myself and a few others I know. I downloaded Doom 3 and GTA, but haven't actually purchased them yet. I will, I just haven't.
I think the only game I purchased from these blockbusters was Metroid Prime 2.
I'm not gonna try to justify it. I knew it was wrong, I did it anyway, but it's interesting to point out that GTA, Halo 2, Doom 3, and HL2 were ALL heavily pirated and available weeks ahead of time. Thousands upon thousands of people downloaded and played them.
The question is, how many purchased, how many didn't? Even still, they performed quite well and no one's losing sleep for their lack of performance.
Just goes to show how people can make a mountain out of a mole hill when it comes to piracy. They make it seem like much more than it really is.. "If you download this game, how can I put braces on my kid's teeth?"
"Uh hm... well, considering your ONE game sold more than the best movie of all time, I think you'll do just fine with those braces."
Why is blockbuster in quotes? They *are* blockbuster titles...
Anyway, video games sequels aren't anything like movie sequels. In almost all cases, video game sequels do better than their originals AND are more fun to play.
See, when you're playing the original, there's a voice going on in your head and the heads of developers: "Damn, it would be cool if we could do THIS..."
When it becomes reality, it's released and you're happy. In another 10 years when gaming technology has evolved tenfold, guess what? Remakes and rereleases of games that would me damn good. You KNOW Doom was fun, so now that we have this amazing technology to have fun with lights, sounds, and eye candy, why not remake it? Maybe in 10 years we'll have virtual mind games like in the movie Strange Days. Doom on that? Yes please.
So.. who cares if it's original or not? It's quite different from Hollywood trying to make a quick buck in doing something like remaking Psycho or remaking Battlefield Earth.
IMO, Spammers and advertisers are both parasites in society.
Sure, traditional advertisers pay, but they're the ones who spend millions of dollars in research to find out what makes people tick in order to push them to buy something. Everything from the colors, voices, and music used in commercials has been researched and is all geared toward product branding in almost every aspect of our life.
Then you have spammers who just toss out billions of ridiculous, although frequently comical, emails in an attempt to sell you viagra or some other completely useless item/service.
See, the spammer is like any other advertiser: they want to try and sell you something.
So they send out a few billion spams, and 20% of them unsubscribe. Instead, they ignore it... and resend the same spam.
What, do they REALLY think if the person took the time to unsubscribe that upon seeing it a second time they'd think, "Oh WAIT, YES, *slaps forehead* I DO need a new pair of sunglasses!!! Silly me. I can't eat carpet"? Sorry, doesn't happen.
I don't know if it's just laziness or what, but ignoring the massive amounts of unsubscribe requests just seems like a waste of time, especially if you're trying to zoom down your list of people to those who will actually buy something.
The only thing they do when companies make a big stink about stupid shit like this is make themselves look bad.
"OOooh you used SCHOLAR, I'm gonna SUE YOU!"
Fuck off.
Just like Microsoft getting pissed at MikeRoweSoft. They really made an ass out of themselves.
We REALLY need to start adding some common sense into IP laws. They don't own the word scholar, they most certainly don't own the word "scholar" in conjunction with a search engine.
I hated the old one. It was too cheesy. The songs were corny, and it was just god awful. I know it's the trend to run about yelling, "Yay, that movie was soooo coooool!", but no, it's not.
Johnny Depp plays good parts, so this should be good....and War of the Worlds by Spielberg? Oh ok, another ID4 then except a scientologist as the lead.
Please folks, reg free links. No one wants to (or should) register for news
------
The battle over digital copyrights and illegal file sharing is often portrayed as a struggle between Internet scofflaws and greedy corporations. Online music junkies with no sense of the marketplace, the argument goes, want to download, copy and share copyrighted materials without restriction. The recording industry, on the other hand, wants to squeeze dollars - by lawsuit and legislation, if necessary - from its property.
The issue, of course, is far subtler than this, but one aspect of the caricature is dead on: the artists are nowhere to be found. A survey released yesterday by the Pew Internet and American Life Project, an arm of the Pew Research Center in Washington, aims to change that. The report, "Artists, Musicians and the Internet," combines and compares the opinions of three groups: the general public, those who identify themselves as artists of various stripes (including filmmakers, writers and digital artists) and a somewhat more self-selecting category of musicians.
Most notably, it is the first large-scale snapshot of what the people who actually produce the goods that downloaders seek (and that the industry jealously guards) think about the Internet and file-sharing.
Among the findings: artists are divided but on the whole not deeply concerned about online file-sharing. Only about half thought that sharing unauthorized copies of music and movies online should be illegal, for instance. And makers of file-sharing software like Kazaa and Grokster may be unnerved to learn that nearly two-thirds said such services should be held responsible for illegal file-swapping; only 15 percent held individual users responsible.
The subset of 2,755 musicians, who were recruited for the survey through e-mail notices, announcements on Web sites and flyers distributed at musicians' conferences, had somewhat different views. Thirty-seven percent, for instance, said the file-sharing services and those who use them ought to share the blame for illegal trades. Only 17 percent singled out the online services themselves as the guilty parties.
"This should solve the problem once and for all about whether anyone can say they speak for all artists," said Jenny Toomey, the executive director of the Future of Music Campaign, a nonprofit organization seeking to bring together the various factions in the copyright wars.
Ms. Toomey, whose group helped draft part of the survey, believes that artists are usually underrepresented in the debates about the high-tech evolution of the industry.
"These decisions need to be made with artists at the table," she said, adding, "it's not enough for both sides to reach out and get an artist who supports their position."
Indeed, big-ticket acts like Metallica and Don Henley have famously denounced illegal file sharing. And the Recording Industry Association of America, which has filed thousands of lawsuits against individual file-sharers, often invokes musicians as prime movers in its crusade.
"Breaking into the music business is no picnic," its Web site reads. "Piracy makes it tougher to survive and even tougher to break through."
File-sharers, on the other hand, often point to high-profile performers like Moby and Chuck D who acknowledge that the online swap meet has provided them with valuable exposure.
"I know for a fact that a lot of people first heard my music by downloading it from Napster or Kazaa," Moby wrote in his online journal last year. "And for this reason I'll always be glad that Napster and Kazaa have existed."
Without questioning the convictions of artists who feel strongly one way or another, however, the Pew survey appears to show that the creative set is both mindful of the benefits the Internet promises and ambivalent about the abuses it facilitates.
"The overall picture," said Lee Rainie, the director of the Pew Project, "is that the musician-artistic community has a much wider ran
When they ask you a real question, like "Is your name [name]?"
Pause and think, answer in your head, "NO it is not. My name is not [name]." but then answer correctly.
As long as there's activity on each question you answer, there's no way for them to detect which ones are lies.
This works on normal polygraphs too. Just make yourself tense up on the easy questions: hold your breath, bite your tongue, rip your toenail off and push UP against the top of your shoe to generate uncomfortable pain.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 27 - Researchers at a government nuclear laboratory and a ceramics company in Salt Lake City say they have found a way to produce pure hydrogen with far less energy than other methods, raising the possibility of using nuclear power to indirectly wean the transportation system from its dependence on oil.
The development would move the country closer to the Energy Department's goal of a "hydrogen economy," in which hydrogen would be created through a variety of means, and would be consumed by devices called fuel cells, to make electricity to run cars and for other purposes. Experts cite three big roadblocks to a hydrogen economy: manufacturing hydrogen cleanly and at low cost, finding a way to ship it and store it on the vehicles that use it, and reducing the astronomical price of fuel cells.
"This is a breakthrough in the first part," said J. Stephen Herring, a consulting engineer at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, which plans to announce the development on Monday with Cerametec Inc. of Salt Lake City.
The developers also said the hydrogen could be used by oil companies to stretch oil supplies even without solving the fuel cell and transportation problems.
Mr. Herring said the experimental work showed the "highest-known production rate of hydrogen by high-temperature electrolysis."
But the plan requires the building of a new kind of nuclear reactor, at a time when the United States is not even building conventional reactors. And the cost estimates are uncertain.
The heart of the plan is an improvement on the most convenient way to make hydrogen, which is to run electric current through water, splitting the H2O molecule into hydrogen and oxygen. This process, called electrolysis, now has a drawback: if the electricity comes from coal, which is the biggest source of power in this country, then the energy value of the ingredients - the amount of energy given off when the fuel is burned - is three and a half to four times larger than the energy value of the product. Also, carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions increase when the additional coal is burned.
Hydrogen can also be made by mixing steam with natural gas and breaking apart both molecules, but the price of natural gas is rising rapidly.
The new method involves running electricity through water that has a very high temperature. As the water molecule breaks up, a ceramic sieve separates the oxygen from the hydrogen. The resulting hydrogen has about half the energy value of the energy put into the process, the developers say. Such losses may be acceptable, or even desirable, because hydrogen for a nuclear reactor can be substituted for oil, which is imported and expensive, and because the basic fuel, uranium, is plentiful.
The idea is to build a reactor that would heat the cooling medium in the nuclear core, in this case helium gas, to about 1,000 degrees Celsius, or more than 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. The existing generation of reactors, used exclusively for electric generation, use water for cooling and heat it to only about 300 degrees Celsius.
The hot gas would be used two ways. It would spin a turbine to make electricity, which could be run through the water being separated. And it would heat that water, to 800 degrees Celsius. But if electricity demand on the power grid ran extremely high, the hydrogen production could easily be shut down for a few hours, and all of the energy could be converted to electricity, designers say.
The goal is to create a reactor that could produce about 300 megawatts of electricity for the grid, enough to run about 300,000 window air-conditioners, or produce about 2.5 kilos of hydrogen per second. When burned, a kilo of hydrogen has about the same energy value as a gallon of unleaded regular gasoline. But fuel cells, which work without burning, get about twice as much work out of each unit of fuel. So if used in automotive fuel cells, the reactor might replace more than 400,000 gallons of gasoline per
The submitter of the story should've put a reg-free link in there (partner=) instead of making people waste their time to register. End of story.
THEN DON'T FUCKING READ IT. Read it somewhere else. If it's not worth the registration, then go without.
I'll continue to read it without registering, thanks. Not only will I read the articles people post, but I will continue to contribute these to stories that are submitted that do not contain reg-free links.
People need to learn. There is no copyright. A story is a story. Their registration is an inconvenience. CNN doesn't require registration. Others should take suit.
*shrug* And if they don't, we'll keep posting the articles AND getting modded up;)
That'd be like saying "taping songs off the radio is radio piracy".
Haha not quite.
I don't really watch or pay attention to commercials to begin with. If I'm watching a show and commercials come on, I either leave the room to do whatever I need to do, or I flip to another channel.
The point is: I'm not watching them either way.
So... what exactly is wrong with downloading TV shows? You can't say "Well the Ads pay for the shows." That's true overall, but not from me since I don't watch em.
Besides, I pay $$ for my cable, and if there's a show I wanted to see that I missed, it's not "oh well, just wait till it's on next time." Screw that. I'll go download it. If they aren't broadcasting it, then they aren't losing anything.
For example, the south park "shit" episode. CC won't air that again and aren't making revenue from it, therefore, I can download it. Yeah yeah, I don't care what the law says, I'm using common sense with this one.
It wasn't a ridiculous comment. People need to seriously get over this shit and start looking at the REAL problem: bad parenting.
My cousin is 12 and is properly educated on these things. He owns San Andreas and Vice City. He's fine. He's a straight A student. At that age you can educate them to the fact that IT'S JUST A GAME. 6 years old? Eh, maybe not. 12? Without a doubt. They get worse shit from school as it is.
Just because a few idiot kids whose parents are total jackasses decide to go out and steal a car doesn't mean you blame it on the game.
Environment doesn't have influence on development as much as a good parent/child relationship. It's a cop out when people say that shit, because think back to when you were a kid and how much your parents tried to shield you from that stuff - yet you always found ways around it (you know you did, so don't deny it).
Slashdot Mirror
Um, wait. So what you're saying is: we're actually supposed to READ these articles?!
You're talking loco... and I like it.
Anyone else disturbed by the fact that people are referred to as "consumers"?
"The author comments that tsunami warnings may not help much, as people often flock to the coastline to see the giant waves."
Call me crazy, but isn't it these very type of people we DON'T want living with us?
I can't get it to run Windows XP or AOL :(
I know everyone likes to be a jokester about this, but the reality is it isn't THAT big and can be easily moved or deflected.
1400 feet isn't that big.
Scientists are smart. In times of need, they will find a solution, and quickly at that.
Don't worry about it.
If you believe acquiring a mod chip and taking apart your console to install it is somehow just as easy as clicking a link in eMule, there's really nothing else I can say.
Pre-modded means... it's already installed for you.
And yes, it's actually easier than downloading an app, installing it, and learning how to use it considering all you need to do is simply go to the site that sells pre-modded system, click "Buy" under "pre-modded ps2/xbox", type in your info, and you're done.
Few days later, you get the system.. ready to go.
Considering you usually burn a game/music to disc anyway, downloading and burning an image to DVD shouldn't be a prob.
Piracy is no more difficult on consoles than anything else. You just need the mod-chip and a DVD burner. There's quite a few sites out there that let you buy pre-modded consoles for relatively cheap.
As for HL2, if you have the game on your HD, you can play it. The crack to circumvent steam checks has been available for quite some time. You should know that. Unless the game itself streams from a company's server, there's no way you can block access to it.
Arguing for piracy? Not necessarily FOR it, but I don't really care either way. People have been saying for ages that piracy will ruin this and that industry. Remember they said that about VHS, casettes, usenet, and P2P.
Nothing has gone anywhere. Hasn't happened and it won't happen. It's just one of those things that you can accept, or you can choose to spend millions upon millions of dollars trying to stop it, but in the end you spend more stopping it than just cutting your losses.
You're responsible with it, at least.
I can't say the same for myself and a few others I know. I downloaded Doom 3 and GTA, but haven't actually purchased them yet. I will, I just haven't.
I think the only game I purchased from these blockbusters was Metroid Prime 2.
I'm not gonna try to justify it. I knew it was wrong, I did it anyway, but it's interesting to point out that GTA, Halo 2, Doom 3, and HL2 were ALL heavily pirated and available weeks ahead of time. Thousands upon thousands of people downloaded and played them.
The question is, how many purchased, how many didn't? Even still, they performed quite well and no one's losing sleep for their lack of performance.
Just goes to show how people can make a mountain out of a mole hill when it comes to piracy. They make it seem like much more than it really is.. "If you download this game, how can I put braces on my kid's teeth?"
"Uh hm... well, considering your ONE game sold more than the best movie of all time, I think you'll do just fine with those braces."
Why is blockbuster in quotes? They *are* blockbuster titles...
Anyway, video games sequels aren't anything like movie sequels. In almost all cases, video game sequels do better than their originals AND are more fun to play.
See, when you're playing the original, there's a voice going on in your head and the heads of developers: "Damn, it would be cool if we could do THIS..."
When it becomes reality, it's released and you're happy. In another 10 years when gaming technology has evolved tenfold, guess what? Remakes and rereleases of games that would me damn good. You KNOW Doom was fun, so now that we have this amazing technology to have fun with lights, sounds, and eye candy, why not remake it? Maybe in 10 years we'll have virtual mind games like in the movie Strange Days. Doom on that? Yes please.
So.. who cares if it's original or not? It's quite different from Hollywood trying to make a quick buck in doing something like remaking Psycho or remaking Battlefield Earth.
That's what I thought...
IMO, Spammers and advertisers are both parasites in society.
Sure, traditional advertisers pay, but they're the ones who spend millions of dollars in research to find out what makes people tick in order to push them to buy something. Everything from the colors, voices, and music used in commercials has been researched and is all geared toward product branding in almost every aspect of our life.
Then you have spammers who just toss out billions of ridiculous, although frequently comical, emails in an attempt to sell you viagra or some other completely useless item/service.
See, the spammer is like any other advertiser: they want to try and sell you something.
So they send out a few billion spams, and 20% of them unsubscribe. Instead, they ignore it... and resend the same spam.
What, do they REALLY think if the person took the time to unsubscribe that upon seeing it a second time they'd think, "Oh WAIT, YES, *slaps forehead* I DO need a new pair of sunglasses!!! Silly me. I can't eat carpet"? Sorry, doesn't happen.
I don't know if it's just laziness or what, but ignoring the massive amounts of unsubscribe requests just seems like a waste of time, especially if you're trying to zoom down your list of people to those who will actually buy something.
The only thing they do when companies make a big stink about stupid shit like this is make themselves look bad.
"OOooh you used SCHOLAR, I'm gonna SUE YOU!"
Fuck off.
Just like Microsoft getting pissed at MikeRoweSoft. They really made an ass out of themselves.
We REALLY need to start adding some common sense into IP laws. They don't own the word scholar, they most certainly don't own the word "scholar" in conjunction with a search engine.
I hated the old one. It was too cheesy. The songs were corny, and it was just god awful. I know it's the trend to run about yelling, "Yay, that movie was soooo coooool!", but no, it's not.
...and War of the Worlds by Spielberg? Oh ok, another ID4 then except a scientologist as the lead.
Johnny Depp plays good parts, so this should be good.
No thanks.
Why would you buy games if you mod your console?
More like: $69 for the chip, $75 for 120GB drive, and $129 for the xbox. $275 total leaves $225 for hookers and drugs.
Mozilla would do WONDERS if they added the Ad Block feature by default :)
;)
Imagine all the fuss then... and the reply: "Cry me a goddamn river."
Nothing advertisers could do about it
Please folks, reg free links. No one wants to (or should) register for news
------
The battle over digital copyrights and illegal file sharing is often portrayed as a struggle between Internet scofflaws and greedy corporations. Online music junkies with no sense of the marketplace, the argument goes, want to download, copy and share copyrighted materials without restriction. The recording industry, on the other hand, wants to squeeze dollars - by lawsuit and legislation, if necessary - from its property.
The issue, of course, is far subtler than this, but one aspect of the caricature is dead on: the artists are nowhere to be found. A survey released yesterday by the Pew Internet and American Life Project, an arm of the Pew Research Center in Washington, aims to change that. The report, "Artists, Musicians and the Internet," combines and compares the opinions of three groups: the general public, those who identify themselves as artists of various stripes (including filmmakers, writers and digital artists) and a somewhat more self-selecting category of musicians.
Most notably, it is the first large-scale snapshot of what the people who actually produce the goods that downloaders seek (and that the industry jealously guards) think about the Internet and file-sharing.
Among the findings: artists are divided but on the whole not deeply concerned about online file-sharing. Only about half thought that sharing unauthorized copies of music and movies online should be illegal, for instance. And makers of file-sharing software like Kazaa and Grokster may be unnerved to learn that nearly two-thirds said such services should be held responsible for illegal file-swapping; only 15 percent held individual users responsible.
The subset of 2,755 musicians, who were recruited for the survey through e-mail notices, announcements on Web sites and flyers distributed at musicians' conferences, had somewhat different views. Thirty-seven percent, for instance, said the file-sharing services and those who use them ought to share the blame for illegal trades. Only 17 percent singled out the online services themselves as the guilty parties.
"This should solve the problem once and for all about whether anyone can say they speak for all artists," said Jenny Toomey, the executive director of the Future of Music Campaign, a nonprofit organization seeking to bring together the various factions in the copyright wars.
Ms. Toomey, whose group helped draft part of the survey, believes that artists are usually underrepresented in the debates about the high-tech evolution of the industry.
"These decisions need to be made with artists at the table," she said, adding, "it's not enough for both sides to reach out and get an artist who supports their position."
Indeed, big-ticket acts like Metallica and Don Henley have famously denounced illegal file sharing. And the Recording Industry Association of America, which has filed thousands of lawsuits against individual file-sharers, often invokes musicians as prime movers in its crusade.
"Breaking into the music business is no picnic," its Web site reads. "Piracy makes it tougher to survive and even tougher to break through."
File-sharers, on the other hand, often point to high-profile performers like Moby and Chuck D who acknowledge that the online swap meet has provided them with valuable exposure.
"I know for a fact that a lot of people first heard my music by downloading it from Napster or Kazaa," Moby wrote in his online journal last year. "And for this reason I'll always be glad that Napster and Kazaa have existed."
Without questioning the convictions of artists who feel strongly one way or another, however, the Pew survey appears to show that the creative set is both mindful of the benefits the Internet promises and ambivalent about the abuses it facilitates.
"The overall picture," said Lee Rainie, the director of the Pew Project, "is that the musician-artistic community has a much wider ran
http://www.themirt.com/
When they ask you a real question, like "Is your name [name]?"
Pause and think, answer in your head, "NO it is not. My name is not [name]." but then answer correctly.
As long as there's activity on each question you answer, there's no way for them to detect which ones are lies.
This works on normal polygraphs too. Just make yourself tense up on the easy questions: hold your breath, bite your tongue, rip your toenail off and push UP against the top of your shoe to generate uncomfortable pain.
Machines: 0
Humans: 2
WASHINGTON, Nov. 27 - Researchers at a government nuclear laboratory and a ceramics company in Salt Lake City say they have found a way to produce pure hydrogen with far less energy than other methods, raising the possibility of using nuclear power to indirectly wean the transportation system from its dependence on oil.
The development would move the country closer to the Energy Department's goal of a "hydrogen economy," in which hydrogen would be created through a variety of means, and would be consumed by devices called fuel cells, to make electricity to run cars and for other purposes. Experts cite three big roadblocks to a hydrogen economy: manufacturing hydrogen cleanly and at low cost, finding a way to ship it and store it on the vehicles that use it, and reducing the astronomical price of fuel cells.
"This is a breakthrough in the first part," said J. Stephen Herring, a consulting engineer at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, which plans to announce the development on Monday with Cerametec Inc. of Salt Lake City.
The developers also said the hydrogen could be used by oil companies to stretch oil supplies even without solving the fuel cell and transportation problems.
Mr. Herring said the experimental work showed the "highest-known production rate of hydrogen by high-temperature electrolysis."
But the plan requires the building of a new kind of nuclear reactor, at a time when the United States is not even building conventional reactors. And the cost estimates are uncertain.
The heart of the plan is an improvement on the most convenient way to make hydrogen, which is to run electric current through water, splitting the H2O molecule into hydrogen and oxygen. This process, called electrolysis, now has a drawback: if the electricity comes from coal, which is the biggest source of power in this country, then the energy value of the ingredients - the amount of energy given off when the fuel is burned - is three and a half to four times larger than the energy value of the product. Also, carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions increase when the additional coal is burned.
Hydrogen can also be made by mixing steam with natural gas and breaking apart both molecules, but the price of natural gas is rising rapidly.
The new method involves running electricity through water that has a very high temperature. As the water molecule breaks up, a ceramic sieve separates the oxygen from the hydrogen. The resulting hydrogen has about half the energy value of the energy put into the process, the developers say. Such losses may be acceptable, or even desirable, because hydrogen for a nuclear reactor can be substituted for oil, which is imported and expensive, and because the basic fuel, uranium, is plentiful.
The idea is to build a reactor that would heat the cooling medium in the nuclear core, in this case helium gas, to about 1,000 degrees Celsius, or more than 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. The existing generation of reactors, used exclusively for electric generation, use water for cooling and heat it to only about 300 degrees Celsius.
The hot gas would be used two ways. It would spin a turbine to make electricity, which could be run through the water being separated. And it would heat that water, to 800 degrees Celsius. But if electricity demand on the power grid ran extremely high, the hydrogen production could easily be shut down for a few hours, and all of the energy could be converted to electricity, designers say.
The goal is to create a reactor that could produce about 300 megawatts of electricity for the grid, enough to run about 300,000 window air-conditioners, or produce about 2.5 kilos of hydrogen per second. When burned, a kilo of hydrogen has about the same energy value as a gallon of unleaded regular gasoline. But fuel cells, which work without burning, get about twice as much work out of each unit of fuel. So if used in automotive fuel cells, the reactor might replace more than 400,000 gallons of gasoline per
The submitter of the story should've put a reg-free link in there (partner=) instead of making people waste their time to register. End of story.
;)
THEN DON'T FUCKING READ IT. Read it somewhere else. If it's not worth the registration, then go without.
I'll continue to read it without registering, thanks. Not only will I read the articles people post, but I will continue to contribute these to stories that are submitted that do not contain reg-free links.
People need to learn. There is no copyright. A story is a story. Their registration is an inconvenience. CNN doesn't require registration. Others should take suit.
*shrug* And if they don't, we'll keep posting the articles AND getting modded up
People need to learn how to post reg-free links. It's fucking irritating. No one wants to register for news.
Does NYTimes pay slashdot to go recruit members for their site? No.
Slashdot doesn't have permission to repost the stories, but guess what? No one cares. Why? Because NO ONE WANTS TO REGISTER FOR FUCKING NEWS.
That'd be like saying "taping songs off the radio is radio piracy".
Haha not quite.
I don't really watch or pay attention to commercials to begin with. If I'm watching a show and commercials come on, I either leave the room to do whatever I need to do, or I flip to another channel.
The point is: I'm not watching them either way.
So... what exactly is wrong with downloading TV shows? You can't say "Well the Ads pay for the shows." That's true overall, but not from me since I don't watch em.
Besides, I pay $$ for my cable, and if there's a show I wanted to see that I missed, it's not "oh well, just wait till it's on next time." Screw that. I'll go download it. If they aren't broadcasting it, then they aren't losing anything.
For example, the south park "shit" episode. CC won't air that again and aren't making revenue from it, therefore, I can download it. Yeah yeah, I don't care what the law says, I'm using common sense with this one.
It wasn't a ridiculous comment. People need to seriously get over this shit and start looking at the REAL problem: bad parenting.
My cousin is 12 and is properly educated on these things. He owns San Andreas and Vice City. He's fine. He's a straight A student. At that age you can educate them to the fact that IT'S JUST A GAME. 6 years old? Eh, maybe not. 12? Without a doubt. They get worse shit from school as it is.
Just because a few idiot kids whose parents are total jackasses decide to go out and steal a car doesn't mean you blame it on the game.
Environment doesn't have influence on development as much as a good parent/child relationship. It's a cop out when people say that shit, because think back to when you were a kid and how much your parents tried to shield you from that stuff - yet you always found ways around it (you know you did, so don't deny it).
Did you turn out fucked up?
It teaches how to figure the day of the week for any Gregorian date of any time in a few seconds, a trick which I still remember and use today!
Care to share? Sounds interesting!