I have a series of questions but any one being answered will make this avid gamer happy.
Has any thought been given to extremely difficult and rewarding five man content?
Are there any plans for single player instances that involves severe amounts of skill as a player?
Are there any plans for further character advancement beyond grinding for gear? Or are there plans to add questable pieces of set gear that compare accordingly to some end game content?
Why can't people just play the XBox instead of hacking it? I mean seriously, you don't see me hacking my XBox. I buy a game, I play a game. It is quite simple.
Sure the arguement can be brought up that some people want to know how it works. Well? Go work for a bloody gaming company who designs how it works.
I read these articles and think to myself... You know they sure do like to brand Microsoft as bug filled. But damn can't we at least brand the people who are breaking the EULA's and such for these "hacks." Microsoft made a game system for people to enjoy games on.
If they had three freaking bugs, whoopy do. At least I am not the unscrupulous individual who is taking the time and effort into doing something that is morally wrong.
We need more, especially when the future is unclear. Competition promotes ingenuity. With all these companies competing for your attention and more importantly your consumership, technology moves with leaps and bounds.
Eventually companies will go bottom up because they can't compete and there will be a group of delcared winners. The future is defined by what companies can deliver the technology to survive among the sea of companies.
While I am the last person I know to ever really complain about this or that. I am rather tired of spending everyday this past week reading about the Space Shuttle Discovery.
Everyday is a new article it seems about this or that. The most pointless to me was the article about how Discovery can't land due to clouds.
I honestly think you can beat a dead horse to death a second time. This was successfully completed by the continuing coverage of Discovery.
I think it would have been better to have reported that Discovery had some issues regarding the tiles and that Discovery landed safely. That would have been all I cared about.
That the shuttle program is nearing its death date. All the money for building and design are basically being thrown away for a grand return to rockets.
Quite honestly it is upsetting to me that over the past 30 or so years of shuttle experimentation. That the best design they could come up with now is a beefed up Saturn V.
I don't know about all you IT guys but in my field of work there is no way I could live with a contract like that. One year of no work doing what I am good at? Gah!
When it comes to deaf members of our community, I can't see them suffering a real "handicap" in regards to using any available OS. As stated over and over in many threads.... OS's are more visual and less audio. Sound cards wouldn't matter to a member of the deaf community since in reality, they serve no purpose. With that said...
An OS of the blind is not in need of a monitor since there is nothing to see per se. However there are certain things they can do that would allow them to be as efficient as one who has vision.
The paradigm of a blind person comes down to the extreme use of two senses, hearing and touch.
These two senses are what you have to build your whole OS around. The ability for them to hear and touch.
Input
- Is one of the most important features to a computer. You have to be able to input information so the computer can put it all together. The first attribute I will concentrate on is touch.
1. I link you to this site as it has many one handed solutions to typing. I am most impressed with the Chording Keyboards for what I have in mind. As I am using the standard OS model we use today.
2. The second step as I see it is to have a rather nice size active braile board that can constantly change at a rapid rate for navigation through said OS. This board will display a desktop so to speak. In braile it will be written through out the board what they are "feeling" or what we would be looking at.
So if we were gonna use windows as a model the board would display like in the top left hand corner the My Computer Icon. At this stage it would be printed in braile on the board as to where they were touching. With a simple push on that location the board would change appropriately to what is available in that location for navigation.
However you wanna keep it simple. You can't get all elaborate on the user. It has to be straight forward and to the point of what they are engaged in touching.
In doing this you can actually (with some imagination) simulate many programs for touch purposes. Excel can be laid out through the pins and they can data entry these areas through touching.
Audio - is an equally important feature that can be used with the board or as an alternative to the board. Voice navigation that is near flawless. I refer to it being right on and not nearly right on. Voice navigation similar to what OS/2 Warp 4 displayed to where a user can open anything that has an audio tag on it. So if I need to get to a folder deep in the hard drive directory without the senseless pushing of the braile pad, I can just say that folders name and it opens.
Voice navigation allows for faster movement throughout the OS.
The real key to an OS of this nature is to allow a member of the blind community to be apart of its entire design. Not just one member but many members. Allow them to help build it and test how it will come out. Whlie us that can see think some things would be good. (Like everything I mentioned, the might suck for someone who can't see). We have to allow them to be in full, 100% participation with the design of these computers as it is what they would use.
In closing, Microsofts handicap features suck. All of them. If that is their idea of helping the handicap then they failed worse than anyone could possibly imagine. You need a fluid voice playback when reading text, not the gimp voice that is all staggery throughout any reading.
This doesn't really apply as one poaster pointed out that simply gliding through the water will allow you to have your hand exit where it entered. Infact you can have it exit beyond where it entered with simple glide. The problem is you slow down.
Hard to say if it the slow down is avoidable but I am sure through some testing you can find out. Depends what application you are putting it in. Sprinting will never be the case since that is a mroe chaotic means of racing but distance swimmers might have more luck with this.
As for kicking it does supply power, more than you would like to think. If kicking supplied next to no power you wouldn't see swimmers kicking as often as they do. A slight kick keeps your feet aloft. Rapid kicking actgually gives you fair forward propulsion.
The best example I can give you is to try and find the video of Jeff Rouse in the 1996 Olympics. At the flip turn his dolphin kick alone allowed him to increase is lead by over a body length and a half if I remember correctly. He was the last one to surface but increased his lead massively.
Kicking alone can be impressive especially underwater. In texas they had a rule that you had to surface before the second set of flags. I watched a couple guys from a competing team nearly get DQ'd because of them kicking 3/4's the length of the pool. They also won mind you.
No infact you are wrong. I can go install your door with drywall screws, drywall screws which would indeed hold your door up. You have absolutely no clue what the role of inspectors are do you? Inspectors go through your home to specifically inspect for life threatening issues with how your home is built.
Framing inspectors look for structural stability so your roof doesn't fall down on you. Or that your walls won't burn up in 2min if there is a fire. Electrical inspectors come in and look to see if everything meets the NEC and city codes. The NEC codes are specifically written for safety alone. Especially in regards to fire. Infact that is a majority of their emphasis.
It is a home owners responsibility to make sure their home is safe for forceable entry. Believe me, the standard door on your home is easily circumventable. Not the builders fault, he used the safe door that met city or state code for fire protection. There is no section on burglar protection. That doesn't exist.
More to the point, under your half assed scenario at comparing a home to a computer. Why didn't you install an alarm? It isn't the builders responsibility to install one, they aren't required. Why didn't you request a proper door during the building process? There are many doors out there designed to thwart entry attempts. Not the builders fault, that is an optional feature.
It is hard to install a faulty door that falls off. Damn near impossible. I can teach a monkey how to screw a door on using drywall screws and it will hold up just fine. More to the point you have three hinges. Leverage keeps it from falling off. Again, your comparison is weak sauce.
The only way that door will fall off is if the top and middle hinge break loose, again a monkey can be taught how to screw one on. Even if those break loose it is gonna take some time for that bottom hinge to give way since the door knob has a bloody stopper inside the framing applying a more secure fit. Lets not even talk about the deadbolt sticking two inches into the framing or that chain lock you might have.
When you hack a banks computer lives aren't at stake. If I wire your house up in lamp cord, chances are you or your childrens lives are at stake in a very harsh and real way.
Digital cameras are still way crappier than film cameras.
I posted that quote from an earlier reply to a thread. It was marked as flamebait. Not entirely sure why as the poster of the reply has a point when it comes to visual quality.
Digital cameras do some things that film based cameras do not. I won't argue that point. They make many things convenient. However that is not the point I think the poster is trying to make. (That digital cameras suck over all)
The point he is trying to make is that digital cameras don't provide the quality of medium format and 35mm slow speed films. (I am talking slow, not 400iso or 100iso. I am talking about below 20iso)
They are not wrong. Digital is moving forward with leaps and bounds but still hasn't made it into the fine quality area of imaging. It isn't a wonder why Hasselblad and Mamiya are still selling strong. Or why Nikon hasn't pulled their F and N lines. If digital is taking over, why aren't they pulling cameras off film based cameras off the shelf?
[change of subject]
When I heard that kodak was pulling their RC line I wasn't heart broken. I didn't even care really. Kodak is a name that is old, they aren't the best by any means. Honestly I prefer Forte paper myself. There are many alternatives. When I took photography in high school and college I experimented alot like everyone does. My instructors even went so far as to recommend Forte, Agfa, Ilford... never once did I hear them recommend Kodak paper.
Some people used it sure but there are so many other quality companies out there that this isn't drastic. Nor are you gonna find yourself making home made emulsions in your garage. Kodak is a name, not an archetype.
I used to be a know nothing when it came to building computers. Typical wanna be computer geek was what I was. I would go places like the Slackware boards and Tom's Hardware to get information so I could further understand how to build a computer. In my search for knowledge I always came up with a top three motherboard manufacturer.
1. Asus
2. Abit
3. Who knows... long time ago.
So I bought Asus over Epox and continued with every upgrade swearing by Asus. What I got was crappy boards with no life span. It might have been the type of board I chose. It might have been a run of badluck. No matter what board I have gotten from Asus, they have a lifespan of about two years before utterly crashing completely. I kid you not.
I had a board that for no reason, after two years, decided that it didn't like the North Bridge chipset and decided to make it not work.
I had a board that was so bugged against one specific Nvidia card that no Windows or Linux OS could run with this video card and mobo combination. It has been nothing but badluck with about three of their boards total. (One was my fault but still amazed me that one power surge could fry the whole board but keep every other component intact and working properly)
So forgive my apathetic and very sarcastic "yea... an Asus article... yea..."
When it comes to beautiful women being attracted to nerds, it isn't for your brain. It is for your pocket book. Bill Gates doesn't bring to the table what Brad Pitt can. Bill is fugly, lets face it. Brad is sword swing, fist smacking, lady loving super actor extreme. More over the guy gots a six pack that makes body builders cry. Bill has his little belly and his glasses.
So why oh why would a beautful woman choose super nerd over super stud? Bill brings in more money a year than Pitt can accumulate in a lifetime. Security is the active word. Security is what she is guarenteed.
I don't understand why time was devoted to such a law. The only things I can see are:
A. Acountablility for faulty and potentially dangerous equipment. Which could hurt a human if the equipment fails and does a variety of dangerous things. Granted it is computer run but someone has to provide maintainence and run the place. So there will be a human presence. Or...
B. Someone really wants to kiss some PETA butt or even win a couple votes.
The hunting of deer or other assorted animals from your computer has its place in the market. I am sure there are a variety of crippled individuals who can no longer participate in the sport. Or even people who can't actually get out into the forests of america to hunt for any of a number of reasons. (Allergies, asthma, fear of the dark, work, etc...)
I am sure there is a percentage of these people who would love to kill their first deer or continue their legacy of hunting.
Is it the same as getting in the thick of it and actually hunting the creature? No way. But it suits a means to and end. There is a certain feel to actually tracking your prey down. Primal for sure, but it is something you just can't experience in day to day life. Unless you are a bar brawler which I am sure is a similar feeling.
So why even bother with such a law. Other than the potential danger to humans who might wander near by or work at the ranch from potentially faulty equipment. It doesn't hurt any citizen in California other than the feelings of animal rights activists. Hunting will continue to be around for hundreds of years.
It just doesn't make sense to me. Thats all really.
Being shocked through the hips cannot cause heart problems of any sort. Electricity has to path through your heart in order to mess up the natural rythem of the heart.
More importantly stun guns operate on a super high voltage with extremely low current.
It isn't voltage that can cause fibrilation but current. The number of electrons passing through a single point in one second.
So over all tissue damage will be minimal, it is the force of these limited amounts of electrons that causes the red marks commonly found on stun gun victims.
The tissue damage commonly resulted from electrical shock is due to the bodies resistance. The best example is to compare the body to a light bulb. With enough current, it heats up causing tissue damage. You literally cook. That is why defibrilation units cause skin to smoke and hair to burn because the amount of electricity forced through the heart is the same as is required to light a 60 watt bulb.
Make no mistake, no heart problems can result due to this means of training.
The internet and ISP's are a huge money market. Heaven forbid a day when it is free. What ever happened to the idea of a connected world with no massive underlying cost?
The summary of the whole article can be summed up with this one quote:
Caboose - "That guy tex is really a robot and you're his boyfriend so that makes you... a gay robot."
It isn't spyware it is a Trojan. Spyware are programs either secretly installed by a base program to monitor your habits of browsing and usage or installed but mildly covered. This is a Trojan intent on stealing banking passwords and such. Two completely different things.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a series of questions but any one being answered will make this avid gamer happy. Has any thought been given to extremely difficult and rewarding five man content? Are there any plans for single player instances that involves severe amounts of skill as a player? Are there any plans for further character advancement beyond grinding for gear? Or are there plans to add questable pieces of set gear that compare accordingly to some end game content?
Holy hell. Every moron replied to my thread. Mark me up as flamebait I fucking love it.
The moderators for slashdot need a lesson in moderation.
I gather you are one of the zealots who is ignored quite often.
/ignore
See?
Why can't people just play the XBox instead of hacking it? I mean seriously, you don't see me hacking my XBox. I buy a game, I play a game. It is quite simple.
Sure the arguement can be brought up that some people want to know how it works. Well? Go work for a bloody gaming company who designs how it works.
I read these articles and think to myself... You know they sure do like to brand Microsoft as bug filled. But damn can't we at least brand the people who are breaking the EULA's and such for these "hacks." Microsoft made a game system for people to enjoy games on.
If they had three freaking bugs, whoopy do. At least I am not the unscrupulous individual who is taking the time and effort into doing something that is morally wrong.
We need more, especially when the future is unclear. Competition promotes ingenuity. With all these companies competing for your attention and more importantly your consumership, technology moves with leaps and bounds.
Eventually companies will go bottom up because they can't compete and there will be a group of delcared winners. The future is defined by what companies can deliver the technology to survive among the sea of companies.
While I am the last person I know to ever really complain about this or that. I am rather tired of spending everyday this past week reading about the Space Shuttle Discovery.
Everyday is a new article it seems about this or that. The most pointless to me was the article about how Discovery can't land due to clouds.
I honestly think you can beat a dead horse to death a second time. This was successfully completed by the continuing coverage of Discovery.
I think it would have been better to have reported that Discovery had some issues regarding the tiles and that Discovery landed safely. That would have been all I cared about.
That the shuttle program is nearing its death date. All the money for building and design are basically being thrown away for a grand return to rockets.
Quite honestly it is upsetting to me that over the past 30 or so years of shuttle experimentation. That the best design they could come up with now is a beefed up Saturn V.
Maybe after all these years, perhaps going with the lowest bidder wasn't the best strategy.
I don't know about all you IT guys but in my field of work there is no way I could live with a contract like that. One year of no work doing what I am good at? Gah!
That while you can teach a robot to play a guitar, you can't teach a robot the art of the guitar.
Sure the robot can pluck away but what is it really doing than playing tune a human created. Humans are the art and science behind music.
You really think a robot will ever be able to play with the style and finese of Eric Clapton? Hardly.
When it comes to deaf members of our community, I can't see them suffering a real "handicap" in regards to using any available OS. As stated over and over in many threads.... OS's are more visual and less audio. Sound cards wouldn't matter to a member of the deaf community since in reality, they serve no purpose. With that said...
An OS of the blind is not in need of a monitor since there is nothing to see per se. However there are certain things they can do that would allow them to be as efficient as one who has vision.
The paradigm of a blind person comes down to the extreme use of two senses, hearing and touch.
These two senses are what you have to build your whole OS around. The ability for them to hear and touch.
Input - Is one of the most important features to a computer. You have to be able to input information so the computer can put it all together. The first attribute I will concentrate on is touch.
1. I link you to this site as it has many one handed solutions to typing. I am most impressed with the Chording Keyboards for what I have in mind. As I am using the standard OS model we use today.
2. The second step as I see it is to have a rather nice size active braile board that can constantly change at a rapid rate for navigation through said OS. This board will display a desktop so to speak. In braile it will be written through out the board what they are "feeling" or what we would be looking at.
So if we were gonna use windows as a model the board would display like in the top left hand corner the My Computer Icon. At this stage it would be printed in braile on the board as to where they were touching. With a simple push on that location the board would change appropriately to what is available in that location for navigation.
However you wanna keep it simple. You can't get all elaborate on the user. It has to be straight forward and to the point of what they are engaged in touching.
In doing this you can actually (with some imagination) simulate many programs for touch purposes. Excel can be laid out through the pins and they can data entry these areas through touching.
Audio - is an equally important feature that can be used with the board or as an alternative to the board. Voice navigation that is near flawless. I refer to it being right on and not nearly right on. Voice navigation similar to what OS/2 Warp 4 displayed to where a user can open anything that has an audio tag on it. So if I need to get to a folder deep in the hard drive directory without the senseless pushing of the braile pad, I can just say that folders name and it opens.
Voice navigation allows for faster movement throughout the OS.
The real key to an OS of this nature is to allow a member of the blind community to be apart of its entire design. Not just one member but many members. Allow them to help build it and test how it will come out. Whlie us that can see think some things would be good. (Like everything I mentioned, the might suck for someone who can't see). We have to allow them to be in full, 100% participation with the design of these computers as it is what they would use.
In closing, Microsofts handicap features suck. All of them. If that is their idea of helping the handicap then they failed worse than anyone could possibly imagine. You need a fluid voice playback when reading text, not the gimp voice that is all staggery throughout any reading.
Swimmer here.
This doesn't really apply as one poaster pointed out that simply gliding through the water will allow you to have your hand exit where it entered. Infact you can have it exit beyond where it entered with simple glide. The problem is you slow down.
Hard to say if it the slow down is avoidable but I am sure through some testing you can find out. Depends what application you are putting it in. Sprinting will never be the case since that is a mroe chaotic means of racing but distance swimmers might have more luck with this.
As for kicking it does supply power, more than you would like to think. If kicking supplied next to no power you wouldn't see swimmers kicking as often as they do. A slight kick keeps your feet aloft. Rapid kicking actgually gives you fair forward propulsion.
The best example I can give you is to try and find the video of Jeff Rouse in the 1996 Olympics. At the flip turn his dolphin kick alone allowed him to increase is lead by over a body length and a half if I remember correctly. He was the last one to surface but increased his lead massively.
Kicking alone can be impressive especially underwater. In texas they had a rule that you had to surface before the second set of flags. I watched a couple guys from a competing team nearly get DQ'd because of them kicking 3/4's the length of the pool. They also won mind you.
No infact you are wrong. I can go install your door with drywall screws, drywall screws which would indeed hold your door up. You have absolutely no clue what the role of inspectors are do you? Inspectors go through your home to specifically inspect for life threatening issues with how your home is built.
Framing inspectors look for structural stability so your roof doesn't fall down on you. Or that your walls won't burn up in 2min if there is a fire. Electrical inspectors come in and look to see if everything meets the NEC and city codes. The NEC codes are specifically written for safety alone. Especially in regards to fire. Infact that is a majority of their emphasis.
It is a home owners responsibility to make sure their home is safe for forceable entry. Believe me, the standard door on your home is easily circumventable. Not the builders fault, he used the safe door that met city or state code for fire protection. There is no section on burglar protection. That doesn't exist.
More to the point, under your half assed scenario at comparing a home to a computer. Why didn't you install an alarm? It isn't the builders responsibility to install one, they aren't required. Why didn't you request a proper door during the building process? There are many doors out there designed to thwart entry attempts. Not the builders fault, that is an optional feature.
It is hard to install a faulty door that falls off. Damn near impossible. I can teach a monkey how to screw a door on using drywall screws and it will hold up just fine. More to the point you have three hinges. Leverage keeps it from falling off. Again, your comparison is weak sauce.
The only way that door will fall off is if the top and middle hinge break loose, again a monkey can be taught how to screw one on. Even if those break loose it is gonna take some time for that bottom hinge to give way since the door knob has a bloody stopper inside the framing applying a more secure fit. Lets not even talk about the deadbolt sticking two inches into the framing or that chain lock you might have.
When you hack a banks computer lives aren't at stake. If I wire your house up in lamp cord, chances are you or your childrens lives are at stake in a very harsh and real way.
Digital cameras are still way crappier than film cameras. I posted that quote from an earlier reply to a thread. It was marked as flamebait. Not entirely sure why as the poster of the reply has a point when it comes to visual quality.
Digital cameras do some things that film based cameras do not. I won't argue that point. They make many things convenient. However that is not the point I think the poster is trying to make. (That digital cameras suck over all)
The point he is trying to make is that digital cameras don't provide the quality of medium format and 35mm slow speed films. (I am talking slow, not 400iso or 100iso. I am talking about below 20iso)
They are not wrong. Digital is moving forward with leaps and bounds but still hasn't made it into the fine quality area of imaging. It isn't a wonder why Hasselblad and Mamiya are still selling strong. Or why Nikon hasn't pulled their F and N lines. If digital is taking over, why aren't they pulling cameras off film based cameras off the shelf?
[change of subject]
When I heard that kodak was pulling their RC line I wasn't heart broken. I didn't even care really. Kodak is a name that is old, they aren't the best by any means. Honestly I prefer Forte paper myself. There are many alternatives. When I took photography in high school and college I experimented alot like everyone does. My instructors even went so far as to recommend Forte, Agfa, Ilford... never once did I hear them recommend Kodak paper.
Some people used it sure but there are so many other quality companies out there that this isn't drastic. Nor are you gonna find yourself making home made emulsions in your garage. Kodak is a name, not an archetype.
I used to be a know nothing when it came to building computers. Typical wanna be computer geek was what I was. I would go places like the Slackware boards and Tom's Hardware to get information so I could further understand how to build a computer. In my search for knowledge I always came up with a top three motherboard manufacturer.
1. Asus
2. Abit
3. Who knows... long time ago.
So I bought Asus over Epox and continued with every upgrade swearing by Asus. What I got was crappy boards with no life span. It might have been the type of board I chose. It might have been a run of badluck. No matter what board I have gotten from Asus, they have a lifespan of about two years before utterly crashing completely. I kid you not.
I had a board that for no reason, after two years, decided that it didn't like the North Bridge chipset and decided to make it not work.
I had a board that was so bugged against one specific Nvidia card that no Windows or Linux OS could run with this video card and mobo combination. It has been nothing but badluck with about three of their boards total. (One was my fault but still amazed me that one power surge could fry the whole board but keep every other component intact and working properly)
So forgive my apathetic and very sarcastic "yea... an Asus article... yea..."
a ten gallon hat thankyou very much ya'll.
When it comes to beautiful women being attracted to nerds, it isn't for your brain. It is for your pocket book. Bill Gates doesn't bring to the table what Brad Pitt can. Bill is fugly, lets face it. Brad is sword swing, fist smacking, lady loving super actor extreme. More over the guy gots a six pack that makes body builders cry. Bill has his little belly and his glasses.
So why oh why would a beautful woman choose super nerd over super stud? Bill brings in more money a year than Pitt can accumulate in a lifetime. Security is the active word. Security is what she is guarenteed.
...and the Jedi don't do that?
Shouldn't the title read:
Formerly Extinct Wildflower found
I don't understand why time was devoted to such a law. The only things I can see are:
A. Acountablility for faulty and potentially dangerous equipment. Which could hurt a human if the equipment fails and does a variety of dangerous things. Granted it is computer run but someone has to provide maintainence and run the place. So there will be a human presence. Or...
B. Someone really wants to kiss some PETA butt or even win a couple votes.
The hunting of deer or other assorted animals from your computer has its place in the market. I am sure there are a variety of crippled individuals who can no longer participate in the sport. Or even people who can't actually get out into the forests of america to hunt for any of a number of reasons. (Allergies, asthma, fear of the dark, work, etc...)
I am sure there is a percentage of these people who would love to kill their first deer or continue their legacy of hunting.
Is it the same as getting in the thick of it and actually hunting the creature? No way. But it suits a means to and end. There is a certain feel to actually tracking your prey down. Primal for sure, but it is something you just can't experience in day to day life. Unless you are a bar brawler which I am sure is a similar feeling.
So why even bother with such a law. Other than the potential danger to humans who might wander near by or work at the ranch from potentially faulty equipment. It doesn't hurt any citizen in California other than the feelings of animal rights activists. Hunting will continue to be around for hundreds of years.
It just doesn't make sense to me. Thats all really.
Being shocked through the hips cannot cause heart problems of any sort. Electricity has to path through your heart in order to mess up the natural rythem of the heart. More importantly stun guns operate on a super high voltage with extremely low current. It isn't voltage that can cause fibrilation but current. The number of electrons passing through a single point in one second. So over all tissue damage will be minimal, it is the force of these limited amounts of electrons that causes the red marks commonly found on stun gun victims. The tissue damage commonly resulted from electrical shock is due to the bodies resistance. The best example is to compare the body to a light bulb. With enough current, it heats up causing tissue damage. You literally cook. That is why defibrilation units cause skin to smoke and hair to burn because the amount of electricity forced through the heart is the same as is required to light a 60 watt bulb. Make no mistake, no heart problems can result due to this means of training.
The internet and ISP's are a huge money market. Heaven forbid a day when it is free. What ever happened to the idea of a connected world with no massive underlying cost?
The article smells of money.
The summary of the whole article can be summed up with this one quote: Caboose - "That guy tex is really a robot and you're his boyfriend so that makes you... a gay robot."
Now the question is... Was that 10 trillion trillon trillion watt's of power calculated at 120 volts or 240?
It isn't spyware it is a Trojan. Spyware are programs either secretly installed by a base program to monitor your habits of browsing and usage or installed but mildly covered. This is a Trojan intent on stealing banking passwords and such. Two completely different things.