We have enforce competition in the form of LLU Unbundling. BT, the owners of most of the POTS infrastructure in the country, are required to allow other providers to install their equipment in order to provide a broadband service, rather than just re-selling BT's wholesale service.
No, Blu-Ray and DVD (or any other form of DRM) cannot have unbreakable encryption because it would be a literal impossibility. You posses both the ciphertext and the key at the same time.
More that the phrase "scientific consensus" is a load of balls, science doesn't work that way. There is no 'consensus', just an as-yet-undisproven theory that most accurately explains the current observations and makes testable predictions. That most scientists will accept that this theory as 'correct' is a byproduct of the theory being accurate, not the other way round. Questioning whether a theory is correct (i.e. attempting to find observations that do not correlate with the theory's predictions) is the very way science advances, and not 'denying the consensus' or somesuch sillyness. That there are people who blindly ignore evidence in their attempt to smear a theory with inconvenient predictions muddies the waters, and results in our current state where anyone who so much as questions any data or theory on anthropogenic climate change is an "anti-science global warming denier", and the slightest correction to data is "proof of the gubernment conspiracy", with BOTH of these being a detriment to actual climate science.
3DTV itself, or rather stereoscopic display technology, is perfectly fine. The problem lies in pants-on-head-retard directors who wouldn't know convergence depth interocular distance from their own anus. Creating stereoscopic video that doesn't cause headaches is HARD. You can;t justtape two cameras together and carry on as usual, and you sure as hell can't expect a 2D movie retrofitted to 3D to look even half decent. Imagine if colour TV had started of with everything in bright block primary colours only.
How about if you encode using, say, x264? The tool is free, but you'd still have to pay the MPEG-LA for... well, owning some specific variants of some algorithms.
Conspiracy theorists have been haarping on about the thing for years, even blaming it for effects that occurred years before it's construction was completed!
Video quality is definitely a case of "you've seen it, you can't unsee it". Overuse of DVNR, upscaling, poor deinterlacing, bitrate starvation, abuse of colour timing (orange and teal, ORANGE AND TEAL!)... once you know what you're looking for it becomes glaringly obvious when someone has been lazy/half-arsed/incompetent.
These are the kinds of people that absolutely won't believe in the medicinal properties of herbs (really, how do you think medicine got invented? We noticed X + Y vegetable cures chronic pain, and 2000 years later some scientist isolated chemicals that he packaged into a pill as a pain killer...), won't believe that meditation helps reduce stress (non-scientific bullshit, you could just sleep...), etc; anything that doesn't sound like it came out of a lab coat is obvious bullshit.
A gross misrepresentation and over-generalisation. I personally do not 'refuse to believe in the medicinal properties of herbs'. What I refuse to accept is that chewing on a leaf is somehow more effective than the refined medicine created from that leaf. I have no doubts that the brain'sstate can be affected by meditation, reading a book, playing a videogame, spending time on the firing range, or having a nap.
Thus these people are ignorant to the portion of the world that has not yet been explained. These people would have been ignorant to the concept that the earth rotates around the sun 500 years ago-- I mean shit, look at the sky, the sun starts at one point in the sky and winds up on the exact opposite side. Obviously it goes around the Earth! And all contemporary reasoning has not explained how in the fuck the earth could be going around the sun, or spinning, so such claims are bullshit.
I suspect that you may be trolling here. If not, you are demonstrating a remarkable level of ignorance about the basic tenets of scientific thinking.
To fit passengers comfortable into the wing, it needs to be a goddamn big wing. A wing that big could only be used on the most mass of the mass transit routes to be economical, would be expensive to develop, and would require airports to be rebuilt to accommodate them at the terminals (real deal-killer). Like any cool new thing, it's legacy compatibility that scuppers it.
There are one or two supersonic business jets, but they're so expensive (about as expensive as buying an ex-mil supersonic jet and getting it refurbished to the required standard) that "you can't buy one" essentially still applies.
A few month ago, I sat in a pub watching (live) an Astronaut operating on the internals of the Hubble Space Telescope. On my phone.
We live in the goddamn future!
It depends on the glasses. Simply circular-polarised glasses are dirt cheap. The funky multi-layer-dichroic filters used in Dolby-3D (it's like anaglyph, but with 6 specific wavelengths, 3 per eye. Think RlRrGlGrBlBr) are hella expensive. $50 per pair is what I've seen quoted and mentioned by the engineers. I guess the feel that the money saved on not needing a retro-reflective silver screen is better spent on the initial glasses cost and cleaning them between performances.
BTW, is the 'pay for your glasses' thing an American thing? Last time I saw a 3D film (in the UK), the glasses were included in the ticket price and gave them back after the performance.
Look Around You.
Look. Around. You.
Have you guessed what we're looking for, yet? Yes, that's right - it's computer programming.
[ MAN SITTING AT TYPEWRITER ]
This man is writing a computer programme. A computer programme is like a script that tells a computer what to do. Like people, computers understand different languages - some examples of computer languages are:
* C
* PASCAL
* BASIC
* C double-plus
* C triple-plus
* C detuned bassoon
* Norwegian
Your school computer is probably a BBC Microcomputerisation Engine and, therefore, understands a dialect of BASIC known as 'HyperFrench.'
Make a note of this in your copybook... now.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, you don't have a fear of heights, you have a fear of depths.
'HDCP stripper' boxes have existed for nearly as long as HDCP has. All this changes is that a key revocation will not disable newer boxes.
We have enforce competition in the form of LLU Unbundling. BT, the owners of most of the POTS infrastructure in the country, are required to allow other providers to install their equipment in order to provide a broadband service, rather than just re-selling BT's wholesale service.
A bit of cunningly placed aluminium foil is an effective and far cheaper alternative.
No, Blu-Ray and DVD (or any other form of DRM) cannot have unbreakable encryption because it would be a literal impossibility. You posses both the ciphertext and the key at the same time.
More that the phrase "scientific consensus" is a load of balls, science doesn't work that way. There is no 'consensus', just an as-yet-undisproven theory that most accurately explains the current observations and makes testable predictions. That most scientists will accept that this theory as 'correct' is a byproduct of the theory being accurate, not the other way round. Questioning whether a theory is correct (i.e. attempting to find observations that do not correlate with the theory's predictions) is the very way science advances, and not 'denying the consensus' or somesuch sillyness. That there are people who blindly ignore evidence in their attempt to smear a theory with inconvenient predictions muddies the waters, and results in our current state where anyone who so much as questions any data or theory on anthropogenic climate change is an "anti-science global warming denier", and the slightest correction to data is "proof of the gubernment conspiracy", with BOTH of these being a detriment to actual climate science.
3DTV itself, or rather stereoscopic display technology, is perfectly fine. The problem lies in pants-on-head-retard directors who wouldn't know convergence depth interocular distance from their own anus. Creating stereoscopic video that doesn't cause headaches is HARD. You can;t justtape two cameras together and carry on as usual, and you sure as hell can't expect a 2D movie retrofitted to 3D to look even half decent.
Imagine if colour TV had started of with everything in bright block primary colours only.
Extraterrestrial cells? Check.
Delivered by meteor? Check.
Reproduce rapidly when heat is applied? Check.
Start stockpiling Head & Shoulders!
paying for the tools you use
How about if you encode using, say, x264? The tool is free, but you'd still have to pay the MPEG-LA for... well, owning some specific variants of some algorithms.
Or, for a slightly less disfiguring alternative, there are cosmetic surgeries that involve lengthening bones.
Did you find yourself hip-deep in cats the last time you left the house?
If you're a Dorf, you don't even need to leave.
They might be proof of A god. One of many, in a rather unpleasant pantheon. Check to see if they have five-fold symmetry and iris-mouths.
Conspiracy theorists have been haarping on about the thing for years, even blaming it for effects that occurred years before it's construction was completed!
Video quality is definitely a case of "you've seen it, you can't unsee it". Overuse of DVNR, upscaling, poor deinterlacing, bitrate starvation, abuse of colour timing (orange and teal, ORANGE AND TEAL!)... once you know what you're looking for it becomes glaringly obvious when someone has been lazy/half-arsed/incompetent.
These are the kinds of people that absolutely won't believe in the medicinal properties of herbs (really, how do you think medicine got invented? We noticed X + Y vegetable cures chronic pain, and 2000 years later some scientist isolated chemicals that he packaged into a pill as a pain killer...), won't believe that meditation helps reduce stress (non-scientific bullshit, you could just sleep...), etc; anything that doesn't sound like it came out of a lab coat is obvious bullshit.
A gross misrepresentation and over-generalisation. I personally do not 'refuse to believe in the medicinal properties of herbs'. What I refuse to accept is that chewing on a leaf is somehow more effective than the refined medicine created from that leaf. I have no doubts that the brain'sstate can be affected by meditation, reading a book, playing a videogame, spending time on the firing range, or having a nap.
Thus these people are ignorant to the portion of the world that has not yet been explained. These people would have been ignorant to the concept that the earth rotates around the sun 500 years ago-- I mean shit, look at the sky, the sun starts at one point in the sky and winds up on the exact opposite side. Obviously it goes around the Earth! And all contemporary reasoning has not explained how in the fuck the earth could be going around the sun, or spinning, so such claims are bullshit.
I suspect that you may be trolling here. If not, you are demonstrating a remarkable level of ignorance about the basic tenets of scientific thinking.
Funny, I never noticed that happening before.
No, make it bigger! Bring back 5.25" form factor drives!
To fit passengers comfortable into the wing, it needs to be a goddamn big wing. A wing that big could only be used on the most mass of the mass transit routes to be economical, would be expensive to develop, and would require airports to be rebuilt to accommodate them at the terminals (real deal-killer).
Like any cool new thing, it's legacy compatibility that scuppers it.
You can't buy a supersonic jet
There are one or two supersonic business jets, but they're so expensive (about as expensive as buying an ex-mil supersonic jet and getting it refurbished to the required standard) that "you can't buy one" essentially still applies.
A few month ago, I sat in a pub watching (live) an Astronaut operating on the internals of the Hubble Space Telescope. On my phone.
We live in the goddamn future!
Last I heard, there was all of one 3D-BluRay movie.
A cursory Google turned up at least 19, not including 'coming soon'. I don't doubt there are more available.
I'd point out that all you ever see of the world is a pair of 2D images, but if you want to get nit-picky....
It depends on the glasses. Simply circular-polarised glasses are dirt cheap. The funky multi-layer-dichroic filters used in Dolby-3D (it's like anaglyph, but with 6 specific wavelengths, 3 per eye. Think RlRrGlGrBlBr) are hella expensive. $50 per pair is what I've seen quoted and mentioned by the engineers. I guess the feel that the money saved on not needing a retro-reflective silver screen is better spent on the initial glasses cost and cleaning them between performances.
BTW, is the 'pay for your glasses' thing an American thing? Last time I saw a 3D film (in the UK), the glasses were included in the ticket price and gave them back after the performance.
You though Health was horrifying? Two words: Helvetica. Scenario.
Look Around You.
Look. Around. You.
Have you guessed what we're looking for, yet? Yes, that's right - it's computer programming.
[ MAN SITTING AT TYPEWRITER ]
This man is writing a computer programme. A computer programme is like a script that tells a computer what to do. Like people, computers understand different languages - some examples of computer languages are:
* C
* PASCAL
* BASIC
* C double-plus
* C triple-plus
* C detuned bassoon
* Norwegian
Your school computer is probably a BBC Microcomputerisation Engine and, therefore, understands a dialect of BASIC known as 'HyperFrench.'
Make a note of this in your copybook... now.