Also.. 20gb?! Somehow I enjoy the thought of piracy a lot less when everything I save in not buying movies, I spend in buying hard-drives / bandwidth!:)
not really.
1 HD-DVD : $20.50 at newegg.com
1 500GB Hard drive : $159.99, also at newegg.com
for the price of the drive, you can buy 8 movies, but the drive will hold roughly 25 movies.
actual cost per downloaded movie : $6.40 (not one cent of which goes to the MPAA) so you save $14.10 per movie.
Why are the child porn types writing software that magically puts child porn on random people's computers? I'm really not clear about what they're accomplishing there, other than potentially hurting their business by bringing child pornography into the spotlight.
i would imagine a parallel to a P2P network. spread it out among unrelated systems, makes it that much harder to track down the actual servers, or maybe eliminate the actual servers and work it on a completely distributed network.
i imagine it would make it very difficult to track down the scum that make the stuff and makes it difficult to track down the downloaders as there would be a huge number of false positives.
because if people actually discover you can get good music through means other than the RIAA labels (as if they have much in the way of good music anyway), the entire industry will collapse and bring out the end of all civilization!
Well, there's an argument to be made that sex is more harmful to children than violence.
Violence (participating in it, not seeing it necessarily) is less likely to be repeated by the child. Example: a 5th grader gets addicted to porn, and molests his baby sister. This happens. More than you think. And when it does, the victim can be (and usually is) scarred for life.
yes, how about some links?
your post merely makes a whole bunch of statements, but i see no sign of anything backing them up.
And when it comes down to it, why didn't she merely turn off the monitor?
this distinctly reminds me of an incident at an elementry school in my town. about 10 years ago, someone was assigned to create a list of "approved" websites for the grade 1-4 classes
said person was not at all technologically competant and listed sites by the URLs and several of them were, umm, less than appropriate for that age group. the teacher of the first class using that list has the site load up before any of the other students and was sitting next to the all-room switch (a single switch linked to all the monitors so they could all be shut off at once for the night) and hit it quickly.
No need to apologize for someone with theories like this. Since they refuse to believe or research anything outside their own narrow views...they are irrelevant.
the fact that school board officals are listening to this guy shows that they are not irrelevant.
it's much easier to call the guy a nutjob, a Christian whacko, or anything else derogatory then to dismantle his argument in a logical way.
the problem being that it is fundamentally difficult/impossible to logically dismantle an arguement based upon religion. it cannot be demonstratedly be proven false, which also happens to be why they aren't considered scientific theories.
But the vast majority of Americans are never a party to a patent lawsuit.
i remember hearing sometime that roughly 1/3 of americans are party to a lawsuit at least once in their lifetimes. can't remember when though and google turns up too many irrelivant results for it.
1. web testing to make sure your pages work in IE (this is questionable as the article mentions different behavior"
2. accessing idiotically designed websites that require Internet explorer to access (with no good reason why they need it. i know of a few that work perfectly fine if you trick them into thinking it is IE, but otherwise they won't let you in.)
I would, quite honestly, prefer a random lottery based system to the one we have now.
I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
But seriously, that is a rather interesting idea. It rather echos the "rule by the unwilling" concept. If they don't want the job, they obviously don't see the self-benefits and are unlikely to abuse their power, at least until they see said benefits, necessitating frequent changes in the people filling such roles, which the current systems seem to lack.
A random drawing of 200 or so people every 6 to 12 months should be adequate to form such a system. Of course, allowing laypeople to acclimate themselves to a government system in a reasonable period of time would require the system to be simplified considerably, though that's not necessarily a bad thing.
you evidently missed several key points of my post.
then it might actually make more sense to just go through the intersection.
and as i said, if he's in the intersection when the light goes red, he gets a ticket for several hundred dollars in the mail. sure, he's doing the "right thing" by going through, but that "right thing" has cost now him several hundred dollars. could be several hundred dollars he can't afford.
Driving so fast that you need to do panic-braking due to yellow lights IS wrong.
for my thinking, i'm assuming he's going 60 or 70 kph, which is the speed limit in several places around my city where this type of incident might occur, though the city counsel here has brains, so we don't have red light cameras.
said guy is driving "safely and sensibly". the light has unexpectedly turned yellow (and might be yellow for either 3 or 6 seconds). he figures it will take him 4 seconds to get through the intersection. he's not willing to bet several hundred dollars on that it is a 6-second light, so he hits the brakes, but the idiot behind him doesn't stop in time and rear-ends him.
now despite him driving sensibly, he now has a smashed up car and likely is going to have a higher insurance rate now.
the guy driving behind the moron could actually try to keep safe driving-distance between the cars so he wouldn't rear-end the car in front of him.
they don't keep a safe distance anyway.
It was the idiot who has zero clue how to drive properly.
yes, but if the camera wasn't there, the guy ahead would have gone through the light
If some idiot crashes in to a streetlight, do you blame the streetlight or the driver? After all, had there been no streetlight, nothing would have happened.
that has nothing to do with this situation. we're not discussing the behavior of the at-fault driver. we're talking about the guy doing nothing wrong.
Um, no. That's not "camera causing an accident". That's "idiot behind the wheel causing an accident".
without camera: guy runs through a yellow light safely
with camea: guy slams brakes in case the light goes red while he's in the intersection, tripping the red light camera and giving him a ticket in the mail, but the guy behind him wasn't expecting this and can't stop in time.
Slashdot Mirror
if you're downloading it in a standard, unencrypted format, why in hell would you need all the HDCP crap?
going by the links you put up, i think that VC-1 is partially based on MPEG-4.
Also.. 20gb?! Somehow I enjoy the thought of piracy a lot less when everything I save in not buying movies, I spend in buying hard-drives / bandwidth! :)
not really.
1 HD-DVD : $20.50 at newegg.com
1 500GB Hard drive : $159.99, also at newegg.com
for the price of the drive, you can buy 8 movies, but the drive will hold roughly 25 movies.
actual cost per downloaded movie : $6.40 (not one cent of which goes to the MPAA) so you save $14.10 per movie.
Canada still didn't ratify anti-piracy laws.
yet. from what i've heard, they're reving up to try again. time to start mailing some letters.
*sigh* and my mod points ran out yesterday. this guy definitely has the idea.
Must be why the Canadian government hasn't gone crazy yet.
I'm honestly surprised that that scenario hasn't happened yet.
Why are the child porn types writing software that magically puts child porn on random people's computers? I'm really not clear about what they're accomplishing there, other than potentially hurting their business by bringing child pornography into the spotlight.
i would imagine a parallel to a P2P network. spread it out among unrelated systems, makes it that much harder to track down the actual servers, or maybe eliminate the actual servers and work it on a completely distributed network.
i imagine it would make it very difficult to track down the scum that make the stuff and makes it difficult to track down the downloaders as there would be a huge number of false positives.
If it's not your music, why do you care?
because if people actually discover you can get good music through means other than the RIAA labels (as if they have much in the way of good music anyway), the entire industry will collapse and bring out the end of all civilization!
Well, there's an argument to be made that sex is more harmful to children than violence.
Violence (participating in it, not seeing it necessarily) is less likely to be repeated by the child. Example: a 5th grader gets addicted to porn, and molests his baby sister. This happens. More than you think. And when it does, the victim can be (and usually is) scarred for life.
yes, how about some links?
your post merely makes a whole bunch of statements, but i see no sign of anything backing them up.
And when it comes down to it, why didn't she merely turn off the monitor?
this distinctly reminds me of an incident at an elementry school in my town. about 10 years ago, someone was assigned to create a list of "approved" websites for the grade 1-4 classes
said person was not at all technologically competant and listed sites by the URLs and several of them were, umm, less than appropriate for that age group. the teacher of the first class using that list has the site load up before any of the other students and was sitting next to the all-room switch (a single switch linked to all the monitors so they could all be shut off at once for the night) and hit it quickly.
said person decided to retire early.
No need to apologize for someone with theories like this. Since they refuse to believe or research anything outside their own narrow views...they are irrelevant.
the fact that school board officals are listening to this guy shows that they are not irrelevant.
it's much easier to call the guy a nutjob, a Christian whacko, or anything else derogatory then to dismantle his argument in a logical way.
the problem being that it is fundamentally difficult/impossible to logically dismantle an arguement based upon religion. it cannot be demonstratedly be proven false, which also happens to be why they aren't considered scientific theories.
Funny you should mention that one, as it was eventually proven to be incorrect. That's was Einstein's claim to fame.
well, it's still pretty valid when you're not dealing with significant fractions of the speed of light.
well, we'll be coordinated anyway.
But the vast majority of Americans are never a party to a patent lawsuit.
i remember hearing sometime that roughly 1/3 of americans are party to a lawsuit at least once in their lifetimes. can't remember when though and google turns up too many irrelivant results for it.
yes, but point 4 says "Blades don't need reloading"
the entire building is no smoking.
which is a good thing in my book.
1. web testing to make sure your pages work in IE (this is questionable as the article mentions different behavior"
2. accessing idiotically designed websites that require Internet explorer to access (with no good reason why they need it. i know of a few that work perfectly fine if you trick them into thinking it is IE, but otherwise they won't let you in.)
depends on how many hours. spend 2 hours on it, that's $26.25 per hour.
but anyway, at least read the summery. it says it was "more a victory in principle than anything else".
Opinions and agendas are like assholes. everyone has one.
I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
But seriously, that is a rather interesting idea. It rather echos the "rule by the unwilling" concept. If they don't want the job, they obviously don't see the self-benefits and are unlikely to abuse their power, at least until they see said benefits, necessitating frequent changes in the people filling such roles, which the current systems seem to lack.
A random drawing of 200 or so people every 6 to 12 months should be adequate to form such a system. Of course, allowing laypeople to acclimate themselves to a government system in a reasonable period of time would require the system to be simplified considerably, though that's not necessarily a bad thing.
and as i said, if he's in the intersection when the light goes red, he gets a ticket for several hundred dollars in the mail. sure, he's doing the "right thing" by going through, but that "right thing" has cost now him several hundred dollars. could be several hundred dollars he can't afford.
for my thinking, i'm assuming he's going 60 or 70 kph, which is the speed limit in several places around my city where this type of incident might occur, though the city counsel here has brains, so we don't have red light cameras.
now despite him driving sensibly, he now has a smashed up car and likely is going to have a higher insurance rate now.
they don't keep a safe distance anyway.
yes, but if the camera wasn't there, the guy ahead would have gone through the light
that has nothing to do with this situation. we're not discussing the behavior of the at-fault driver. we're talking about the guy doing nothing wrong.
Um, no. That's not "camera causing an accident". That's "idiot behind the wheel causing an accident".
without camera: guy runs through a yellow light safely
with camea: guy slams brakes in case the light goes red while he's in the intersection, tripping the red light camera and giving him a ticket in the mail, but the guy behind him wasn't expecting this and can't stop in time.