The big ISP's in Canada LOVE torrent sites, Trackers bring in ALOT of cash to the ISP's that shelter them.
I highly doubt that. ISPs want you to buy their service, but they don't actually want you to use it for anything other than light web and email usage. I use Rogers and they are probably one of the worst offenders when it comes to throttling BitTorrent traffic. I can easily get 700-800kb/sec with certain web sites or ftps, yet I usually only get 25-50kb/sec with BitTorrent if I'm lucky. If ISPs loved BitTorrent so much, they wouldn't be throttling it...
From what I've read, the demonoid servers got hosed and the admins have to restore everything from backups. The TorrentFreak article is just baseless speculation at this point and slashdot isn't helping by spreading these rumours.
Thank you for clearing things up. I've never owned an iphone or a cellphone, so I don't really know how things work. I was pretty skeptical with your original comparison as it seemed you were showing an iphone bias. Again, thanks for replying and I'm sorry if I had to question your comparison, that's just my nature to question anyone who doesn't show sources.
Take a look at the new rules that went into effect on January 1st 2007, on the Elections Canada website.
Corporations, trade unions, associations and groups can no longer make political contributions. However, your employer can give you a paid leave of absence during an election period to allow you to be a nomination contestant or a candidate without that leave being considered a contribution.
When I listed those corporate contributions from the 2006 Durham riding, corporate contributions were still allowed. It looks like the Canadian government has finally cracked down on corporate donations. Also, if you look at other rules on that list, the Canadian government is really cracking down on all forms of campaign contributions and/or lobbying efforts.
There used to be a $2500 individual contribution limit, it's now $1100. Also, you have to be a Canadian Citizen or permanent resident in order to make a donation. This should cut down on all those American lobbyists bribing Canadian politicians. Of course there are probably still loopholes like those lobbyists can obtain a Canadian citizenship or they can just give that money to a Canadian citizen who will donate it on their behalf, etc..
Still, these new rules are a good thing in my opinion.
Like someone else mentioned, there's a legal limit for contributions in Canada, and it's quite small to avoid large payoffs like we see down in the States. It's actually even more strict now than it was a year or two ago. Take a look at the new rules on the Elections Canada website.
Here are some of the rules that just came into effect on January 1, 2007:
# You can make a political donation to registered political entities only if you are a citizen or permanent resident of Canada. (emphasis mine)
This rule is mostly meant to prevent American lobbyists from paying off Canadian politicians.
# You can give no more than $1,100* in each calendar year to each registered political party. # You can give no more than $1,100* in total in any calendar year to the various entities of each registered political party (registered associations, nomination contestants and candidates). # You can give no more than $1,100* to each independent candidate for a particular election. # You can give no more than $1,100* in total to the leadership contestants in a particular leadership contest.
Basically, $1,100 is the limit that you can give to each political party.
# You can no longer make a cash contribution of more than $20 to registered political entities.
You can't pay in cash if the amount is over $20, it has to be a check, etc.. (this is most likely because cash donations are harder to trace)
# Corporations, trade unions, associations and groups can no longer make political contributions. However, your employer can give you a paid leave of absence during an election period to allow you to be a nomination contestant or a candidate without that leave being considered a contribution. (emphasis mine)
This is new. In the past, corporations could make donations.
# If you are running as a nomination contestant or a candidate, you can make an additional contribution up to $1,000 in total per election from your own funds to your own campaign. You can divide this amount between your nomination and candidate campaigns as you wish. # If you are running as a party leadership contestant, you can make an additional contribution of up to $1,000 in total per contest from your own funds to your own campaign.
You can only spend $1000 out of your own pocket if you are running. I think this is meant to prevent those rich politicians from having a financial advantage over the average Joe who is also running for office.
# All contributions over $20 must be receipted and reported.
This has to do with that "You can no longer make a cash contribution of more than $20 to registered political entities" rule I mentioned above.
# Candidates cannot accept any gift that might influence them as eventual members of Parliament.
That's a no brainer.
# Candidates may accept a gift from a relative or as a normal expression of courtesy or protocol.
That seems fair enough. There is also a rule where if you receive a gift that is worth over $500, you must report it, the circumstance where you received the gift, etc..
I'm really liking most of these new rules. Anything to cut down on lobbying in Canada is good in my books. You shouldn't need large amounts of money to run for office. In the States, I hear about people running for President and they spend over $60 million on their campaign. That's just nuts in my opinion. You shouldn't need that much money to get elected. It should be on merit alone, not how much media coverage you can buy.
I was actually going to raise the issue with Bev Oda in a seperate thread. She's been taking bribes from the broadcasting industry since 2004, maybe earlier... It's amazing how long she has remained in office even though she is clearly receiving contributions from broadcasting corporations.
In November 2006, Oda planned on holding a fundraising dinner for broadcasting executives, just weeks before a major review of broadcasting rules. The event was cancelled, but a number of donations were still made.
If you go to the Elections Canada website, you can see all of the corporations and individuals who donated to Bev Oda's Durham riding in 2006 (Unfortunately there's no direct link so you have to use their search feature). Select "Ontario" under Provice/Territory. Then select "Conservative Party of Canada" under Political Party. Now under Electoral District select "Durham". Leave the years 2006 to 2006. Hit the search button and then select Durham "Conservative Association / 2006". With that entry selected, hit the Add button. Finally, hit the lower right search button (not the top one).... (It's a horrible interface to access this public information...)
Now you should see the following three options:
By return summary Allows you to search summary information on contributions made to registered associations By return details The easiest way to view the complete details of contributions and expenses for registered associations By contributor Allows you to search for contributions made to registered associations
Click on "By return details".
Here's the list of corporate contributions (from Part 2b - Statement of Contributions Received - Details of Contributions from Corporations)
5 of those 6 corporate donations are from media corporations. It might even be 6 out of 6 but I couldn't find any details on "Gorritane Bros. Ltd.".
Also, much more disturbing is the list of individual contributions (Part 2a - Statement of Contributions Received - Details of Contributions from Individuals). The following are just the individuals who I could identify as working for some media corporation or group:
23 Gail Asper Oct. 31, 2006 250.00 5 Leonard Asper Jan. 26, 2006 2,500.00 Leonard Asper is the President and CEO of CanWest, a major Canadian media company (they own Global TV). It appears he also got his wife to donate to Bev's riding.
13 Andre Bureau Oct. 16, 2006 500.00 Andrea Bureau is the former chairman of the CTRC and is now the President and CEO of Astral Communications Inc (now known as Astral Media). Astral owns several Canadian radio and television stations.
14 Lisa De Wilde Oct. 16, 2006 250.00 Lisa De Wilde was a former president and CEO of Astral Communications (now known as Astral Media). She is now the CEO of TVOntario. Interesting how she and Andre Bureau both made donations on the same day. Lisa was the former President and CEO of Astral while Andre is the current president and CEO, and they both managed to make donations to Bev Oda on the same day?
16 Robin Jackson Oct. 20, 2006 250.00 Robin Jackson is the Executive Director of the CIFVF (The Canadian Independent Film and Video Fund). Here's a quote 'The Canadian Independent Film & Video Fund (CIFVF) is a dynamic private sector funding body which supports non-theatrical film, v
I don't really agree, most games seem to get worse after the 3rd incarnation.
Doom 1 and 2 were definitely some of my favourite FPS games of all time. Doom 3 wasn't nearly as fun or classic as the original two. The Quake series was also one of my favourites growing up. Quake 1 was probably the best, followed by Quake 2 and 3. Quake 1 and 2 had amazing single and multiplayer while Quake 3 only focused on multiplayer. So I wouldn't say that Quake 3 had features that the first two lacked, if anything it was the opposite. Anyway, I think the original doom 1-2 and quake 1-3 were the best while they tended to get worse over the years (doom 3 and quake 4 were a major letdown).
I don't know if you played the original Descent series, but Descent 1 and 2 were truely amazing games. Descent 3 was also pretty good, but then they decided to make Descent Freespace and while it was fun, it wasn't nearly as good as the originals. So not all games get better with new versions, often they get worse. I used to play the original 2D Duke Nukem 1 and 2 on my first PC. Later on I got Duke Nukem 3D and it was definitely a big improvement over the previous 2D versions. But then what happened? Duke Nukem went down hill after DN 3D and now Duke Nukem Forever is the laughing stock of the internet.
Elder Scrolls was another great series. Most people I know that played Morrowind think it was way better than Oblivion. Oblivion was much better in the graphics department, but Morrowind killed it in many other areas. Again, a game that gets worse over time. Another such game is Shadowrun, I absolutely loved the SNES version. Then Microsoft got the rights and the latest Shadowrun incarnation is truely an insult. The latest Shadowrun is a frigging multiplayer FPS, it's doesn't even resemble the original cyberpunk game.
It's not all bad though. One game that I can think of that has gotten better over the years is Unreal Tournament. I was never a big fan of the original UT, but slowly over the years, UT has gotten better and better. UT2003 was really good and UT2004 was simply amazing. Hopefully UT2007 (now UT3) continues that upward trend and isn't worse than UT2004. You never know though... Sometimes games get better, sometimes they get worse. From my experiences, more games seem to get worse lately as the developer focuses on graphical improvements instead of focusing on what made the previous games great (the gameplay!).
I own a PS3 and it's true, current game selection is pathetic. The only games I plan on buying this year will probably be Ratchet & Clank, Dirt and Assasin's Creed. Of those 3 games, only Ratchet & Clank is a PS3 exclusive. The PS3 won't really start to shine until halfway through 2008 when we have Metal Gear Solid 4, Gran Turismo 5 and Grand Theft Auto 4 (though GTA4 won't be an exclusive).
It's also an amazing dvd player and media server, but most people tend to care about games the most, and I would agree since it's supposed to be a game console primarly. I really do like the media center features though. I have TVersity and I use it to stream videos to my PS3 (TVersity can transcode videos on the fly incase the PS3 can't play a certain codec). It's also an amazing dvd player as it can upscale dvds to 1080p and I notice a big improvement over my old 480p dvd player. I don't even care about the fact that it can play blu-ray movies as the dvd upscaling feature makes my massive dvd collection look even better.
Really? In 2007? Like What? Looking at the release dates [ign.com], I don't see a decent exclusive before LittleBigPlanet or Killzone, both of which are in February.
(emphasis mine)
Only Ratchet & Clank is exclusive, all the other games you mentioned will be on the 360 and PC aswell. But you are right, Ratchet & Clank will be a great exclusive and I'm looking forward to picking up my copy (I own all the Ratchet & Clank PS2 games).
October 23, 2007 Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction
If you've never played Going Commando or Up Your Arsenal, you probably wouldn't understand, but R&C is an awesome series. It's got action, comedy, puzzles, tons of weapons and upgrades, gadgets, racing, secrets, space battles, etc... It's got a ton of replay value and I still go back and play the old PS2 versions once in a while. It's the only PS3 game I've been looking forward to this year, all the others are non-exclusive or come out in 2008.
I want a computer without Windows!! Where can I buy one...?
Answer: I can't.
I call bullshit. Pretty much any mom and pop shop will gladly sell you a system without Windows pre-installed. It's only the major OEMs like HP and Dell that have in the past only bundled their systems with Microsoft Windows.
The local chinese shop where I buy all my computer parts also builds and sells PCs. If you go to their website and use the form to put together your own PC, it comes with NO operating system by default. If you actually want an OS, you have to specify which one you want and they will sell you that and/or install it for you.
If you know where to look, you can always find a place that will sell you a PC without Windows. That's clearly not the "Answer: I can't" that you claimed, it sounds more like your answer should have been "I'm too lazy to look".
Funny how you picked on Microsoft, but left Apple alone. Apple is just as guilty of locking people into their hardware as Microsoft is guilty of locking people into their software. They are rather similar in that regard.
Sorry, but I find it extremely hard to trust your numbers as you don't even cite one source. Also, you aren't showing the full picture (where's voice charges?!). Give me a full picture with voice calls and I will be more inclined to believe you.
The cheapest contract is $59.99/month price, you get 450 minutes, 200 text SMS messages, unlimited data and 5000 night/weekend minutes. For $79.99/month you get 900 minutes, 200 text messages, unlimited data and unlimited night/weekend minutes. This goes all the way up to $219.99/month for 6000 minutes, 200 text messages, unlimited data and unlimited night/weekend minutes. Also, you can pay an additional $10/month for 1500 text messages (instead of 200) or $20/month for unlimited text messages.
Now find comparable plans for the Treo, BlackBerry, etc.. and compare them using those real figures and then I'll be impressed. From what I've seen, the iPhone isn't the most expensive, but it's definitely not the cheapest either.
Also, most of the plans you're comparing aren't even fair comparisons. A lot of them have 1500 text/SMS messages, but you're only using the 200 message plan for the iphone? Atleast add the additional $10/month for 1500 text messages to the iphone plan to make it a bit more even. You mentioned 200 additional messages for $4.99/mo with the iphone, but from what I've read, that only covers direct AT&T to AT&T messages, but I could be wrong.
Text: $71.88 Data: $240 TOTAL: $299.88/yr
How does $71.88 + $240 equal $299.88 and not $311.88? I hope all these mistakes were just honest mistakes and not a result of you purposefully modifying the results.
A model that ends in xx00 supports a 1066mhz FSB while a model that ends in xx50 supports a 1333mhz FSB.
This isn't always true, older chips all ended in xx00 and some used an 800mhz FSB and some used a 1066mhz FSB. Also, I believe there are a couple of chips that end in xx20 and xx40 to confuse things a little further. I'm pretty sure all newer chips that support a 1333mhz FSB end in "50" though instead of "00".
I actually think Intel's recent chip naming convention is pretty good. It's not great, but it's pretty easy to figure out. Basically, each chip is given a letter (or two in this case) to tell us what type of chip it is. Each chip is also given a number to let us know how fast it is relative to clock speed (the higher the number, the higher the clock speed).
AFAIK, there are 3 letters that Intel uses to label their desktop chips. E means dual core, Q means quad core and X means extreme. The difference with the "X" or extreme chips is that they have an unlocked multiplier, which makes it much easier for people to overclock them.
So, just by looking at the letter(s) of the model number, right away I can tell that the QX9650 is a quad core "extreme" chip. It's also probably clocked fairly high judging by the number. Also, I can tell by the xx50 that this chip supports a 1333mhz FSB. Older chips end in xx00 and use a 1066mhz FSB while chips that support a 1333mhz FSB end in xx50.
So to summarize, if you know what to look for, you can gather a lot of information just by looking at "QX9650". You can tell if it's a dual or quad core, you can tell if the multiplier is unlocked, you can tell if it supports a 1066mhz or 1333mhz FSB and you can get an idea of how high the cpu is clocked.
For detailed information on each Intel Core 2 processor, check out the wikipedia page.
Thank you for using logic and reasoning instead of using the moral high ground card and shouting down anyone who doesn't share your beliefs. I lack the grasp of the english language to express my views as clearly and concisely as you have done, but I wanted to say basically the same thing to several people in this thread. It's amazing how many people are using the sympathy card in this thread. Again, Kudos to you!
I'm a fan of NewYorkCountryLawyer, but I've lost a fair amount of respect for him after reading some things he's written in this thread. He'll probably mark me "foe" now because I don't fall in line and agree with his every view. It's quite sad really that there are people out there like this.
I have a lot of sympathy for this woman, but having MS makes no difference. I don't care if your rich, poor, blind, dumb, sick or healthy... We're all equal human beings and we should be treated as equal, no matter what.
The control scheme on the DS version of Metroid was absolutely horrible, the game itself was okay, but I had major issues with the controls. It's the only game I can think of in recent memory where the control scheme actually caused me great amounts of pain. I'm no stranger to game induced pain, I used to get blisters after playing SNES games for hours on end. Also, I used to suffer from mild carpel tunnel from all the PC gaming I did a couple years ago, but that pales in comparison to the amount of pain I got while trying to play Metroid DS.
The way the control scheme was set up, you had to hold the DS with your left hand while simultaneously using the D-PAD and the top left button. Imagine clenching your left hand in a fist, now imagine using your thumb to control the D-PAD while simultaneously using your index finger to control the top left button on the DS, all the while the remaining 3 fingers are used to hold onto the DS. Well you can't just use those 3 fingers to hold the DS as they are on placed on the back of the DS, you also need your thumb to help clench the DS, but the problem is you also need that thumb to use the D-PAD. You may be wondering, why don't you just use your right hand to help hold the DS... Well you can't use your right hand as you use your right hand to hold the stylus pen so you can look around, aim, etc...
I couldn't even play the game for more than 15 minutes before my left hand was so cramped I had to stop playing. I tried lots of different ways of holding the DS as I really wanted to enjoy the game, but I could never find a pain-free way of controlling it. I ended up shelving that game and I haven't touched it since.
Thief 3 was good, but Thief 2 was better. If they make another game in the series I hope they drop some of the overly simplistic console elements and return to the older interface.
I doubt "they" will make a Thief 4 anytime soon, unless a 3rd company decides to continue the series.
Looking Glass Studios made the original Thief 1 and 2, they went out of business in 2000. Ion Storm Inc. then made Thief 3, they got bought out and basically went out of business in 2005.
All those titles sound pretty good, but only Mass Effect and Too Human are xbox 360 exclusives AFAIK. Most of those games you listed will be on the PS3 and/or PC.
I already bought/preordered my copy of The Orange Box and I'm playing the beta of Team Fortress 2 and it's absolutely amazing. I'm a diehard team fortress fan, ever since the original QW:TF, and I love what Valve has done with TF2. I don't really like the fact that Valve removed all grenades, pyro rocket launcher, medic infections, etc.. It's basically a simplified version of team fortress, but it's still amazing. It took me a while to get over the fact that they removed grenades (I was pretty pissed to say the least), but now I'm really starting to enjoy TF2 and it's a solid 10 out of 10. I've actually been itching to play for the last couple hours and I'm probably going to go play after I submit this post.
I had to do some googling to find out whether you were telling the truth or not. I managed to find this CBC story from 2004. Here's a quote from that CBC story:
Compared to other countries with similar economies, Canada's spending is in the ballpark, according to a report from the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development. The latest figures on what countries spend on health care come from 2002, when Canada spent 9.6 per cent of GDP on health care:
* France 9.7%.
* Germany 10.9%.
* Denmark 8.8%.
* Sweden 9.2%.
At the high end of the scale is the United States, which spent 14.6 per cent of GDP on health care.
The story is from 2004 and they're quoting statistics from 2002, but I'd imagine those are still pretty close to what they are today. So it looks like you were correct, Canada spent around 9.6% our GDP back in 2002 while the United States spent around 14.6% of their GDP. My question is, does that ~15% of US GDP spent on health care take into account things like prescription costs? I know prescriptions can cost a lot more (sometimes 2-3 times more) in the States then they do here in Canada. Would perscription costs be enough to increase United States health care spending by that much or is there other factors?
Canadians pay 9% of GDP to insure 100% of citizens, compared with 14% of GDP to insure 85% of Americans.
Here's a quote from the "Price of Health Care" section of that wikipedia article:
Health care is one of the most expensive items of both nations' budgets. The U.S. government spends more per capita on health care than the government does in Canada. In 2004, the government of Canada spent $2,120 (in US dollars) per person on health care, while the United States government spent $2,724.[5]
However, U.S. government spending covers less than half of all health care costs. Private spending for health care is also far greater in the U.S. than in Canada. In Canada, an average of $917 was spent annually by individuals or private insurance companies for health care, including dental, eye care, and drugs. In the U.S., this number is $3,372.[5] In 2004, health care consumed 15.4% of U.S. annual GDP. In Canada, only 9.8% of GDP was spent on health care.
Finally, I think the section on malpractice litigation is fairly interesting aswell:
Malpractice litigation
The extra cost of malpractice lawsuits accounts for some of the difference in health spending in the two countries. In Canada the total cost of settlements, legal fees, and insurance comes to $4 per person each year, but in the United States it is $16.[68] Average payouts to American plaintiffs were $265,103, while payouts to Canadian plaintiffs were somewhat higher, averaging $309,417[69]. However, malpractice suits are far more common in the U.S., with 350% more suits filed each year per person.[68] While malpractice costs are significantly higher in the U.S., they make up only a small proportion of total medical spending. The total cost of defending and settling malpractice lawsuits in the U.S. in 2001 was approximately $6.5bn, or 0.46% of total health spending.[70] Critics say that defensive medicine consumes up to 9% of American healthcare expenses.[71][72] In the same year in Canada, the total burden of malpractice suits was $237 million, or 0.27% of total health spending.[68]
I had to look up defensive medicine as I've never heard of that term before. That s
Try this Ipod Nano at future shop 219$ (or BestBuy.ca)
Same Ipod nano at BestBuy.com at 149$
I'm surprised no one else noticed this mistake, but you're comparing an 8GB ipod nano on those Canadian websites to a 4GB ipod nano on the American website.
"As far as we know, effective rate reaches at 40MBps or 320Mbps for bulk transfer on a USB 2.0 hard drive with no one else is sharing the bus."
The part I emphasised is probably the most important part of that sentence. I've run read tests on both my external hard drives in the past and they maxed out at around 30MB/sec. I have around 4 other USB devices plugged in at all times, so that might explain while my externals are only getting closer to 30MB/sec over 40MB/sec. I always assumed that each USB device could get 480Mbps PER device, not 320Mbps for all devices... That's pretty crappy now that I think about it. I have 2 externals, a usb headset, a usb mouse, a usb gamepad, an ipod that uses usb, etc.. All these devices have to share that paltry amount of bandwidth? Now I understand why people prefer eSATA....
It's rumoured that Intel will release a new server platform/chipset which will use DDR2 memory later this year. Do a google search for "San Clemente chipset" or "Cranberry Lake platform". It's supposedly going to be an entry-level server platform which uses DDR2-667 registered memory.
Basically, intel releases a new architecture every 2 years and in between that they release a die shrink/derivative.
Penryn is mainly just a die shrink of Merom (codename for the laptop version of the Core 2). Merom was a 65nm chip and Penrym is a 45nm chip using the same architecture. Next they will release a new architecture using 45nm (codename Nehalem), then they will release a die shrink of Nehalem using 32nm, and so on and so forth...
Here's a quick rundown:
2006: Core 2 architecture released at 65nm 2007: Die shrink of the Core 2 architecture from 65nm to 45nm 2008: New architecture (code name Nehalem) released at 45nm 2009: Die shrink of the Nehalem architecture from 45nm to 32nm 2010: New architecture (code name Sandy Bridge, formerly known as Gesher) released at 32nm 2011: Die shrink of the Sandy Bridge architecture from 32nm to 22nm
Slashdot Mirror
I highly doubt that. ISPs want you to buy their service, but they don't actually want you to use it for anything other than light web and email usage. I use Rogers and they are probably one of the worst offenders when it comes to throttling BitTorrent traffic. I can easily get 700-800kb/sec with certain web sites or ftps, yet I usually only get 25-50kb/sec with BitTorrent if I'm lucky. If ISPs loved BitTorrent so much, they wouldn't be throttling it...
From what I've read, the demonoid servers got hosed and the admins have to restore everything from backups. The TorrentFreak article is just baseless speculation at this point and slashdot isn't helping by spreading these rumours.
Thank you for clearing things up. I've never owned an iphone or a cellphone, so I don't really know how things work. I was pretty skeptical with your original comparison as it seemed you were showing an iphone bias. Again, thanks for replying and I'm sorry if I had to question your comparison, that's just my nature to question anyone who doesn't show sources.
When I listed those corporate contributions from the 2006 Durham riding, corporate contributions were still allowed. It looks like the Canadian government has finally cracked down on corporate donations. Also, if you look at other rules on that list, the Canadian government is really cracking down on all forms of campaign contributions and/or lobbying efforts.
There used to be a $2500 individual contribution limit, it's now $1100. Also, you have to be a Canadian Citizen or permanent resident in order to make a donation. This should cut down on all those American lobbyists bribing Canadian politicians. Of course there are probably still loopholes like those lobbyists can obtain a Canadian citizenship or they can just give that money to a Canadian citizen who will donate it on their behalf, etc..
Still, these new rules are a good thing in my opinion.
Like someone else mentioned, there's a legal limit for contributions in Canada, and it's quite small to avoid large payoffs like we see down in the States. It's actually even more strict now than it was a year or two ago. Take a look at the new rules on the Elections Canada website.
Here are some of the rules that just came into effect on January 1, 2007:
# You can make a political donation to registered political entities only if you are a citizen or permanent resident of Canada. (emphasis mine)
This rule is mostly meant to prevent American lobbyists from paying off Canadian politicians.
# You can give no more than $1,100* in each calendar year to each registered political party.
# You can give no more than $1,100* in total in any calendar year to the various entities of each registered political party (registered associations, nomination contestants and candidates).
# You can give no more than $1,100* to each independent candidate for a particular election.
# You can give no more than $1,100* in total to the leadership contestants in a particular leadership contest.
Basically, $1,100 is the limit that you can give to each political party.
# You can no longer make a cash contribution of more than $20 to registered political entities.
You can't pay in cash if the amount is over $20, it has to be a check, etc.. (this is most likely because cash donations are harder to trace)
# Corporations, trade unions, associations and groups can no longer make political contributions. However, your employer can give you a paid leave of absence during an election period to allow you to be a nomination contestant or a candidate without that leave being considered a contribution. (emphasis mine)
This is new. In the past, corporations could make donations.
# If you are running as a nomination contestant or a candidate, you can make an additional contribution up to $1,000 in total per election from your own funds to your own campaign. You can divide this amount between your nomination and candidate campaigns as you wish.
# If you are running as a party leadership contestant, you can make an additional contribution of up to $1,000 in total per contest from your own funds to your own campaign.
You can only spend $1000 out of your own pocket if you are running. I think this is meant to prevent those rich politicians from having a financial advantage over the average Joe who is also running for office.
# All contributions over $20 must be receipted and reported.
This has to do with that "You can no longer make a cash contribution of more than $20 to registered political entities" rule I mentioned above.
# Candidates cannot accept any gift that might influence them as eventual members of Parliament.
That's a no brainer.
# Candidates may accept a gift from a relative or as a normal expression of courtesy or protocol.
That seems fair enough. There is also a rule where if you receive a gift that is worth over $500, you must report it, the circumstance where you received the gift, etc..
I'm really liking most of these new rules. Anything to cut down on lobbying in Canada is good in my books. You shouldn't need large amounts of money to run for office. In the States, I hear about people running for President and they spend over $60 million on their campaign. That's just nuts in my opinion. You shouldn't need that much money to get elected. It should be on merit alone, not how much media coverage you can buy.
From Bev Oda's wikipedia entry:
If you go to the Elections Canada website, you can see all of the corporations and individuals who donated to Bev Oda's Durham riding in 2006 (Unfortunately there's no direct link so you have to use their search feature). Select "Ontario" under Provice/Territory. Then select "Conservative Party of Canada" under Political Party. Now under Electoral District select "Durham". Leave the years 2006 to 2006. Hit the search button and then select Durham "Conservative Association / 2006". With that entry selected, hit the Add button. Finally, hit the lower right search button (not the top one).... (It's a horrible interface to access this public information...)
Now you should see the following three options:
Click on "By return details".
Here's the list of corporate contributions (from Part 2b - Statement of Contributions Received - Details of Contributions from Corporations)
1 EMI Music Canada Jan. 3, 2006 500.00
2 EMI Music Canada Jan. 10, 2006 1,000.00
3 Gorritane Bros. Ltd. Feb. 24, 2006 300.00
4 Radio Marketing Bureau Oct. 12, 2006 250.00
5 Alliance Atlantis Oct. 25, 2006 500.00
6 Insight Productions Co. Ltd. Nov. 2, 2006 500.00
5 of those 6 corporate donations are from media corporations. It might even be 6 out of 6 but I couldn't find any details on "Gorritane Bros. Ltd.".
Also, much more disturbing is the list of individual contributions (Part 2a - Statement of Contributions Received - Details of Contributions from Individuals). The following are just the individuals who I could identify as working for some media corporation or group:
23 Gail Asper Oct. 31, 2006 250.00
5 Leonard Asper Jan. 26, 2006 2,500.00
Leonard Asper is the President and CEO of CanWest, a major Canadian media company (they own Global TV). It appears he also got his wife to donate to Bev's riding.
13 Andre Bureau Oct. 16, 2006 500.00
Andrea Bureau is the former chairman of the CTRC and is now the President and CEO of Astral Communications Inc (now known as Astral Media). Astral owns several Canadian radio and television stations.
14 Lisa De Wilde Oct. 16, 2006 250.00
Lisa De Wilde was a former president and CEO of Astral Communications (now known as Astral Media). She is now the CEO of TVOntario. Interesting how she and Andre Bureau both made donations on the same day. Lisa was the former President and CEO of Astral while Andre is the current president and CEO, and they both managed to make donations to Bev Oda on the same day?
16 Robin Jackson Oct. 20, 2006 250.00
Robin Jackson is the Executive Director of the CIFVF (The Canadian Independent Film and Video Fund). Here's a quote 'The Canadian Independent Film & Video Fund (CIFVF) is a dynamic private sector funding body which supports non-theatrical film, v
I don't really agree, most games seem to get worse after the 3rd incarnation.
Doom 1 and 2 were definitely some of my favourite FPS games of all time. Doom 3 wasn't nearly as fun or classic as the original two. The Quake series was also one of my favourites growing up. Quake 1 was probably the best, followed by Quake 2 and 3. Quake 1 and 2 had amazing single and multiplayer while Quake 3 only focused on multiplayer. So I wouldn't say that Quake 3 had features that the first two lacked, if anything it was the opposite. Anyway, I think the original doom 1-2 and quake 1-3 were the best while they tended to get worse over the years (doom 3 and quake 4 were a major letdown).
I don't know if you played the original Descent series, but Descent 1 and 2 were truely amazing games. Descent 3 was also pretty good, but then they decided to make Descent Freespace and while it was fun, it wasn't nearly as good as the originals. So not all games get better with new versions, often they get worse. I used to play the original 2D Duke Nukem 1 and 2 on my first PC. Later on I got Duke Nukem 3D and it was definitely a big improvement over the previous 2D versions. But then what happened? Duke Nukem went down hill after DN 3D and now Duke Nukem Forever is the laughing stock of the internet.
Elder Scrolls was another great series. Most people I know that played Morrowind think it was way better than Oblivion. Oblivion was much better in the graphics department, but Morrowind killed it in many other areas. Again, a game that gets worse over time. Another such game is Shadowrun, I absolutely loved the SNES version. Then Microsoft got the rights and the latest Shadowrun incarnation is truely an insult. The latest Shadowrun is a frigging multiplayer FPS, it's doesn't even resemble the original cyberpunk game.
It's not all bad though. One game that I can think of that has gotten better over the years is Unreal Tournament. I was never a big fan of the original UT, but slowly over the years, UT has gotten better and better. UT2003 was really good and UT2004 was simply amazing. Hopefully UT2007 (now UT3) continues that upward trend and isn't worse than UT2004. You never know though... Sometimes games get better, sometimes they get worse. From my experiences, more games seem to get worse lately as the developer focuses on graphical improvements instead of focusing on what made the previous games great (the gameplay!).
That was John Romero, not John Carmack. It's from the infamous Daikatana poster John Romero's about to make you his bitch. Suck it down.
I own a PS3 and it's true, current game selection is pathetic. The only games I plan on buying this year will probably be Ratchet & Clank, Dirt and Assasin's Creed. Of those 3 games, only Ratchet & Clank is a PS3 exclusive. The PS3 won't really start to shine until halfway through 2008 when we have Metal Gear Solid 4, Gran Turismo 5 and Grand Theft Auto 4 (though GTA4 won't be an exclusive).
It's also an amazing dvd player and media server, but most people tend to care about games the most, and I would agree since it's supposed to be a game console primarly. I really do like the media center features though. I have TVersity and I use it to stream videos to my PS3 (TVersity can transcode videos on the fly incase the PS3 can't play a certain codec). It's also an amazing dvd player as it can upscale dvds to 1080p and I notice a big improvement over my old 480p dvd player. I don't even care about the fact that it can play blu-ray movies as the dvd upscaling feature makes my massive dvd collection look even better.
Only Ratchet & Clank is exclusive, all the other games you mentioned will be on the 360 and PC aswell. But you are right, Ratchet & Clank will be a great exclusive and I'm looking forward to picking up my copy (I own all the Ratchet & Clank PS2 games).
October 23, 2007 Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction
If you've never played Going Commando or Up Your Arsenal, you probably wouldn't understand, but R&C is an awesome series. It's got action, comedy, puzzles, tons of weapons and upgrades, gadgets, racing, secrets, space battles, etc... It's got a ton of replay value and I still go back and play the old PS2 versions once in a while. It's the only PS3 game I've been looking forward to this year, all the others are non-exclusive or come out in 2008.
I call bullshit. Pretty much any mom and pop shop will gladly sell you a system without Windows pre-installed. It's only the major OEMs like HP and Dell that have in the past only bundled their systems with Microsoft Windows.
The local chinese shop where I buy all my computer parts also builds and sells PCs. If you go to their website and use the form to put together your own PC, it comes with NO operating system by default. If you actually want an OS, you have to specify which one you want and they will sell you that and/or install it for you.
If you know where to look, you can always find a place that will sell you a PC without Windows. That's clearly not the "Answer: I can't" that you claimed, it sounds more like your answer should have been "I'm too lazy to look".
Funny how you picked on Microsoft, but left Apple alone. Apple is just as guilty of locking people into their hardware as Microsoft is guilty of locking people into their software. They are rather similar in that regard.
Go to AT&T's iphone website and click on "Activation/Plans/Services" at the bottom.
The cheapest contract is $59.99/month price, you get 450 minutes, 200 text SMS messages, unlimited data and 5000 night/weekend minutes. For $79.99/month you get 900 minutes, 200 text messages, unlimited data and unlimited night/weekend minutes. This goes all the way up to $219.99/month for 6000 minutes, 200 text messages, unlimited data and unlimited night/weekend minutes. Also, you can pay an additional $10/month for 1500 text messages (instead of 200) or $20/month for unlimited text messages.
Now find comparable plans for the Treo, BlackBerry, etc.. and compare them using those real figures and then I'll be impressed. From what I've seen, the iPhone isn't the most expensive, but it's definitely not the cheapest either.
Also, most of the plans you're comparing aren't even fair comparisons. A lot of them have 1500 text/SMS messages, but you're only using the 200 message plan for the iphone? Atleast add the additional $10/month for 1500 text messages to the iphone plan to make it a bit more even. You mentioned 200 additional messages for $4.99/mo with the iphone, but from what I've read, that only covers direct AT&T to AT&T messages, but I could be wrong.
How does $71.88 + $240 equal $299.88 and not $311.88? I hope all these mistakes were just honest mistakes and not a result of you purposefully modifying the results.
Don't forget D) FSB frequency.
A model that ends in xx00 supports a 1066mhz FSB while a model that ends in xx50 supports a 1333mhz FSB.
This isn't always true, older chips all ended in xx00 and some used an 800mhz FSB and some used a 1066mhz FSB. Also, I believe there are a couple of chips that end in xx20 and xx40 to confuse things a little further. I'm pretty sure all newer chips that support a 1333mhz FSB end in "50" though instead of "00".
I actually think Intel's recent chip naming convention is pretty good. It's not great, but it's pretty easy to figure out. Basically, each chip is given a letter (or two in this case) to tell us what type of chip it is. Each chip is also given a number to let us know how fast it is relative to clock speed (the higher the number, the higher the clock speed).
AFAIK, there are 3 letters that Intel uses to label their desktop chips. E means dual core, Q means quad core and X means extreme. The difference with the "X" or extreme chips is that they have an unlocked multiplier, which makes it much easier for people to overclock them.
So, just by looking at the letter(s) of the model number, right away I can tell that the QX9650 is a quad core "extreme" chip. It's also probably clocked fairly high judging by the number. Also, I can tell by the xx50 that this chip supports a 1333mhz FSB. Older chips end in xx00 and use a 1066mhz FSB while chips that support a 1333mhz FSB end in xx50.
So to summarize, if you know what to look for, you can gather a lot of information just by looking at "QX9650". You can tell if it's a dual or quad core, you can tell if the multiplier is unlocked, you can tell if it supports a 1066mhz or 1333mhz FSB and you can get an idea of how high the cpu is clocked.
For detailed information on each Intel Core 2 processor, check out the wikipedia page.
Thank you for using logic and reasoning instead of using the moral high ground card and shouting down anyone who doesn't share your beliefs. I lack the grasp of the english language to express my views as clearly and concisely as you have done, but I wanted to say basically the same thing to several people in this thread. It's amazing how many people are using the sympathy card in this thread. Again, Kudos to you!
I'm a fan of NewYorkCountryLawyer, but I've lost a fair amount of respect for him after reading some things he's written in this thread. He'll probably mark me "foe" now because I don't fall in line and agree with his every view. It's quite sad really that there are people out there like this.
I have a lot of sympathy for this woman, but having MS makes no difference. I don't care if your rich, poor, blind, dumb, sick or healthy... We're all equal human beings and we should be treated as equal, no matter what.
The control scheme on the DS version of Metroid was absolutely horrible, the game itself was okay, but I had major issues with the controls. It's the only game I can think of in recent memory where the control scheme actually caused me great amounts of pain. I'm no stranger to game induced pain, I used to get blisters after playing SNES games for hours on end. Also, I used to suffer from mild carpel tunnel from all the PC gaming I did a couple years ago, but that pales in comparison to the amount of pain I got while trying to play Metroid DS.
The way the control scheme was set up, you had to hold the DS with your left hand while simultaneously using the D-PAD and the top left button. Imagine clenching your left hand in a fist, now imagine using your thumb to control the D-PAD while simultaneously using your index finger to control the top left button on the DS, all the while the remaining 3 fingers are used to hold onto the DS. Well you can't just use those 3 fingers to hold the DS as they are on placed on the back of the DS, you also need your thumb to help clench the DS, but the problem is you also need that thumb to use the D-PAD. You may be wondering, why don't you just use your right hand to help hold the DS... Well you can't use your right hand as you use your right hand to hold the stylus pen so you can look around, aim, etc...
I couldn't even play the game for more than 15 minutes before my left hand was so cramped I had to stop playing. I tried lots of different ways of holding the DS as I really wanted to enjoy the game, but I could never find a pain-free way of controlling it. I ended up shelving that game and I haven't touched it since.
I doubt "they" will make a Thief 4 anytime soon, unless a 3rd company decides to continue the series.
Looking Glass Studios made the original Thief 1 and 2, they went out of business in 2000.
Ion Storm Inc. then made Thief 3, they got bought out and basically went out of business in 2005.
All those titles sound pretty good, but only Mass Effect and Too Human are xbox 360 exclusives AFAIK. Most of those games you listed will be on the PS3 and/or PC.
I already bought/preordered my copy of The Orange Box and I'm playing the beta of Team Fortress 2 and it's absolutely amazing. I'm a diehard team fortress fan, ever since the original QW:TF, and I love what Valve has done with TF2. I don't really like the fact that Valve removed all grenades, pyro rocket launcher, medic infections, etc.. It's basically a simplified version of team fortress, but it's still amazing. It took me a while to get over the fact that they removed grenades (I was pretty pissed to say the least), but now I'm really starting to enjoy TF2 and it's a solid 10 out of 10. I've actually been itching to play for the last couple hours and I'm probably going to go play after I submit this post.
ps. Look at my sig for my Team Fortress 2 stats.
The story is from 2004 and they're quoting statistics from 2002, but I'd imagine those are still pretty close to what they are today. So it looks like you were correct, Canada spent around 9.6% our GDP back in 2002 while the United States spent around 14.6% of their GDP. My question is, does that ~15% of US GDP spent on health care take into account things like prescription costs? I know prescriptions can cost a lot more (sometimes 2-3 times more) in the States then they do here in Canada. Would perscription costs be enough to increase United States health care spending by that much or is there other factors?
Also, I found this Wikipedia entry, Canadian and American health care systems compared. Here's a quote from the "Wait times" section:
Here's a quote from the "Price of Health Care" section of that wikipedia article:
Finally, I think the section on malpractice litigation is fairly interesting aswell:
I had to look up defensive medicine as I've never heard of that term before. That s
I'm surprised no one else noticed this mistake, but you're comparing an 8GB ipod nano on those Canadian websites to a 4GB ipod nano on the American website.
Here's a correct comparison:
Bestbuy.ca 4GB ipod nano: $169.99 Canadian
Bestbuy.com 4GB ipod nano: $149.99 American
The part I emphasised is probably the most important part of that sentence. I've run read tests on both my external hard drives in the past and they maxed out at around 30MB/sec. I have around 4 other USB devices plugged in at all times, so that might explain while my externals are only getting closer to 30MB/sec over 40MB/sec. I always assumed that each USB device could get 480Mbps PER device, not 320Mbps for all devices... That's pretty crappy now that I think about it. I have 2 externals, a usb headset, a usb mouse, a usb gamepad, an ipod that uses usb, etc.. All these devices have to share that paltry amount of bandwidth? Now I understand why people prefer eSATA....
It's rumoured that Intel will release a new server platform/chipset which will use DDR2 memory later this year. Do a google search for "San Clemente chipset" or "Cranberry Lake platform". It's supposedly going to be an entry-level server platform which uses DDR2-667 registered memory.
Here's an old image which shows Intel's current roadmap: http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/5313/1775largelongtermroadmap7fs.png
Basically, intel releases a new architecture every 2 years and in between that they release a die shrink/derivative.
Penryn is mainly just a die shrink of Merom (codename for the laptop version of the Core 2). Merom was a 65nm chip and Penrym is a 45nm chip using the same architecture. Next they will release a new architecture using 45nm (codename Nehalem), then they will release a die shrink of Nehalem using 32nm, and so on and so forth...
Here's a quick rundown:
2006: Core 2 architecture released at 65nm
2007: Die shrink of the Core 2 architecture from 65nm to 45nm
2008: New architecture (code name Nehalem) released at 45nm
2009: Die shrink of the Nehalem architecture from 45nm to 32nm
2010: New architecture (code name Sandy Bridge, formerly known as Gesher) released at 32nm
2011: Die shrink of the Sandy Bridge architecture from 32nm to 22nm