Nah, the best (worst?) example of product placement on TV was an episode of "According to Jim" that was a half hour ad for Red Lobster. The show purportedly was about one of the children going on the spelling bee circuit and what a hassle it was for the parents, but the thrust of the show was how, after every win, they would take the kid to Red Lobster because she loved the food there. There were constant references to it and, in the final scene of the show, they even unfurled a banner with the name and logo at the spelling bee championship.
Red Lobster bought itself a nice primetime infomercial.
You are correct on the trademark issue and, more importantly, the first of three to correct me. Glad you commented on the more important part also.
I'll have to remember to always include an error in every post. The score certainly increases fast when multiple people point out the same error.
I'd really hope the defendant's lawyers do a good job during the discovery process. They should be able to request all the records the RIAA has concerning their various investigations into alleged infringements, not just the cases they have been prosecuting. When they produce a list of corporate infringing IPs, it's going to seem odd that the RIAA is only going after shallow-pocketed individuals. If I remember correctly, to enforce copyright you are required to pursue all known violations in order to maintain the copyright. Maybe this case will force the RIAA to start filing many, many more lawsuits, including going after large companies as well. What happens once a Microsoft, Google, or.gov IP shows up on their hit list?
But to truely break down the numbers, we'll have to know how large the trees being discussed are supposed to be. When chopped down, the wood from those trees would be measured as a cord which conveniently is 128 cubic feet of wood, so a MegaT, multiplied by tree size and divided by 128 will determine its MegaCords of equivalent burning power.
For tree size, ask Sun what standard they were using in their million tree hyperbole... er, calculations.
Back in the Dartmouth Time Sharing days, I could only play Zork in background because my core allocation in foreground was only half that of a background run. It was quite a trick scripting that out. I ended up with a lot of printouts that ended with me cursing the small maze.
You can't "look up" to see the dark (far) side of the moon very well.
Interestingly, you can't use this software to view certain areas of imagery that are conveniently missing from their data also. Notice especialy the left side of this shot with the strange pattern.
http://www.worldwindcentral.com/hotspots/view_hots pot.php?id=1642&mode=full
And as already mentioned, in the upper right, they don't have the core of the big, obvious impact crater? Somehow I don't think so!
Since this was "delayed" technology, I can see the logic of staying with the Radeon name, especially since they have put a lot of money into the recognition for the line. But in the short term, it just makes me say ho-hum to this new release. Now we'll just have to wait for NVIDIA's next shot across their bow.
Slashdot Mirror
Red Lobster bought itself a nice primetime infomercial.
You are correct on the trademark issue and, more importantly, the first of three to correct me. Glad you commented on the more important part also. I'll have to remember to always include an error in every post. The score certainly increases fast when multiple people point out the same error.
I'd really hope the defendant's lawyers do a good job during the discovery process. They should be able to request all the records the RIAA has concerning their various investigations into alleged infringements, not just the cases they have been prosecuting. When they produce a list of corporate infringing IPs, it's going to seem odd that the RIAA is only going after shallow-pocketed individuals. If I remember correctly, to enforce copyright you are required to pursue all known violations in order to maintain the copyright. Maybe this case will force the RIAA to start filing many, many more lawsuits, including going after large companies as well. What happens once a Microsoft, Google, or .gov IP shows up on their hit list?
But to truely break down the numbers, we'll have to know how large the trees being discussed are supposed to be. When chopped down, the wood from those trees would be measured as a cord which conveniently is 128 cubic feet of wood, so a MegaT, multiplied by tree size and divided by 128 will determine its MegaCords of equivalent burning power. For tree size, ask Sun what standard they were using in their million tree hyperbole... er, calculations.
Back in the Dartmouth Time Sharing days, I could only play Zork in background because my core allocation in foreground was only half that of a background run. It was quite a trick scripting that out. I ended up with a lot of printouts that ended with me cursing the small maze.
You can't "look up" to see the dark (far) side of the moon very well. Interestingly, you can't use this software to view certain areas of imagery that are conveniently missing from their data also. Notice especialy the left side of this shot with the strange pattern. http://www.worldwindcentral.com/hotspots/view_hots pot.php?id=1642&mode=full
And as already mentioned, in the upper right, they don't have the core of the big, obvious impact crater? Somehow I don't think so!
Since this was "delayed" technology, I can see the logic of staying with the Radeon name, especially since they have put a lot of money into the recognition for the line. But in the short term, it just makes me say ho-hum to this new release. Now we'll just have to wait for NVIDIA's next shot across their bow.
Only when followed by "... that's all folks!"