People keep saying that BitCoin will have it's value as long as people keep using it and that you're not supposed to get rich by mining. But that isn't even the problem. I transferred some cash to BitCoins and back on Friday and it was paid out to me on Sunday. By the time I got the transfer, it had lost almost half of its value. Now imagine if that would constantly happen with your real money.
Ummm, that does happen with your real money. Have you looked at the stock markets and the international exchange rates lately?!
This kind of thing is what the V22 Osprey was made for. It should have the range to get to the south pole, and it should be able to land vertically, get the person on board in 30 seconds, and get the hell out of there.
If you actually research this, you will find that the Osprey does not, in fact, have sufficient range to get to the Amundsen-Scott research station without refueling. It may also need to be weatherized to withstand the cold temperatures.
~$599 phone + ~$105/mo bill * 5 years = ~$7000...didn't you realize that your little pocket toy cost more than most used cars?
Sorry, but you are insane.
My iPhone 4 32GB cost $299 + $60/month on a 2-year contract with voice, data, and messaging. That totals $1739 for phone plus 2 years of cell service.
Since a basic home land-line costs $20/mo (without long-distance service), I figure that the cell service with long-distance voice, data, apps, and text/image/video messaging is worth at least $40/mo. So, the total cost of the phone is at most $299 + $20/month, or $779, over 2 years.
With the iPhone 3GS, it works out to $49 + $20/month = $529.
I recently sold a 20-year-old Honda Civic with a blown head gasket for more than that.
Wake up.
Why are you using a 2-year cost when the person you are responding to used a 5-year cost?
I don't necessarily agree with his argument, but I definitely don't understand your logic!
I won't lose sleep over the bastard either-- what makes me lose sleep is the the president/executive branch can unilaterally decide to kill two American citizens, and then without and review or oversight on the part of either of the other branches of the US government, carry out the killing. There needs to be more in place to check presidential power than just "it's ok, trust us, we won't do anything out of line, our own lawyers agree it's ok."
Look at the bright side... during the cold war, the CIA would assassinate people without ever admitting it. Now they are at least putting out press releases documenting their activities.
US-sanctioned killings have been going on for decades, the only difference is that you now know about it.
I know we all love our space projects here and I'm no exception - but the reality is that part of recovering from this unfathomly huge deficit is cutting spending.
If you were looking at your finances and were trying to take care of your debt aggressively you'd cut damned near anything not necessary. I can't really fault the politicians for this per se, but if they're going to make the programs we love suffer they need to continue cutting elsewhere as well (which appears to be happening relatively slowly and painfully). I've heard them mention there'd be sacrifice and thus I'd also like to see them cut their own benefits and salaries; however, I haven't seen such occur yet. (If it has and I've somehow missed it by all means educate me).
My questions to you all: -If we start slashing budgets in this manner how does this affect jobs? Obviously there will be layoffs but will it be on a scale that's more/less devastating to our economy as a whole? -Would you approach this specific funding issue differently? -What else would you cut?
All good points, but we've spend a trillion dollars in Iraq and that doesn't seem to be getting cut.
As an American, I'd rather be in space in than in Iraq or Afghanistan.
This issue isn't really Amazon's or California's fault. California wants to tax online purchases (especially Amazon's) because it is a profitable income source they have not been tapping into. Amazon wants to avoid it because they profit of off their customers preferentially buying online to avoid state taxes.
I think what this really highlights is the difference of opinion between American citizens and the state governments on sales taxes. People feel that they already pay an income tax and don't want to get taxed again when they buy things. The cash-strapped (and mismanaged) government doesn't want to lose that income source.
Personally, I am disappointed that Amazon is caving. I was hoping for their referendum to make it to a vote to see the actually CA public opinion on this issue. But then again, I never think it is a good idea to give more money to any organization (private, state or federal) that cannot balance its current budget.
I think the main point here is that U.S. should clean up their own shit first. Like he said "that this was not feasible". U.S. has a long history of attacking Russia and other countries for copyright theft while ignoring that U.S. itself has the same problems. Russia here seems to understand that, U.S. doesn't.
Copyright theft is so much more blatant in Russia and many other countries (China) than it is in the US. Also, I am willing to bet that US companies (Hollywood) lose way more money due to international copyright theft than do Russian ones. So your logic doesn't really hold.
Nothing is stopping the Russians from blocking any offending websites. They can be just like the Chinese... lock down the internet and then profit from selling pirated DVDs.
I'm sorry, but when in the last decade did computer programmers become "engineers?" It sounds like some kind of bullshit self-appointed title that is similar to calling a janitor a "sanitation engineer."
Real engineers take classes in statics, dynamics, electronics, fluids mechanics, materials science, and programming... in addition to taking electives like math and chemistry. What components of a real engineering curriculum do "software engineers" take? Programming, "software design," and maybe math?
Give me a break. If you can't become a Professional Engineer in your field, you're not a fucking engineer. If you code or design software, you are a "programmer" or a "software designer."
(Programmers, mod me down all you want if it helps ease the pain of the truth.)
American consumers have made their choice a long time ago.
So did the Chinese.
They turned a blind eye to America's post-industrial pollution problems and chose to profit while creating the same toxic environment (but on an epic scale) in their own backyard. Now they are losing jobs to Vietnam and having to deal with an angry and sick population.
I guess those who cannot remember the past really are condemned to repeat it.
And at the other extreme, I have heard news stories about: A kid gets arrested for having a butter knife in his lunch box. A kid gets busted for possession of Tylenol. Another kid gets in trouble for sharing cupcakes. Kids getting sanctioned for holding hands in the hallway. The schools crack down so hard on these miniscule infringments that they MAKE THE NEWS. With schools worrying about all this crap, we wonder why they're not learning to read and write??
Well, when I was in middle school, I was more worried about getting mugged and beat up than learning to read or write. The teachers had no control over what happened in the hallways, in gym, and in the schoolyard before and after the schoolday. Knives were snuck into school and some kids would occasionally get caught with guns.
It was an absolutely terrifying time for me. The only good thing that came out of it is that I learned how to (1) get beat up and (2) how to suckerpunch someone to end a fight before it stared or to even the odds when it was 3 on 1. However, these are not skills that I would want my child to have to learn in a similar manner.
It's nice to see that there is still at least some ambition left in our society.
There's still quite a bit of ambition around.
Unfortunately it's crushed under the hordes of incompetent program managers and politicians, who are unable to differentiate between snake oil salesman peddling the latest BS and skilled engineers/scientists.
The first big mistake was letting people who are unable to perform skilled research try to award grants. The second was paying those contract administrators more than the people doing the actual research.
The core problem is that the evolution of the average WoW player is at odds with the evolution of the game.
Think about it: The Warcraft series has been out since 1994 and WoW was first released in 2004. Someone who was a freshman in college in 1994 would have graduated in 1998. If they want for an advanced degree, most would have received it by 2004. The end of schooling would result in a massive decrease in the available time for gaming due to the typical life progression after education: start a full-time job, get married, and have kids. With a 9-5 job and a wife it is possible to play WoW. But add on a child and/or a job requiring take-home work, any meaningful WoW experience is just not possible... even if you don't have to sleep!
Meanwhile, we have seen WoW evolve from a predominately PvE environment to a highly specialized PvE or PvP environment requiring more time input. It used to be possible to have a high level character with good gear and do well at both PvE and PvP. That is no longer true. WoW now requires players to input a massive dungeon effort to get the right PvE gear. To enjoy PvP, you have to put in similar time into the battlegrounds for top-notch PvP gear. Blizzard has stratified the gameplay such that it is simply not possible to survive in either (the PvP or PvE) environment unless your character abilities and gear are specialized for that specific environment. And all that is on top of the base grinding time requirement necessary to maintain any character.
As you get older and have more responsibilities outside of WoW, maintaining your characters turns into more of a job. This is exacerbated by the fact that you can no longer enjoy both PvE and PvP unless you double your time in game. With a max-level character and good (but not great) gear, playing WoW is about as fun as doing chores around the house, and it costs more. I think many adult WoW players are starting to realize that.
If Blizzard wants to increase their subscriber base, I would argue that they need to make WoW more accessible to players with limited play time. Decrease the grinding necessary for high-level characters. Have some (large) portion of dungeons be negotiable with a pick-up group. Merge the PvP and PvE gearsets. Start some WoW servers with in-game parameters tuned for players with busy lives (lower difficulty, higher grinding return, merged PvP/PvE gearsets, more dungeons completable in 1 hr).
Making the gameplay more elite with an aging subscriber base is a bad idea, until that subscriber base hits retirement age!
Because for most Americans, cutting taxes means less money in their pockets. Not more.
Tax money is the government's income. It might surprise you, but the feds don't just eat those dollars. They spend it. On YOU, no less. Cutting incomes means for the government the same an income reduction means for you: They can't spend as much. Since they spend it on you, that means less money gets spent on you.
Now, of course, one might argue "hey, who cares? The money I don't have to give them I can spend myself!" True. Very true. And if you earn in the six digits (and not the lower ones), it actually means you gain a lot with every percent tax you pay less. Else, it means that you now have to buy something or pay for something the feds paid for earlier. Because, as it is in our world, TANSTAAFL. Someone has to foot the bill. And if the feds can't, you have to.
So are you arguing that the US government dollars being spent on military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq are actually being spent on me? How about the cash for clunkers and US mortgage bailouts? Explain how those helped me even though I was not eligible to take advantage of them?
I have a novel concept for you. Some of us don't want to the government to spend money on us and we don't want free handouts. We want to retain our own income and responsibly control how we spend it. Government as a whole has demonstrated itself to be a highly inefficient machine that is prone to corruption and waste at every level. Unlike corporations or individuals, there is no penalty to the government if they fail to run in the black... congress thinks they can always raise taxes. To prevent this problem from growing, the government should be given the minimum possible funding necessary to sustain itself.
This keeps it from getting involves in extended and unnecessary conflicts, dicking around with our free-market economy, and conditioning its citizens to adopt irresponsible spending habits... because they are sure that a new bailout package is just around the corner.
We are buried in debt that was created almost entirely by Republican administrations, due to Republican policies. Federal taxes are at their lowest point in living memory, federal revenue as a fraction of GDP is 20% below where it was in 1980, and we are facing a deficit that will never be closed unless that circumstance is changed. Taxes go up or our deficit continues to accumulate - your choice.
You neglected to mention an alternative option. Government spending can go down. Way down.
Taxes are percentage-based and rise with inflation. There should be no reason to ever raise the tax percentage, unless your government is (1) operating less efficiently or (2) providing additional services.
I find it amusing when the solution to government cash shortages is always "raise taxes." If you keep doing that, eventually citizens' income will be taxed at rates above 100%. Is that what you really want for your children?
And by "one (proprietary) port," you mean "an industry-standard Thunderbolt / LightPeak port, which will be used to daisy-chain all the peripherals which you can't connect wirelessly," right?
By industry-standard, I assume that you mean "Apple industry standard!" Firewire 800 was good example of that: It was neat, worked well, and no one except Apple really adopted it. This limited its usefulness in contrast to the actual industry standard that was USB. Hopefully Thunderbolt is more readily adopted, but companies are already complaining about the price associated with the connector (much like they did with Firewire).
Because when you predict that in the future, technology will function exactly the same as it does today, you look kind of retarded.
There is no doubt that there have been many connector-based improvements have really occurred since USB 1.0, but have they really been worth the cost increase associated with (1) buying new connectors, (2) buying new interface cards or computers to handle the new protocol, (3) paying for proprietary dongles? I would argue no, especially since software bloat seems to have matched the bandwidth increase.
There's no doubt that I get a better screen resolution with my DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort cables, but my eyes can't see details that small anyway. And cables that used to cost $10 are now $50-$100.
This post-USB1.0 cable technology may be a win for the computer enthusiast, those of us with specialized needs and the companies, but so far I would argue it has been a big and expensive fail for the average computer user.
I can't believe how those Homeowners associations have proliferated so greatly, and why so many people out up with this.
Once you buy the land...shouldn't it be YOURs to do with as you please? I'm surprised someone with enough spare $$ and time hasn't had many of those agreements thrown the fuck out.
The number of homeowners associations is directly correlated with the number of shithead neighbors who are unable to maintain their home, but ARE able to collect every broken-down wreck-of-a-car and have it towed onto their front lawns. And when I say lawn, I mean gravel sprinkled with dog crap.
Slashdot Mirror
People keep saying that BitCoin will have it's value as long as people keep using it and that you're not supposed to get rich by mining. But that isn't even the problem. I transferred some cash to BitCoins and back on Friday and it was paid out to me on Sunday. By the time I got the transfer, it had lost almost half of its value. Now imagine if that would constantly happen with your real money.
Ummm, that does happen with your real money. Have you looked at the stock markets and the international exchange rates lately?!
This kind of thing is what the V22 Osprey was made for. It should have the range to get to the south pole, and it should be able to land vertically, get the person on board in 30 seconds, and get the hell out of there.
If you actually research this, you will find that the Osprey does not, in fact, have sufficient range to get to the Amundsen-Scott research station without refueling. It may also need to be weatherized to withstand the cold temperatures.
~$599 phone + ~$105/mo bill * 5 years = ~$7000...didn't you realize that your little pocket toy cost more than most used cars?
Sorry, but you are insane.
My iPhone 4 32GB cost $299 + $60/month on a 2-year contract with voice, data, and messaging. That totals $1739 for phone plus 2 years of cell service.
Since a basic home land-line costs $20/mo (without long-distance service), I figure that the cell service with long-distance voice, data, apps, and text/image/video messaging is worth at least $40/mo. So, the total cost of the phone is at most $299 + $20/month, or $779, over 2 years.
With the iPhone 3GS, it works out to $49 + $20/month = $529.
I recently sold a 20-year-old Honda Civic with a blown head gasket for more than that.
Wake up.
Why are you using a 2-year cost when the person you are responding to used a 5-year cost?
I don't necessarily agree with his argument, but I definitely don't understand your logic!
I won't lose sleep over the bastard either-- what makes me lose sleep is the the president/executive branch can unilaterally decide to kill two American citizens, and then without and review or oversight on the part of either of the other branches of the US government, carry out the killing. There needs to be more in place to check presidential power than just "it's ok, trust us, we won't do anything out of line, our own lawyers agree it's ok."
Look at the bright side... during the cold war, the CIA would assassinate people without ever admitting it. Now they are at least putting out press releases documenting their activities.
US-sanctioned killings have been going on for decades, the only difference is that you now know about it.
I know we all love our space projects here and I'm no exception - but the reality is that part of recovering from this unfathomly huge deficit is cutting spending.
If you were looking at your finances and were trying to take care of your debt aggressively you'd cut damned near anything not necessary. I can't really fault the politicians for this per se, but if they're going to make the programs we love suffer they need to continue cutting elsewhere as well (which appears to be happening relatively slowly and painfully). I've heard them mention there'd be sacrifice and thus I'd also like to see them cut their own benefits and salaries; however, I haven't seen such occur yet. (If it has and I've somehow missed it by all means educate me).
My questions to you all:
-If we start slashing budgets in this manner how does this affect jobs? Obviously there will be layoffs but will it be on a scale that's more/less devastating to our economy as a whole?
-Would you approach this specific funding issue differently?
-What else would you cut?
All good points, but we've spend a trillion dollars in Iraq and that doesn't seem to be getting cut.
As an American, I'd rather be in space in than in Iraq or Afghanistan.
How about you?
why not just deorbit the whole thing in a controlled fashion and aim it at an ocean?
Or a Michael Bolton concert, assuming you're trying to minimise the chance of it hitting someone.
Or China. You know they are going to end up recycling the metal anyway.
This issue isn't really Amazon's or California's fault. California wants to tax online purchases (especially Amazon's) because it is a profitable income source they have not been tapping into. Amazon wants to avoid it because they profit of off their customers preferentially buying online to avoid state taxes.
I think what this really highlights is the difference of opinion between American citizens and the state governments on sales taxes. People feel that they already pay an income tax and don't want to get taxed again when they buy things. The cash-strapped (and mismanaged) government doesn't want to lose that income source.
Personally, I am disappointed that Amazon is caving. I was hoping for their referendum to make it to a vote to see the actually CA public opinion on this issue. But then again, I never think it is a good idea to give more money to any organization (private, state or federal) that cannot balance its current budget.
"Funny how the US bullies everybody.."
There. Corrected for you.
It's even more amusing how everyone caves to US bullying so easily. Pussies.
... we'll nuke it!
We used to be able to go TO the moon. Now we can just take pictures of our old footprints there.
I can't tell is NASA is actually proud of this new capability or if this is a sarcastic stunt to get more funding.
I think the main point here is that U.S. should clean up their own shit first. Like he said "that this was not feasible". U.S. has a long history of attacking Russia and other countries for copyright theft while ignoring that U.S. itself has the same problems. Russia here seems to understand that, U.S. doesn't.
Copyright theft is so much more blatant in Russia and many other countries (China) than it is in the US. Also, I am willing to bet that US companies (Hollywood) lose way more money due to international copyright theft than do Russian ones. So your logic doesn't really hold.
Nothing is stopping the Russians from blocking any offending websites. They can be just like the Chinese... lock down the internet and then profit from selling pirated DVDs.
Yeah, you just shot my precious light bulb! What, did you think I would be right next to it?
And do you think that I am in my remote-control tank?
I'm actually right behind you!
I'm sorry, but when in the last decade did computer programmers become "engineers?" It sounds like some kind of bullshit self-appointed title that is similar to calling a janitor a "sanitation engineer."
Real engineers take classes in statics, dynamics, electronics, fluids mechanics, materials science, and programming... in addition to taking electives like math and chemistry. What components of a real engineering curriculum do "software engineers" take? Programming, "software design," and maybe math?
Give me a break. If you can't become a Professional Engineer in your field, you're not a fucking engineer. If you code or design software, you are a "programmer" or a "software designer."
(Programmers, mod me down all you want if it helps ease the pain of the truth.)
I refuse to install Silverlight on my computer and I get almost all my movies for free anyway. Sony/Disney can just suck it.
How is your fear of Silverlight and admission of media theft relevant to this discussion?
American consumers have made their choice a long time ago.
So did the Chinese.
They turned a blind eye to America's post-industrial pollution problems and chose to profit while creating the same toxic environment (but on an epic scale) in their own backyard. Now they are losing jobs to Vietnam and having to deal with an angry and sick population.
I guess those who cannot remember the past really are condemned to repeat it.
How is he an anonymous reader if his name is in the second sentence of the article?
Remember that in addition to being "anonymous," he is also a self-proclaimed "Idiot."
And at the other extreme, I have heard news stories about: A kid gets arrested for having a butter knife in his lunch box. A kid gets busted for possession of Tylenol. Another kid gets in trouble for sharing cupcakes. Kids getting sanctioned for holding hands in the hallway. The schools crack down so hard on these miniscule infringments that they MAKE THE NEWS. With schools worrying about all this crap, we wonder why they're not learning to read and write??
Well, when I was in middle school, I was more worried about getting mugged and beat up than learning to read or write. The teachers had no control over what happened in the hallways, in gym, and in the schoolyard before and after the schoolday. Knives were snuck into school and some kids would occasionally get caught with guns.
It was an absolutely terrifying time for me. The only good thing that came out of it is that I learned how to (1) get beat up and (2) how to suckerpunch someone to end a fight before it stared or to even the odds when it was 3 on 1. However, these are not skills that I would want my child to have to learn in a similar manner.
So maybe a little more oversight is a good thing.
It's nice to see that there is still at least some ambition left in our society.
There's still quite a bit of ambition around.
Unfortunately it's crushed under the hordes of incompetent program managers and politicians, who are unable to differentiate between snake oil salesman peddling the latest BS and skilled engineers/scientists.
The first big mistake was letting people who are unable to perform skilled research try to award grants. The second was paying those contract administrators more than the people doing the actual research.
The core problem is that the evolution of the average WoW player is at odds with the evolution of the game.
Think about it: The Warcraft series has been out since 1994 and WoW was first released in 2004. Someone who was a freshman in college in 1994 would have graduated in 1998. If they want for an advanced degree, most would have received it by 2004. The end of schooling would result in a massive decrease in the available time for gaming due to the typical life progression after education: start a full-time job, get married, and have kids. With a 9-5 job and a wife it is possible to play WoW. But add on a child and/or a job requiring take-home work, any meaningful WoW experience is just not possible... even if you don't have to sleep!
Meanwhile, we have seen WoW evolve from a predominately PvE environment to a highly specialized PvE or PvP environment requiring more time input. It used to be possible to have a high level character with good gear and do well at both PvE and PvP. That is no longer true. WoW now requires players to input a massive dungeon effort to get the right PvE gear. To enjoy PvP, you have to put in similar time into the battlegrounds for top-notch PvP gear. Blizzard has stratified the gameplay such that it is simply not possible to survive in either (the PvP or PvE) environment unless your character abilities and gear are specialized for that specific environment. And all that is on top of the base grinding time requirement necessary to maintain any character.
As you get older and have more responsibilities outside of WoW, maintaining your characters turns into more of a job. This is exacerbated by the fact that you can no longer enjoy both PvE and PvP unless you double your time in game. With a max-level character and good (but not great) gear, playing WoW is about as fun as doing chores around the house, and it costs more. I think many adult WoW players are starting to realize that.
If Blizzard wants to increase their subscriber base, I would argue that they need to make WoW more accessible to players with limited play time. Decrease the grinding necessary for high-level characters. Have some (large) portion of dungeons be negotiable with a pick-up group. Merge the PvP and PvE gearsets. Start some WoW servers with in-game parameters tuned for players with busy lives (lower difficulty, higher grinding return, merged PvP/PvE gearsets, more dungeons completable in 1 hr).
Making the gameplay more elite with an aging subscriber base is a bad idea, until that subscriber base hits retirement age!
Because for most Americans, cutting taxes means less money in their pockets. Not more.
Tax money is the government's income. It might surprise you, but the feds don't just eat those dollars. They spend it. On YOU, no less. Cutting incomes means for the government the same an income reduction means for you: They can't spend as much. Since they spend it on you, that means less money gets spent on you.
Now, of course, one might argue "hey, who cares? The money I don't have to give them I can spend myself!" True. Very true. And if you earn in the six digits (and not the lower ones), it actually means you gain a lot with every percent tax you pay less. Else, it means that you now have to buy something or pay for something the feds paid for earlier. Because, as it is in our world, TANSTAAFL. Someone has to foot the bill. And if the feds can't, you have to.
So are you arguing that the US government dollars being spent on military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq are actually being spent on me? How about the cash for clunkers and US mortgage bailouts? Explain how those helped me even though I was not eligible to take advantage of them?
I have a novel concept for you. Some of us don't want to the government to spend money on us and we don't want free handouts. We want to retain our own income and responsibly control how we spend it. Government as a whole has demonstrated itself to be a highly inefficient machine that is prone to corruption and waste at every level. Unlike corporations or individuals, there is no penalty to the government if they fail to run in the black... congress thinks they can always raise taxes. To prevent this problem from growing, the government should be given the minimum possible funding necessary to sustain itself.
This keeps it from getting involves in extended and unnecessary conflicts, dicking around with our free-market economy, and conditioning its citizens to adopt irresponsible spending habits... because they are sure that a new bailout package is just around the corner.
We are buried in debt that was created almost entirely by Republican administrations, due to Republican policies. Federal taxes are at their lowest point in living memory, federal revenue as a fraction of GDP is 20% below where it was in 1980, and we are facing a deficit that will never be closed unless that circumstance is changed. Taxes go up or our deficit continues to accumulate - your choice.
You neglected to mention an alternative option. Government spending can go down. Way down.
Taxes are percentage-based and rise with inflation. There should be no reason to ever raise the tax percentage, unless your government is (1) operating less efficiently or (2) providing additional services.
I find it amusing when the solution to government cash shortages is always "raise taxes." If you keep doing that, eventually citizens' income will be taxed at rates above 100%. Is that what you really want for your children?
Because that might be useful.
Can't we send a diver down there with a specialized mixed-gas diving setup?
And by "one (proprietary) port," you mean "an industry-standard Thunderbolt / LightPeak port, which will be used to daisy-chain all the peripherals which you can't connect wirelessly," right?
By industry-standard, I assume that you mean "Apple industry standard!" Firewire 800 was good example of that: It was neat, worked well, and no one except Apple really adopted it. This limited its usefulness in contrast to the actual industry standard that was USB. Hopefully Thunderbolt is more readily adopted, but companies are already complaining about the price associated with the connector (much like they did with Firewire).
Because when you predict that in the future, technology will function exactly the same as it does today, you look kind of retarded.
There is no doubt that there have been many connector-based improvements have really occurred since USB 1.0, but have they really been worth the cost increase associated with (1) buying new connectors, (2) buying new interface cards or computers to handle the new protocol, (3) paying for proprietary dongles? I would argue no, especially since software bloat seems to have matched the bandwidth increase.
There's no doubt that I get a better screen resolution with my DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort cables, but my eyes can't see details that small anyway. And cables that used to cost $10 are now $50-$100.
This post-USB1.0 cable technology may be a win for the computer enthusiast, those of us with specialized needs and the companies, but so far I would argue it has been a big and expensive fail for the average computer user.
I can't believe how those Homeowners associations have proliferated so greatly, and why so many people out up with this.
Once you buy the land...shouldn't it be YOURs to do with as you please? I'm surprised someone with enough spare $$ and time hasn't had many of those agreements thrown the fuck out.
The number of homeowners associations is directly correlated with the number of shithead neighbors who are unable to maintain their home, but ARE able to collect every broken-down wreck-of-a-car and have it towed onto their front lawns. And when I say lawn, I mean gravel sprinkled with dog crap.