2001: A Space Odessey was filmed in 70mm. I've seen it in the theater, and the level of detail is astounding.
If any movie would make a great test case for SD versus HD, 2001 is it.
I strongly suspect, though, that HDNet movies is just showing an anamorphic SD version scaled to HD, unless they have access to true HD transfers that aren't on the market yet.
A persuasive argument, but your biased view of the situation fails to take into account all the cutlass and keelhaul-related deaths due to Canadian piracy.
Rights are yours if you have the means to enforce your ability to exercise your right Cool, so if I have the strength to clobber you in a dark alley, and the cunning to get away without being seen, I am clearly just exercising my right to take your wallet!
I eagerly await my -1 Troll mods from all those who would rather suppress cognitive dissonance than resolve it.
The War to End All Wars is upon us, and it's our obligation to join the cause and fight the dread beast Microsoft. I fear for our ancestors if we do not. Why, is Microsoft building a time machine to go back and kill your great grandpa?
Christ, it's like a Community Theater production of Les Linux Miserables around here.
stop squabbling about what is and isn't happening, and why. Worry instead about What Should Be Done. It's pretty damn hard to figure out What Should Be Done when you're not sure what is and isn't happening, and why.
But the people copying music aren't creating music out of thin air. They are simply copying, and (presumably) enjoying the work without compensating the creator. Music isn't a consumable commidity.
And since the people who actually make (as opposed to copy) music aren't making food out of thin air, no they can not eat and be sheltered unless they find anothing source of income.
Folks round these parts love to justify paying nothing for music because production has become so easy and cheap, and copying is free. But this completely ignores the truth that it is the music that you want, not the media.
Sure, anybody can make a recording and distribute it now, but only a very small percentage of people have the talent to actually create music that is worth listening to. These people should be compensated for what they do. If you like a tune, it has VALUE.
But it's far easier to just take what you want and then rationalize it with self-serving rhetoric. "Bad business model! Evil Record Companies! Adapt or die! They should do it for love, not money! Free stuff enriches society!"
I am perfectly happy to see the major labels in their death throes, but I don't see much hope for a direct artist-to-fan musical utopia springing up on the RIAA's grave now that it seems that the rapidly growing attitude is that nobody should ever have to pay for recorded music, even if it isn't being produced by an evil soulless corporation.
I assume you are refering to Aureal when you say they "squash" competition. There were bad steps taken on both sides of the issue, but it was all started when Aureal began selling their products based on EAX support. Creative took them to court over it and rather than making the correct business decision and settling out of court, they chose to fight it out. This bankrupted the company and Creative purchased their assets. I don't see where Creative was "squashing" them rather than giving them enough rope. Actually, it started when Creative sued Aureal for patent infringement and tried to prevent them from shipping their product. Aureal didn't settle (did Creative even offer?) because they thought the suit had no merit, and they court apparently agreed, as it found in favor of Aureal. Aureal's counter suits against Creative never made it to judgement, because, as we know, the legal defense drove them to bankrupcy.
I'd say a large, well funded company filing a baseless suit against a much smaller competitor in an attempt to get them to waste as much money as possible defending themselves would qualify as "squashing".
In my opinion, all NASA needs to do is present congress with a scientific statistic claim with percent confidence of global destruction. I think a better idea would be to sit congress down, make them watch Armageddon, and tell them "If you don't fund our program, the earth could fall victim to more shitty movies just like this!
Basically, it means if you don't want to be subject to prosecution, you should turn off the cameras in your convenience store *before* the robbers commence pistol-whipping you.
Actually, it's not even close to the idea of psychohistory.
But it wouldn't take the genius of Hari Seldon or a bunch of German scientists to predict that somebody was going to make a dumb anti-Bush joke in this thread.
But if that's true, then why can I find a magazine devoted to Not Believing in God, but I can't find, say, a "Journal of Non-Philatelist Thought" or "Not Interested in Model Railroads Monthly".
I mean, once you decide you don't believe in a supreme being, what the hell do you need a magazine for?
Fact is, I have met people for whom Atheism IS a religion. They preach it with obsessive religious fervor, are strongly intolerant to any other religious belief, and are taken aback when you don't agree with their views. They may be all about "not believing", but in every other way, they behave like a religious fanatic.
See, by putting certain words from your headlines into quotes, you can avoid being held responsible for wild inaccuracy, while promulgating your opinion, all in one easy step.
Future Slashdot headlines you are likely to see:
Ballmer "Murders" Infants
Diebold "Brutally Sodomizes" Voters
RIAA "Wages Wholesale Slaughter" of P2P File Sharers "and Their Families"
I just don't know if I can enjoy my diamonds without knowing that some poor bastard in a third world country suffered greatly to produce it. They call this progress?
So... doing nothing but fuming with impotent rage and ranting on Slashdot like a lifetime member of the Rage Against the Machine fanclub is the way to improve yourself?
I believe this is the output of the Postmodernism Generator, which, in a fit of recursive postmodern irony, is virtually indistinguishable from the output of genuine postmodernists.
Jackson made The Frighteners, which was, IIRC, pretty successful at the box office, and proved that Peter Jackson knew how to make a movie that balanced characters, story, humor, thrills, and elaborate special effects in a highly entertaining fashion.
Even though he wasn't that well know to the public at the time, I don't think it was completely unexpected that he was given the money to make LoTR.
No, but the recount for which Gore asked, and the Florida Supreme Court ordered, was finished by the press, and it showed Bush as the winner.
Gore never asked for a statewide recount because he was afraid a statewide recount wouldn't have given him the net votes he needed. He only asked for counts of the undervotes in Democratic-leaning counties because he thought he could get just enough votes to be elected. His rhetoric about "count every vote" was total hooey.
So if the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't put a stop to the recount, Gore would have still lost, only he would have been hoisted by his own petard instead of having the convenient "judicial coup" excuse.
There's an interesting article on the whole despicable affair HERE.
If anyone cares, the world is destined to run out of raw silver reserves long, long before it runs out of oil. Dozens of analysts are expecting a COMEX default on silver futures within the next couple years. It might not seem like a big deal, but just watch what happens to the price of silver when it does...
And I don't even want to think about how vulnerable this will leave us to werewolf attacks!
Slashdot Mirror
2001: A Space Odessey was filmed in 70mm. I've seen it in the theater, and the level of detail is astounding.
If any movie would make a great test case for SD versus HD, 2001 is it.
I strongly suspect, though, that HDNet movies is just showing an anamorphic SD version scaled to HD, unless they have access to true HD transfers that aren't on the market yet.
A persuasive argument, but your biased view of the situation fails to take into account all the cutlass and keelhaul-related deaths due to Canadian piracy.
Christ, it's like a Community Theater production of Les Linux Miserables around here.
:s%/most/all/g :%s/s%/%s/gThere, fixed that for you.
But the people copying music aren't creating music out of thin air. They are simply copying, and (presumably) enjoying the work without compensating the creator. Music isn't a consumable commidity.
And since the people who actually make (as opposed to copy) music aren't making food out of thin air, no they can not eat and be sheltered unless they find anothing source of income.
Folks round these parts love to justify paying nothing for music because production has become so easy and cheap, and copying is free. But this completely ignores the truth that it is the music that you want, not the media.
Sure, anybody can make a recording and distribute it now, but only a very small percentage of people have the talent to actually create music that is worth listening to. These people should be compensated for what they do. If you like a tune, it has VALUE.
But it's far easier to just take what you want and then rationalize it with self-serving rhetoric. "Bad business model! Evil Record Companies! Adapt or die! They should do it for love, not money! Free stuff enriches society!"
I am perfectly happy to see the major labels in their death throes, but I don't see much hope for a direct artist-to-fan musical utopia springing up on the RIAA's grave now that it seems that the rapidly growing attitude is that nobody should ever have to pay for recorded music, even if it isn't being produced by an evil soulless corporation.
Gentlemen! Gentlemen!
We've gotta protect our phonybaloney jobs! Something must be done immediately! Immediately!
I'd say a large, well funded company filing a baseless suit against a much smaller competitor in an attempt to get them to waste as much money as possible defending themselves would qualify as "squashing".
Basically, it means if you don't want to be subject to prosecution, you should turn off the cameras in your convenience store *before* the robbers commence pistol-whipping you.
Actually, it's not even close to the idea of psychohistory.
But it wouldn't take the genius of Hari Seldon or a bunch of German scientists to predict that somebody was going to make a dumb anti-Bush joke in this thread.
I mean, once you decide you don't believe in a supreme being, what the hell do you need a magazine for?
Fact is, I have met people for whom Atheism IS a religion. They preach it with obsessive religious fervor, are strongly intolerant to any other religious belief, and are taken aback when you don't agree with their views. They may be all about "not believing", but in every other way, they behave like a religious fanatic.
Yes, you are so right, copyright must be destroyed.
As a writer, I should be perfectly content with the money I make from my lucrative endorsements and concert sales.
See, by putting certain words from your headlines into quotes, you can avoid being held responsible for wild inaccuracy, while promulgating your opinion, all in one easy step.
Future Slashdot headlines you are likely to see:
Ballmer "Murders" Infants
Diebold "Brutally Sodomizes" Voters
RIAA "Wages Wholesale Slaughter" of P2P File Sharers "and Their Families"
I just don't know if I can enjoy my diamonds without knowing that some poor bastard in a third world country suffered greatly to produce it. They call this progress?
So... doing nothing but fuming with impotent rage and ranting on Slashdot like a lifetime member of the Rage Against the Machine fanclub is the way to improve yourself?
No, thanks. I choose escapism and apathy.
I believe this is the output of the Postmodernism Generator, which, in a fit of recursive postmodern irony, is virtually indistinguishable from the output of genuine postmodernists.
Jackson made The Frighteners, which was, IIRC, pretty successful at the box office, and proved that Peter Jackson knew how to make a movie that balanced characters, story, humor, thrills, and elaborate special effects in a highly entertaining fashion.
Even though he wasn't that well know to the public at the time, I don't think it was completely unexpected that he was given the money to make LoTR.
Gore never asked for a statewide recount because he was afraid a statewide recount wouldn't have given him the net votes he needed. He only asked for counts of the undervotes in Democratic-leaning counties because he thought he could get just enough votes to be elected. His rhetoric about "count every vote" was total hooey.
So if the U.S. Supreme Court hadn't put a stop to the recount, Gore would have still lost, only he would have been hoisted by his own petard instead of having the convenient "judicial coup" excuse.
There's an interesting article on the whole despicable affair HERE.
Insightful?
Who *didn't* think we were going to get all our services over one wire once digital bandwidth became great enough?
It's all just data. They might as well have patented a "novel method" for sending HTTP, FTP and SMTP data over the same wire.
An exciting new game
That's the way to stick it to The Man!
Show the world -- or at least anybody who happens to look at your monitor -- that you ain't gonna be oppressed by no proprietary icons!