"The current global warming trend is caused by human activity, primarily the use of fossil fuels. That is an absolute fact. It's about as well established as Newtonian physics at this point."
No it's not a fact, and that's the point. Money and politics have produced the research that supports the argument, but there is actually a ton of more convincing research most people are too afraid to support or follow up.
I agree that being more environmentally friendly is good, even when I don't believe we are the cause of climate change. BUT the end result of all this nonsense is hasty, public-support-winning laws from politicians (are light bulbs and stand-by buttons really so important in this world and need to be regulated?!) and the continuation of poverty in the third world, who get environmental power forced upon them.
Does it make sense that the worlds richest nations get to use and abuse the cheapest forms of electricity, while the poorest nations have the most expensive forms of electricity (e.g. solar) forced upon them? Seriously, google the effects of not being able to afford electricity has on african nations. I was shocked to learn how something simple like depending a fire in your hut affects life expectancy.
I have a OneClick Intelligent Mains Panel http://www.oneclickpower.co.uk/acatalog/#aP7NFOC and have been feeling smug ever since. I have a dual monitor set up, router for the room and powered speakers that used to be on all the time, even if my PCs were off. Now, a few seconds after my PC shutdowns, the power is cut from everything else. Seems a good idea to me:)
This is unfortunately harsh, but kinda true. I installed Vista retail on a brand new self-built machine, worked perfectly bar the 'beta' 8800gtx drivers, which still worked fine for me. The install was faster than XP as well.
That said, idiots should be allowed to use computers as well, just not write articles. A bad workman always blames his Windows:)
"It's cheaper than most of the "commercial" alternatives, and offers what is widely regarded as the best programming on the planet."
It might be cheaper (BBC 130 vs 180 for Sky base package) but considering if you like TV you need to get Sky or cable really means you are forced to pay twice for your channels.
Channel 4 and five are evidence you can have an excellent channel without needing the license fee. Their homegrown stuff is excellent, and they show *a lot* of decent US shows between them. For free, no bullying tactics to tax me, just the odd advert or two.
BBC just make a lot of copycat shows, awful soaps and reality tv, waste a lot of money on niche services, and their saving grace- the occasional decent documentary. They are useless at importing US shows as well, losing the simpsons and 24 for example, yet still find the money to pay Jonathan Ross over £17m... They do show some decent stuff, but American Dad or Seinfeld at midnight on a Sunday isn't exactly useful scheduling.
If you can't tell, I'm not a fan and I don't agree with the parent. I don't have anything against people who like the BBC, but they should pay for it, not me. The sooner the license fee goes, the better.
But having said all that, I pay my tax. I should be able to put their content online, make my own channel with their shows- their stuff is publicly funded so it should be in the public domain, and I won't begrudge a few foreigners who have the perverse desire to watch the BBC either.
A quick google tells me there are 1.5m unbundled lines, and 3.3m cable subscribers (which means the potential cable subscribers is probably way higher.) So I think a fair chunk of the UK net-using population has some sort of access to decent speeds. TBH I would consider 3.5mb to be a decent speed anyway:)
My post was really to trying point out the situation isn't *that bad* in the UK. Maybe I'm a lucky example, but I've lived in 4 different places in Birmingham now (previously a roaming student) and always had a fanatastic conenction. A decade ago I was running up £100/month bills on dial-up... now that was a bad time for the using the net in the UK!
I've had 16mb (with 1mb up) ADSL for over a year now (and get the full speed), and cable has had 10mb for a couple of years. With a decent provider (my last two have been Blueyonder and Bulldog), these speeds have absolutely no caps. We're not matching Sweden, but we've reached speeds that are certainly fast enough for today.
Admittedly I live in Birmingham, which has a population of about 1m, but any built up area should be capable of getting a decent service. What's really wrong with the UK is most people 'sticking' with BT to provide everything (and their services are typically the worst available) or some nanny-ISP like AOL. Perversely, these slow, restricted ISPs might be best for non-nerds so I've given up trying to suggest something better.
An emerging trend in the UK, and I have no idea if it is also happening in other countries, is the idea of tagging free broadband onto other subscription services, like Orange mobile phone contract, or Sky TV. No doubt there have been some issues with early adopters from what I've read on the net, but they offer very decent speeds and definitely something to consider if you want to save some cash on net access.
Wow, you were so busy being a first-gen HD user that you forgot to get with the times!
"Plasmas are over-priced, wear out too fast, and get burn-in." Wrong, wrong, and wrong. These things are simply not true anymore.
Go back to your crusty old TV and try to eek whatever kudos you think you can from getting it a few months before the rest of us. Just also remember things can move on before doling out advice:)
I've had my 42" HD plasma over a year now, and it's still kicking as much ass now as it was when i bought it.
I play tons of video games on there, no problems whatsoever. I often reboot my HTPC, forget about it, and come to find Windows MCE on the screen a few hours later. Image retention fades in seconds after changing the picture.
For me, LCD just looks ugly with standard def on a big screen. Plasma can look good no matter what you throw at it, but often it takes a good while tweaking the settings with something like DVE.
Totally agree, I've had my K750i coming up to a year now, and it's superb. Bluetooth, Pro Duo slot, 2MP camera, MP3 player - they've squuezed a lot of useful stuff in there. The idea isn't to be the best at everything it tries, but just be a useful at as many things as possible... I always have my phone with me, but not always other stuff like cameras, ipods, external hard drive etc.
The camera quality is good enough for 'everyday' shots. I have a lot of photos I wouldn't have taken with a proper camera, or had the chance to if my phone didn't take cameras.
And of course higher MP is better... I often have a look through my old phone photos, and going from 0.3 to 1.3 to 2MP models over the past 3-4 years, the newer pictures just capture so much more of the moment.
We actually prefer the first Monkey Ball for it's multiplayer options. Monkey Flight is easily the best, but the 'down time' of the first makes each match longer, but in a good way. Much more time for friendly jibes, stealing other peoples tactics, and four people on the edge of their seat hoping aiai will roll that little bit more into the sea:)
The second Monkey Golf is also way less 'crazy golf' orientated, which also puts me off.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, I've had a HDMI graphics card (with audio support) for over a year now.
"The current global warming trend is caused by human activity, primarily the use of fossil fuels. That is an absolute fact. It's about as well established as Newtonian physics at this point."
No it's not a fact, and that's the point. Money and politics have produced the research that supports the argument, but there is actually a ton of more convincing research most people are too afraid to support or follow up.
I agree that being more environmentally friendly is good, even when I don't believe we are the cause of climate change. BUT the end result of all this nonsense is hasty, public-support-winning laws from politicians (are light bulbs and stand-by buttons really so important in this world and need to be regulated?!) and the continuation of poverty in the third world, who get environmental power forced upon them.
Does it make sense that the worlds richest nations get to use and abuse the cheapest forms of electricity, while the poorest nations have the most expensive forms of electricity (e.g. solar) forced upon them? Seriously, google the effects of not being able to afford electricity has on african nations. I was shocked to learn how something simple like depending a fire in your hut affects life expectancy.
I have a OneClick Intelligent Mains Panel http://www.oneclickpower.co.uk/acatalog/#aP7NFOC :)
and have been feeling smug ever since. I have a dual monitor set up, router for the room and powered speakers that used to be on all the time, even if my PCs were off. Now, a few seconds after my PC shutdowns, the power is cut from everything else. Seems a good idea to me
This is unfortunately harsh, but kinda true. I installed Vista retail on a brand new self-built machine, worked perfectly bar the 'beta' 8800gtx drivers, which still worked fine for me. The install was faster than XP as well.
:)
That said, idiots should be allowed to use computers as well, just not write articles. A bad workman always blames his Windows
"It's cheaper than most of the "commercial" alternatives, and offers what is widely regarded as the best programming on the planet."
It might be cheaper (BBC 130 vs 180 for Sky base package) but considering if you like TV you need to get Sky or cable really means you are forced to pay twice for your channels.
Channel 4 and five are evidence you can have an excellent channel without needing the license fee. Their homegrown stuff is excellent, and they show *a lot* of decent US shows between them. For free, no bullying tactics to tax me, just the odd advert or two.
BBC just make a lot of copycat shows, awful soaps and reality tv, waste a lot of money on niche services, and their saving grace- the occasional decent documentary. They are useless at importing US shows as well, losing the simpsons and 24 for example, yet still find the money to pay Jonathan Ross over £17m... They do show some decent stuff, but American Dad or Seinfeld at midnight on a Sunday isn't exactly useful scheduling.
If you can't tell, I'm not a fan and I don't agree with the parent. I don't have anything against people who like the BBC, but they should pay for it, not me. The sooner the license fee goes, the better.
But having said all that, I pay my tax. I should be able to put their content online, make my own channel with their shows- their stuff is publicly funded so it should be in the public domain, and I won't begrudge a few foreigners who have the perverse desire to watch the BBC either.
A quick google tells me there are 1.5m unbundled lines, and 3.3m cable subscribers (which means the potential cable subscribers is probably way higher.) So I think a fair chunk of the UK net-using population has some sort of access to decent speeds. TBH I would consider 3.5mb to be a decent speed anyway :)
My post was really to trying point out the situation isn't *that bad* in the UK. Maybe I'm a lucky example, but I've lived in 4 different places in Birmingham now (previously a roaming student) and always had a fanatastic conenction. A decade ago I was running up £100/month bills on dial-up... now that was a bad time for the using the net in the UK!
I don't think your post is typical of the UK.
I've had 16mb (with 1mb up) ADSL for over a year now (and get the full speed), and cable has had 10mb for a couple of years. With a decent provider (my last two have been Blueyonder and Bulldog), these speeds have absolutely no caps. We're not matching Sweden, but we've reached speeds that are certainly fast enough for today.
Admittedly I live in Birmingham, which has a population of about 1m, but any built up area should be capable of getting a decent service. What's really wrong with the UK is most people 'sticking' with BT to provide everything (and their services are typically the worst available) or some nanny-ISP like AOL. Perversely, these slow, restricted ISPs might be best for non-nerds so I've given up trying to suggest something better.
An emerging trend in the UK, and I have no idea if it is also happening in other countries, is the idea of tagging free broadband onto other subscription services, like Orange mobile phone contract, or Sky TV. No doubt there have been some issues with early adopters from what I've read on the net, but they offer very decent speeds and definitely something to consider if you want to save some cash on net access.
Wow, you were so busy being a first-gen HD user that you forgot to get with the times!
:)
"Plasmas are over-priced, wear out too fast, and get burn-in."
Wrong, wrong, and wrong. These things are simply not true anymore.
Go back to your crusty old TV and try to eek whatever kudos you think you can from getting it a few months before the rest of us. Just also remember things can move on before doling out advice
I've had my 42" HD plasma over a year now, and it's still kicking as much ass now as it was when i bought it.
I play tons of video games on there, no problems whatsoever. I often reboot my HTPC, forget about it, and come to find Windows MCE on the screen a few hours later. Image retention fades in seconds after changing the picture.
For me, LCD just looks ugly with standard def on a big screen. Plasma can look good no matter what you throw at it, but often it takes a good while tweaking the settings with something like DVE.
Wow, what a quick comeback!
I preordered over a month a go at my local Gamestation, and I'm still number 92 in the queue :(
From:
http://www.e3insider.com/e3tv/
"ETV - DVD-Quality Versions of E3Insider's Videos, Including the Press Events"
It sounds really neat actually, especially the subscription thing, where I'm hoping you can just leave it running grabbing videos automatically.
Totally agree, I've had my K750i coming up to a year now, and it's superb. Bluetooth, Pro Duo slot, 2MP camera, MP3 player - they've squuezed a lot of useful stuff in there. The idea isn't to be the best at everything it tries, but just be a useful at as many things as possible... I always have my phone with me, but not always other stuff like cameras, ipods, external hard drive etc.
The camera quality is good enough for 'everyday' shots. I have a lot of photos I wouldn't have taken with a proper camera, or had the chance to if my phone didn't take cameras.
And of course higher MP is better... I often have a look through my old phone photos, and going from 0.3 to 1.3 to 2MP models over the past 3-4 years, the newer pictures just capture so much more of the moment.
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=63 701
..and I'm big Microsoft fanboy. But 3 games? And one I specifically had to dig out and hook up my original Xbox for? C'mon MS, must try harder :)
Yeah, a lot of the time my HTPC is running MAME and stuff like that :)
I already have a viiv PC with HDMI out, and let me tell you it looks sweet!
We actually prefer the first Monkey Ball for it's multiplayer options. Monkey Flight is easily the best, but the 'down time' of the first makes each match longer, but in a good way. Much more time for friendly jibes, stealing other peoples tactics, and four people on the edge of their seat hoping aiai will roll that little bit more into the sea :)
The second Monkey Golf is also way less 'crazy golf' orientated, which also puts me off.