I think the names of companies are blotted out so as to not give free advertising. Like the "cola myths" bit -- if Pepsi's buying ad space, don't give Coke free exposure.
Oh, its not those names that bother me. And I understand why in this case.
When dealing with a brand, and the Mythbuster's notoriously unscientific methods, it wouldn't do to have them come to a conclusion like "Major Brand Y" will kill your children. I can see how that will cause issues and lawsuits. It wouldn't help if they later came out with the statement "Well it wasn't the Pepsi that ate through the teeth, but the contaminant we forgot to clean out of the cup" Or something like that. In that case, they would have actually damaged a brand.
I guess I should say that it bothers me, but I do understand.
Your willing to complain online that they censor the chemical names, but too lazy to look the combinations up ONLINE. Are you serious?
I get paid design things that carry explosives (typically one way). I'm serious in that I don't have to look up the combinations because what they are doing is usually pretty obvious and based on their setup (like when they made nitrous oxide).
People who are worried that idiots will try what they see on TV are being naive if they don't realize that these are the same idiots that are manufacturing Meth in the trunks of their cars. Blocking out the information of someone who wants to make a 'boom' isn't going to stop them from getting that information. (Or just pouring gasoline on their pants and lighting it on fire, as youtube can attest)
But my true point is that they block out the mudane details like names of companies or locations for seemingly little purpose. It is bothersome to me, as I'm the type of person to go research that information, and it would save me a few minutes on google.
And their big 'bleep' was located 'bleep' but don't 'bleep' anywhere near 'bleep' CUE BIG FIREBALL BOOM!
Sorry about that, it is just a pet peeve of mine that Mythbusters is seemingly censoring mundane details about what they are doing. What is the point about censoring the location where you are firing off a minigun? It's obviously restricted, and it isn't as if people are going to wander onto some military base and pick up a minigun.
If the people who watch the show were so stupid as to try and use some of the chemicals that are used in the show (and harm themselves or someone else) I'd wager that they are probably too stupid to even know where to order them.
You never saw Mr. Wizard bleeping out the chemical names on his demonstrations.
I swear that if the lawyers had their way, they would bleep 'gasoline'.
The R rating allowed showing superheroes as human, sexual creatures... and the horrible, angry side of humans that we all know exists. It put a microscope on our own personalities... and made much of the audience uncomfortable (as did the source material).
No, not really. I'd never read Watchmen and I was interested in seeing the movie.
1. Unless you read up on the backstories, you ended up getting blased with dozens of 2 second shots of people that you figured you were supposed to know, but ended up not really caring much.
2. Without the backstories, the characters were just sort of 'odd'. It wasn't a microscope into our own personalities, it was a magnifying glass on some really flawed people. It made me uncomfortable because I wanted to know how anyone could stand to be around any of the others.
3. The people we DID know about were characatures that stood out against the people who WERE characatures. Nixon was a political cartoon. In those scenes, I was watching an imitation of Dr. Strangelove and it paled in comparison.
4. The sex scene was awkward because it was too long. Frankly, I didn't need it to be that long, I wasn't turned off by it because it was a sex scene, but because the audience said "We get it.." And the director repeated "No, not yet you don't" and the audience repeated "yeah, we do". Director: are you sure? I've got 3 more minutes to show you.
5. The gore. It was just so much that it destroyed the flow of the scenes. Just when you started to relate to the character's anguish, he was strangling someone with their own intestines.
Everything was just overdone. You can show heroes as human, sexual, flawed, creatures without the use of Neon signs indicating your effort.
Oh yeah, and the reveal? Good job giving Ozzymandius an accent and enunciation that blurred what could have been the most 'shocking' moments. "What?" "isedididitthirtyfivmenutesago" "Sed a give?"
I must disagree: western governments have historically ruled against the protection of anonymous speech; however, free speech has traditionally been protected.
You are wrong. Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960).
The Supreme Court found that a law that prohibited anonymous handbills was void. Anonymous speech was specifically cited as having a role in free societies.
Wouldn't an MP5 player not be usable in many countries?
Oh it's usable. Without a doubt. In fact, my problem is that once I started using it, I had to keep using it until everyone stopped complaining about me using it.
Light goes yellow. Can you safely stop? If so then you stop. If you can't then you go. If the light is timed properly then it won't turn red before you hit the intersection if you couldn't safely stop. If it isn't timed properly then that's a whole another matter that needs to be addressed. Hopefully you noticed where I agreed with everybody who said that lowering the yellow light timing to increase revenue is a crock of shit and needs to be dealt with accordingly.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, and you are being unreasonable to think that more people won't start stopping at lights that they normally would have been able to proceed through.
I'm driving along, and I see the traffic light change. I'm at the deciding point where I normally would think, "At this point, I would normally continue through the intersection" If I were any further from the intersection I'd stop.
That's how it is supposed to work. But then you introduce the traffic camera.
Tell me, do you know how this particular camera works? Do you know if the yellow light is 4 seconds, or 5 seconds?
Is it a camera that will flash if the light turns red while you are still in the intersection? Is it a camera that will flash only if you cross the white line after the light turns red? Is it a camera that has a 0.5 second margin for people who just miscalculated by 0.1 seconds?
That's the problem, you don't know. On my way to work, I drive past 3 different styles of traffic cameras. I have no clue how they work, I don't know if it only triggers on crossing the white line on red, or if it triggers if I cross 99% of the intersection and the light turns red at that moment. So, since I'm not willing to fork over $200+ dollars into a system which I find distasteful, I stop earlier than I used to.
I've been driving longer than some drivers have been alive and I've NEVER had a ticket for running a red light. But under this system, it's too easy to turn a slight misjudgement into a hefty fine.
If the yellow light timing hasn't been tampered with why do you need to 'suddenly stop cold' to avoid the camera? If you treat the yellow light as you are supposed to treat it (i.e: stop if you can safely do so) there is zero excuse for running a red light.
The problem is you are causing me to make a $200+ decision in 0.5 seconds.
If I see a yellow light, I'm stopping hard. I don't care that the roads around here are 55 MPH, I'm stopping hard because I can't afford a $200 error in judgement.
With a red light camera, you CAN'T treat the yellow light like you are supposed to. I usually take my foot off the gas and carefully coast through a yellow light. If it slightly turns red before I'm through the intersection, I'm not really endangering anyone because the other side isn't green yet. If it turns yellow before I reach it, I would stop. But there is that whole middle ground where I have to decide, should I slam on my breaks because I saw a glimpse of yellow, or risk an uncontestable fine?
In the end, I drive large pickup truck with proper headrests. Since the other guy will have to pay for it, a rear end collision doesn't worry me as much.
What if a child runs into the road in front of the 5th car in front of you. This causes traffic to back up when it was previously clear that you would be able to pass through the intersection during the green/yellow. Now, you are issued a citation for safely responding to changing traffic conditions. I can't control the car in front of me, and to assume that every time you enter the intersection you must be certain that you will always be able to pass through is impossible.
You could have a system that provides resistance for a slight amount, but then disengages and emits an alert tone (like your lights are still on) if you continue.
That way, you get the initial resistance to prevent accidental movement, but the human can still override the system if they really want to make that maneuver w/o feeling restricted or 'stiff controls'.
In my case, I have a place to store an aircraft in a local home, and on my vacation property. I have a house in upstate NY which I would like to go to, but it is a 6-7 hour drive from my current location.
The ability to store this thing in my home garage, drive it to a local airport, fuel, and then fly to NY would be wonderful. I could land in a podunk airport, and drive the last 3 miles to my vacation home and store it in my garage there. I'm not too keen on arranging to park an aircraft at a field and pay a fee to do so when I could have the option of storing it in my own climate controlled garage (would it be a hangar then?)
If they can get it down to the sport craft limitations, this thing would be awesome and I'd buy one in a heartbeat.
Point still stands, if you're going to complain about price spend a few seconds looking online for a better price first.
Actually you have been helping to prove my point. These cables are popping up all over the place, and no doubt they ship a dozen or so before someone comes back with the complaint that "It doesn't actually work with the iphone 3g". Then it drops off.
That's the problem with this chip. Until you actually get someone who has bought one of these cables, and tried it in an iPhone3g (And potentially one of a specific software version) You have no real confidence in the compatability.
A cable, should be a cable, should be a cable. You shouldn't have to worry if there is some proprietary chip inside a what should be little more than pins, shielding and a connector on each end. It introduces a hell of a lot of confusion, highlighted by your inability to first select the correct cable. (and according to the description, you didn't get it right the second time either).
I'm pretty sure he meant "turn by turn" as in voice instructions
I think more along the lines of switching to the next direction once you pass the previous on the GPS. It's very annoying to know you reach a location, then look down to your phone to click the next button which then zooms your map into the next direction at such a level that you have no idea if it is 10 miles or 10 feet away without reading the details of the next item.
Basically, every time you pass a marker, advance it to the next marker without changing the zoom on your map, and you would make a lot of people happy.
the newest AIM client gets around this. it will leave you signed into the system if the app isn't running, it'll then send you a text message for any incoming message which you can reply to via text.
it isn't the prettiest thing, but it works.. though obviously you'll want unlimited texts
I've often wondered if the reason that they didn't have these clients able to be backgrounded is because AT&T wanted their cut in the form of SMS.
I refuse to pay the money for unlimited texts (yes it's nearly a pittance, but for me it is principle).
Of course, I've jailbroken my phone, so I CAN background the aim client...
You could spend 2 billion dollars shielding something, or you could spend $144 an hour paying ~20 people minimum wage to sit on myspace, irc, and twitter all day and space them around your complex.
With all the TVs, cars, airplanes, cell phones, motorcycles, powerlines, CB radios.... etc. Do you really think an extra 20 signals is going to slow anyone down?
BTW, would you get those 20 people to follow all of your TEMPEST devices around to provide noise? Strap them to the roof of your hmmwv? Stuff em behind the pilot?
In the UNIVERSE? Might as well say the Earth is flat.
You missed the point. He said that according to the definition, there are only 8 planets in the universe. Those other planetary like objects orbiting a different star do not fit into this definition, and are therefore not planets according to the definition.
Who do you think 'they' are? They are us. Don't think that 'us vs them' means that we are actually any different from them. It's just a useful way to rally your base, having a common enemy and all.
Anyway, for most of us, morals won't pay the bills.
I've never been to New York, so I wouldn't know. I was thinking of parking fines more in line with just about everywhere else I've been. Those fines are outrageous.
He is actually understating the fines. Or I should say, the total cost. I just had a car returned to me, with an expired inspection. I was literally driving it to the shop to have it inspected when I was pulled over for that.
I looked it up, saw it was a $25 fine (since it had just expired) and pleaded guilty. Big mistake.
2 week later I received a bill. $25 fine, as expected, and an $85 SURCHARGE. The total, for what was originally a $25 fine, became a $110 fine for an out of date inspection.
Thank god that I'm also literally moving out of this state today. 6 hr drive ahead of me, but good riddance.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm assuming that was just a fart joke, but we "acquired" it from our natural gas supply.
I suppose some farts do rise to a level where one could describe them as 'unnatural'. My dog can clear other dogs from the room.
I think the names of companies are blotted out so as to not give free advertising. Like the "cola myths" bit -- if Pepsi's buying ad space, don't give Coke free exposure.
Oh, its not those names that bother me. And I understand why in this case.
When dealing with a brand, and the Mythbuster's notoriously unscientific methods, it wouldn't do to have them come to a conclusion like "Major Brand Y" will kill your children. I can see how that will cause issues and lawsuits. It wouldn't help if they later came out with the statement "Well it wasn't the Pepsi that ate through the teeth, but the contaminant we forgot to clean out of the cup" Or something like that. In that case, they would have actually damaged a brand.
I guess I should say that it bothers me, but I do understand.
Your willing to complain online that they censor the chemical names, but too lazy to look the combinations up ONLINE. Are you serious?
I get paid design things that carry explosives (typically one way). I'm serious in that I don't have to look up the combinations because what they are doing is usually pretty obvious and based on their setup (like when they made nitrous oxide).
People who are worried that idiots will try what they see on TV are being naive if they don't realize that these are the same idiots that are manufacturing Meth in the trunks of their cars. Blocking out the information of someone who wants to make a 'boom' isn't going to stop them from getting that information. (Or just pouring gasoline on their pants and lighting it on fire, as youtube can attest)
But my true point is that they block out the mudane details like names of companies or locations for seemingly little purpose. It is bothersome to me, as I'm the type of person to go research that information, and it would save me a few minutes on google.
For a cross between a sex toy and a neon light? /shrugs
Who am I to judge? :)
But if you keep going with that line of thinking, you might have a hot seller of a product on your hands.
And their big 'bleep' was located 'bleep' but don't 'bleep' anywhere near 'bleep' CUE BIG FIREBALL BOOM!
Sorry about that, it is just a pet peeve of mine that Mythbusters is seemingly censoring mundane details about what they are doing. What is the point about censoring the location where you are firing off a minigun? It's obviously restricted, and it isn't as if people are going to wander onto some military base and pick up a minigun.
If the people who watch the show were so stupid as to try and use some of the chemicals that are used in the show (and harm themselves or someone else) I'd wager that they are probably too stupid to even know where to order them.
You never saw Mr. Wizard bleeping out the chemical names on his demonstrations.
I swear that if the lawyers had their way, they would bleep 'gasoline'.
The R rating allowed showing superheroes as human, sexual creatures... and the horrible, angry side of humans that we all know exists. It put a microscope on our own personalities... and made much of the audience uncomfortable (as did the source material).
No, not really. I'd never read Watchmen and I was interested in seeing the movie.
1. Unless you read up on the backstories, you ended up getting blased with dozens of 2 second shots of people that you figured you were supposed to know, but ended up not really caring much.
2. Without the backstories, the characters were just sort of 'odd'. It wasn't a microscope into our own personalities, it was a magnifying glass on some really flawed people. It made me uncomfortable because I wanted to know how anyone could stand to be around any of the others.
3. The people we DID know about were characatures that stood out against the people who WERE characatures. Nixon was a political cartoon. In those scenes, I was watching an imitation of Dr. Strangelove and it paled in comparison.
4. The sex scene was awkward because it was too long. Frankly, I didn't need it to be that long, I wasn't turned off by it because it was a sex scene, but because the audience said "We get it.." And the director repeated "No, not yet you don't" and the audience repeated "yeah, we do". Director: are you sure? I've got 3 more minutes to show you.
5. The gore. It was just so much that it destroyed the flow of the scenes. Just when you started to relate to the character's anguish, he was strangling someone with their own intestines.
Everything was just overdone. You can show heroes as human, sexual, flawed, creatures without the use of Neon signs indicating your effort.
Oh yeah, and the reveal? Good job giving Ozzymandius an accent and enunciation that blurred what could have been the most 'shocking' moments.
"What?"
"isedididitthirtyfivmenutesago"
"Sed a give?"
The problem you have is that you instantly go "It's a dick! FIXATE FIXATE FIXATE..." Exactly the same as my girlfriend did.
Well, you know that when you don't get enough of something you often get cravings... ;)
I must disagree: western governments have historically ruled against the protection of anonymous speech; however, free speech has traditionally been protected.
You are wrong.
Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960).
The Supreme Court found that a law that prohibited anonymous handbills was void. Anonymous speech was specifically cited as having a role in free societies.
Being able to state your opinion without fear of reprisal is a necessary condition for free speech.
It is not a sufficient condition.
Banning anonymous speech is certainly NOT a necessary condition for free speech either.
I mean, who is going to notice a schizophrenic ant
That's the one that is walking along, waving its antennae to no one, and creeping out the other workers.
Wouldn't an MP5 player not be usable in many countries?
Oh it's usable. Without a doubt. In fact, my problem is that once I started using it, I had to keep using it until everyone stopped complaining about me using it.
Light goes yellow. Can you safely stop? If so then you stop. If you can't then you go. If the light is timed properly then it won't turn red before you hit the intersection if you couldn't safely stop. If it isn't timed properly then that's a whole another matter that needs to be addressed. Hopefully you noticed where I agreed with everybody who said that lowering the yellow light timing to increase revenue is a crock of shit and needs to be dealt with accordingly.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, and you are being unreasonable to think that more people won't start stopping at lights that they normally would have been able to proceed through.
I'm driving along, and I see the traffic light change. I'm at the deciding point where I normally would think, "At this point, I would normally continue through the intersection" If I were any further from the intersection I'd stop.
That's how it is supposed to work. But then you introduce the traffic camera.
Tell me, do you know how this particular camera works? Do you know if the yellow light is 4 seconds, or 5 seconds?
Is it a camera that will flash if the light turns red while you are still in the intersection? Is it a camera that will flash only if you cross the white line after the light turns red? Is it a camera that has a 0.5 second margin for people who just miscalculated by 0.1 seconds?
That's the problem, you don't know. On my way to work, I drive past 3 different styles of traffic cameras. I have no clue how they work, I don't know if it only triggers on crossing the white line on red, or if it triggers if I cross 99% of the intersection and the light turns red at that moment. So, since I'm not willing to fork over $200+ dollars into a system which I find distasteful, I stop earlier than I used to.
I've been driving longer than some drivers have been alive and I've NEVER had a ticket for running a red light. But under this system, it's too easy to turn a slight misjudgement into a hefty fine.
If the yellow light timing hasn't been tampered with why do you need to 'suddenly stop cold' to avoid the camera? If you treat the yellow light as you are supposed to treat it (i.e: stop if you can safely do so) there is zero excuse for running a red light.
The problem is you are causing me to make a $200+ decision in 0.5 seconds.
If I see a yellow light, I'm stopping hard. I don't care that the roads around here are 55 MPH, I'm stopping hard because I can't afford a $200 error in judgement.
With a red light camera, you CAN'T treat the yellow light like you are supposed to. I usually take my foot off the gas and carefully coast through a yellow light. If it slightly turns red before I'm through the intersection, I'm not really endangering anyone because the other side isn't green yet. If it turns yellow before I reach it, I would stop. But there is that whole middle ground where I have to decide, should I slam on my breaks because I saw a glimpse of yellow, or risk an uncontestable fine?
In the end, I drive large pickup truck with proper headrests. Since the other guy will have to pay for it, a rear end collision doesn't worry me as much.
What if a child runs into the road in front of the 5th car in front of you. This causes traffic to back up when it was previously clear that you would be able to pass through the intersection during the green/yellow. Now, you are issued a citation for safely responding to changing traffic conditions. I can't control the car in front of me, and to assume that every time you enter the intersection you must be certain that you will always be able to pass through is impossible.
You could have a system that provides resistance for a slight amount, but then disengages and emits an alert tone (like your lights are still on) if you continue.
That way, you get the initial resistance to prevent accidental movement, but the human can still override the system if they really want to make that maneuver w/o feeling restricted or 'stiff controls'.
In my case, I have a place to store an aircraft in a local home, and on my vacation property. I have a house in upstate NY which I would like to go to, but it is a 6-7 hour drive from my current location.
The ability to store this thing in my home garage, drive it to a local airport, fuel, and then fly to NY would be wonderful. I could land in a podunk airport, and drive the last 3 miles to my vacation home and store it in my garage there. I'm not too keen on arranging to park an aircraft at a field and pay a fee to do so when I could have the option of storing it in my own climate controlled garage (would it be a hangar then?)
If they can get it down to the sport craft limitations, this thing would be awesome and I'd buy one in a heartbeat.
Here you go.
Point still stands, if you're going to complain about price spend a few seconds looking online for a better price first.
Actually you have been helping to prove my point. These cables are popping up all over the place, and no doubt they ship a dozen or so before someone comes back with the complaint that "It doesn't actually work with the iphone 3g". Then it drops off.
That's the problem with this chip. Until you actually get someone who has bought one of these cables, and tried it in an iPhone3g (And potentially one of a specific software version) You have no real confidence in the compatability.
A cable, should be a cable, should be a cable. You shouldn't have to worry if there is some proprietary chip inside a what should be little more than pins, shielding and a connector on each end. It introduces a hell of a lot of confusion, highlighted by your inability to first select the correct cable. (and according to the description, you didn't get it right the second time either).
I'm pretty sure he meant "turn by turn" as in voice instructions
I think more along the lines of switching to the next direction once you pass the previous on the GPS. It's very annoying to know you reach a location, then look down to your phone to click the next button which then zooms your map into the next direction at such a level that you have no idea if it is 10 miles or 10 feet away without reading the details of the next item.
Basically, every time you pass a marker, advance it to the next marker without changing the zoom on your map, and you would make a lot of people happy.
the newest AIM client gets around this. it will leave you signed into the system if the app isn't running, it'll then send you a text message for any incoming message which you can reply to via text.
it isn't the prettiest thing, but it works.. though obviously you'll want unlimited texts
I've often wondered if the reason that they didn't have these clients able to be backgrounded is because AT&T wanted their cut in the form of SMS.
I refuse to pay the money for unlimited texts (yes it's nearly a pittance, but for me it is principle).
Of course, I've jailbroken my phone, so I CAN background the aim client...
I haven't seen a single example of Apple denying the chip to a company who has requested it, so I don't see the big deal.
Find me a TV-out cable for my iphone that costs less than $30.
That's the big deal for me. (No really, find me one, because I'd love to get one, but I refuse to pay $40-50 for what should be a $4-5 purchase)
There are of course various levels to these things, but you will NOT find classified data scattered around on systems outside a secured area.
Perhaps a better way to put it, you shouldn't find red data on a black network.
Honestly, it's hard to mess that up under almost all circumstances. It takes someone completely brain-dead, or malicious, to mix the two.
You could spend 2 billion dollars shielding something, or you could spend $144 an hour paying ~20 people minimum wage to sit on myspace, irc, and twitter all day and space them around your complex.
With all the TVs, cars, airplanes, cell phones, motorcycles, powerlines, CB radios.... etc. Do you really think an extra 20 signals is going to slow anyone down?
BTW, would you get those 20 people to follow all of your TEMPEST devices around to provide noise? Strap them to the roof of your hmmwv? Stuff em behind the pilot?
In the UNIVERSE? Might as well say the Earth is flat.
You missed the point. He said that according to the definition, there are only 8 planets in the universe. Those other planetary like objects orbiting a different star do not fit into this definition, and are therefore not planets according to the definition.
Believe it or not "they" read sites like /. too...
Who do you think 'they' are? They are us. Don't think that 'us vs them' means that we are actually any different from them. It's just a useful way to rally your base, having a common enemy and all.
Anyway, for most of us, morals won't pay the bills.
I've never been to New York, so I wouldn't know. I was thinking of parking fines more in line with just about everywhere else I've been. Those fines are outrageous.
He is actually understating the fines. Or I should say, the total cost. I just had a car returned to me, with an expired inspection. I was literally driving it to the shop to have it inspected when I was pulled over for that.
I looked it up, saw it was a $25 fine (since it had just expired) and pleaded guilty. Big mistake.
2 week later I received a bill. $25 fine, as expected, and an $85 SURCHARGE. The total, for what was originally a $25 fine, became a $110 fine for an out of date inspection.
Thank god that I'm also literally moving out of this state today. 6 hr drive ahead of me, but good riddance.