PDA

View Full Version : can't even begin to describe how much this irks me!!!



borkus
02-26-2007, 08:34 PM
http://www.thatvideosite.com/video/4013 they link to a worthy cause. rich tycoons trying to make us deal with low band internet because we're not rich!!! man, i wanna punch something right now. i signed their petition. hope a few of you will do the same. the only strength we have against the powers that be is in numbers. this reminds me so much of microsoft. why is it that an o.s. that is pretty much required since what, the late '90's still cost $300? ooh, need to let that one go. could rant for pages. anyway. hope some of you will join the cause. look to other parts of the world. 3d world printed an article about this happening in the uk a few months back. not just in the u.s. like i said, all we have is numbers. the more people fighting the cause, the better. and powerball. but even if i were rich, i wouldn't want to think i had to pay more for something that was cheaper just a short while ago... ah, i hate posting such gloomy news!!! but want to be a part of this gloom not happening...

borkus
02-26-2007, 08:37 PM
video is pretty cheesy, now that i took a breath and watched it again. but it conveys the point well enough

borkus
02-26-2007, 09:32 PM
to lighten things up, but not take away precedence. something to lighten up the mood with a jarring but real look on where we (u.s. and others) sit in the world. http://www.thatvideosite.com/video/4012 i like the presentation on this one. simple, but carries the point well

borkus
02-26-2007, 09:38 PM
my personal favorite, "to whom did these questions go to b.g. (before google)? i hear ya. google being a lifeline

monfoodoo
02-26-2007, 10:07 PM
This only the beginning.however i feel we only have about 5 to 6years years left as a civilization.

Matt
02-27-2007, 03:47 AM
Global warming will take us all out before that anyway!

Lightwolf
02-27-2007, 04:58 AM
Doom!
Quake!

Elmar Moelzer
02-27-2007, 05:13 AM
Hmm, I would guess that once providers start doing this, there will be smaller competing providers, that will not do it. You simply switch to one who does not do it. I dont know about the US, but here in Austria we have got the luxury of choice (meanwhile). So if my provider does not do what I want, there are plenty others that will happily do so.
CU
Elmar

tonybliss
02-27-2007, 05:50 AM
Global warming will take us all out before that anyway!

Wooohooooooooooooo!!! Yaaaaaaaaaaaah!!
:dance:

Andyjaggy
02-27-2007, 07:52 AM
This only the beginning.however i feel we only have about 5 to 6years years left as a civilization.

According to my predictions it's 4 years 3 months 2 days 6 hours and 12 minutes.

shrox
02-27-2007, 09:19 AM
Well, the video refered to the internet as "pipes", didn't really explain things in other than "big business bad, joe blow good" terms, and generally oversimplified the subject.

The good news is that asteriod 2004 MN4 will pass within 22,600 miles of Earth on April 13, 2029, then return in 2035 to hit us...

monfoodoo
02-27-2007, 10:40 AM
Global warming,you must be kidding me.Not a bigger scam than DDT.Here is a interesting link that may interedt you.http://www.akdart.com/warming.html or The global Warming Page.

Captain Obvious
02-27-2007, 11:21 AM
Quake!
Unreal!

gjjackson
02-27-2007, 01:16 PM
After watching the video it's obvious there is a misconception on the whole matter. It's not the internet that everyone uses to surf. It's about putting in a new "Backbone" that carries the load. The "pipe" now is much too small for everything that is transmitted. It's a backbone that the carriers will use. But what do you expect when it's fermented by those of "The Nation" magazine and a supposed news show from Comedy Central (don't remember the guys name.) and too many nowadays believe it's a "Real" news show. Get real people.

Dave Jerrard
02-27-2007, 01:51 PM
But what do you expect when it's fermented by those of "The Nation" magazine and a supposed news show from Comedy Central (don't remember the guys name.) and too many nowadays believe it's a "Real" news show. Get real people.The Daily Show? Well, it's been repeated on that show several times that they are a fake news show. What's sad is that they generally are able to provide much more accurate news in five minutes than most of the 24 hour news channels do in a day.

He Who Can't Stand The Crap The 'Real' News Channels Dump On Us.

Andyjaggy
02-27-2007, 02:08 PM
Unreal!

Doom!

Jim_C
02-27-2007, 03:10 PM
But what do you expect when it's fermented by those of "The Nation" magazine and a supposed news show from Comedy Central (don't remember the guys name.) and too many nowadays believe it's a "Real" news show. Get real people.


Oh yes... the 'real' news on CNN(the Anna Nicole channel) and Fox News (mouthpiece of the white house) is sooooooooo much more accurate and sincere.

CMT
02-27-2007, 03:50 PM
Oh yes... the 'real' news on CNN(the Anna Nicole channel) and Fox News (mouthpiece of the white house) is sooooooooo much more accurate and sincere.

They are the Yin to the rest of the media's Yang.... Fox isn't the only politically biased network.....

kopperdrake
02-27-2007, 04:02 PM
So help me, if they ever privatise the BBC I'm leaving the country.

DogBoy
02-28-2007, 03:01 AM
Doom!

Bubble-Bobble :confused: :o :screwy:

Iain
02-28-2007, 03:22 AM
erm..Super Bomberman?

hrgiger
02-28-2007, 04:10 AM
If global warming doesn't get us(and lets face facts, it probably will), then the Asteroid(Apotheosis) headed towards earth in 2036 will.

Captain Obvious
02-28-2007, 08:12 AM
Goldeneye!

Captain Obvious
02-28-2007, 08:13 AM
If global warming doesn't get us(and lets face facts, it probably will), then the Asteroid(Apotheosis) headed towards earth in 2036 will.
Bah! We all know that it's the Covenant that'll finish us off.

iconoclasty
02-28-2007, 11:11 AM
I'm pretty sure the spam bots will eventually rise up and crush us all in their metal spammy claws.

Dave Jerrard
02-28-2007, 02:01 PM
If global warming doesn't get us(and lets face facts, it probably will), then the Asteroid(Apotheosis) headed towards earth in 2036 will.
Since AUgust of last year, that's not likely to happen. Apophis (not Apopheosis) has been downgraded to 0 on the Torino scale, which is a scale measuring the threat level of asteroids. There's currently only one asteroid with the threat level higher than 0, asteroid 1950 DA, which doesn't have a chance of hitting us until March 16th, 2880. We should have warp drive by then. At least I hope so!

He Who Is Planning A Barbecue The Next Weekend After That.

geothefaust
02-28-2007, 02:11 PM
The Daily Show? Well, it's been repeated on that show several times that they are a fake news show. What's sad is that they generally are able to provide much more accurate news in five minutes than most of the 24 hour news channels do in a day.

He Who Can't Stand The Crap The 'Real' News Channels Dump On Us.

So true!


...And Legend of Zelda.

Tom Wood
02-28-2007, 02:43 PM
This article makes a convincing argument in favor of -some- discriminatory pricing:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/18/AR2007011801508.html

Also:

http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2010131,00.html

The end user probably wouldn't see much change since they are wanting to charge at the content-provider end of the tube. Maybe more ads and a slight uptick in price per episode of video purchased online.

I'm not arguing for the telecommunications companies, but it's a complicated issue that deserves more than an emotional response.

Captain Obvious
02-28-2007, 04:14 PM
...And Legend of Zelda.
Well, that much goes without saying.

Stooch
03-06-2007, 12:51 PM
From the global warming page:


The debate over global warming is political rather than scientific. It is driven by the people who make their decisions based upon other people's emotional outbursts, sound bites and bumper stickers rather than rational thinking. The people who are most upset about global warming are the people who don't believe that God created the heavens and the earth. (Ironically, these are some of the same people who teach "survival of the fittest" in the public schools.) The earth was designed and built by someone who still has his hand on the thermostat to this day. If that is not true, and we merely evolved into what we are today, then we have no choice but to continue evolving and adapting when the temperature goes up or down.


Thats as far as i got. The second i saw that line, i knew immediatelly that im reading the drivel of a mental weakling who needs the crutch of religion and fools himself into thinking that he knows what he is talking about. If there is anything that irks me its the blind faith to a childrens story made by people who were scared of lightning and thunder. Some of these idiots even get a government position and make the rest of us suffer from their ignorance.

monfoodoo
03-06-2007, 02:09 PM
As far as the earths history goes ,mans minscule time slot is the most unerradict as far as a violently changing climate.It is not our fault nor can we change how the climate reacts.and at this point civilization is cleaner than used to be.I don't feel guilty about anything.

Stooch
03-06-2007, 02:12 PM
well science isnt on your side and im sure as he|| more inclined to take their word for it.

Lightwolf
03-06-2007, 02:38 PM
As far as the earths history goes ,mans minscule time slot is the most unerradict as far as a violently changing climate.It is not our fault nor can we change how the climate reacts.and at this point civilization is cleaner than used to be.I don't feel guilty about anything.
Funny, since you can even track local climate changes that happen on a weekly cycle - incidentally the same cycle used as "work" days and "off" days.
Surprisingly there is no natural cycle that is identical and follows what we call a "week".
And that's just local changes.

Cheers,
Mike

jasonwestmas
03-06-2007, 03:03 PM
At&t is already charging about $30 more to use their so called uber fast internet. I use it and it is fast but still affordable for a financial weakling like myself. I guess I'll only really be P.O. about this when I have to tack on another $30 bucks just to have decent bandwidth to my favorite sites. That video reminds me of how telephone companies like AT&T have all these tiny little features on your phone bill that add up to to one large bill. You have to go over each feature with the telephone person to make sure you aren't getting charged for something you don't need. The same will probably happen with accessing certain servers/sites etc. Now that really burns me.

jasonwestmas
03-06-2007, 03:05 PM
well science isnt on your side . . .

Ha Wow! You're one of the first people I've heared say that other than myself.

tribbles
03-06-2007, 03:11 PM
Funny, since you can even track local climate changes that happen on a weekly cycle - incidentally the same cycle used as "work" days and "off" days.
Surprisingly there is no natural cycle that is identical and follows what we call a "week".
And that's just local changes.

Cheers,
Mike

Ahh - but there is one that follows the "bank holiday", called the "rain cloud" :)

ted
03-06-2007, 03:26 PM
Scientists would never state "Humans CAUSE Global Warming".
Scientists would state 5% or 90% of it.
Sounds like a bunch of Chicken Little’s with a cause. Hardly a scientific statement. :screwy:

jasonwestmas
03-06-2007, 03:34 PM
Scientists would never state "Humans CAUSE Global Warming".
Scientists would state 5% or 90% of it.
Sounds like a bunch of Chicken Little’s with a cause. Hardly a scientific statement. :screwy:

Theory is a part of science though and therefore inaccuracy or making generalized statement are still a part of science. In other words there is some truth to Science and some possibilities and some falsehoods.

Cageman
03-06-2007, 03:36 PM
Quake!

Actually, we play Quake 3 at lunch and after we are done for the day... :)

jasonwestmas
03-06-2007, 03:39 PM
Theory is a part of science though and therefore inaccuracy or making generalized statement are still a part of science. In other words there is some truth to Science and some possibilities and some falsehoods.

Actually this last statement could be applied to any philosophy about the earth or even universal understanding reguarding history or scripture in general. I've never fully agreed or disagreed with anyone.

TripD
03-06-2007, 05:58 PM
Ultimately Global warming will only affect the human presence (read population). ~16k years ago noone was living in northern Europe because it was a block of ice and this will happen again. H*ll, it happened right here where I live in NoCal. Also, Mother nature did just fine after the asteroid that likely killed off the dynasaurs hit the earth and that incident lit up half the earth's forests in flame. Mother nature as always, will do just fine albeit always changing.

mattclary
03-07-2007, 06:16 AM
Maybe a little global warming and pollution are a small price to pay. :yingyang:

http://www.gaianation.net/org/gaiasporing.html

Exception
03-07-2007, 02:00 PM
Global warming,you must be kidding me.Not a bigger scam than DDT.Here is a interesting link that may interedt you.http://www.akdart.com/warming.html or The global Warming Page.

Wow. That must be one of the most insidious pieces of religiously based idiocy on the planet.

Seriously, get a science degree, then do some research, then claim that Global Climate Change is not an issue (Oh yes, I do have one). Even calling it Global Warming is wrong.

Talk about irking...

jasonwestmas
03-07-2007, 02:23 PM
Um yeah, there is no math, stats, formulae or even any scientific/ historical experimentation/ data on that page so therefore, what's the point of babbling against someone elses views on this controversial subject.

I'm talking about the babbling on the so called "global warming page", not you Exception. :) It sounds more like industrial propaganda using people's need to believe that a god is actually in control of this planet's weather for better, when in actuallity Nature has no respect of persons and we do have actual control over Nature to a certain degree. Just how much control is unknown to me. I won't pretend to know like so many other do.

Glendalough
03-07-2007, 03:44 PM
Why do people always attack scientists, they seem to think they are pitted against God and religion?

It must be a poor and weak faith that is knocked over by a fact of science.

Scientists simply invented all these things (machines) that have upset the atmosphere. Now they say a mess has been created and people (mostly the Oil Corporations and other Losers) try to paint them a conspirators.

Bill Carey
03-07-2007, 04:37 PM
Oh come on, the data shows clear enough that temperatures are going up and carbon dioxide levels are rising. The question is what to do about it. Give up technology and live in caves again? I think not. Scientists and engineers have many possible solutions, just hasn't reached the point where anyone wants to pay for it. (It will) It's the people who claim the 'we're all gonna die!" that need to dry up and go away so the people want to deal with it in a realistic way can be heard.

Dave Jerrard
03-07-2007, 05:46 PM
Wow. That must be one of the most insidious pieces of religiously based idiocy on the planet.Holy crap! That's hilarious in a sad way! You can't even get by this guy's first line without seeing him shoot himself inthe foort!

"It is my opinion, based on the material cited below, as well as my years of careful observation (of the news media, not the weather) that the entire "global warming problem" is a hoax."
:ohmy:
Careful observation, of the NEWS MEDIA??? Oh yeah, there's a reliable source of accurate information! Not the weather itself, but the poorly translated second- and third-hand information and untrained opinions and hype from people that couldn't tell the difference between when a wheel is turned or bent (Larry King on an emergency landing at LAX), and couldn't be bothered to change their reporting even after being corrected on air.


He Who Really Hates The News Media These Days.

gjjackson
03-07-2007, 05:55 PM
Consensus among scientists Says there's global warming. That's enough for me,, Not to put much stock in it. There is No consensus in science. Science isn't consensus. It is based on provable theorems. All we have is anecdotal information. And why wouldn't the scientist release their model information. That is suspect. The earth has been evolving since it's inception and will continue to do so. The Sahara was full of rivers and evidently a fruitful plain, but not now. It certainly wasn't due to "fossil fuels" that it became a desert. Follow the money. Most all of this ideology is simply a way for many to make money. That's ALL there is to it.

TripD
03-07-2007, 06:08 PM
He Who Really Hates The News Media These Days.

Don't be bad mouthin Faux news! :neener:

Dave Jerrard
03-07-2007, 06:33 PM
Don't be bad mouthin Faux news! :neener:
I wasn't. :hey:


He Who Was Bad Mouthin' The News Media. :neener:

Lightwolf
03-07-2007, 06:40 PM
Follow the money. Most all of this ideology is simply a way for many to make money. That's ALL there is to it.
Following that logic...

This can be said for everything, but so far more money can be made by ignoring the possibility of us having a negative impact.

Then again, following the money is a very capitalist, "american" thing, you should be all for it ;)

Either way, your arguments don't convince me :p

Cheers,
Mike

ted
03-07-2007, 08:31 PM
Wow. That must be one of the most insidious pieces of religiously based idiocy on the planet...

Why do you say that?
There were only 2 sentences that mentioned God in the 10 paragraphs. And the second one clearly stated that if God wasn't involved, the rest of the information still held ground. It wasn't even about God, the bible or religion.

Why do some people find it impossible to debate a point without blaming the other persons religion??? I guess it's the only thing to do if you have nothing else.

Weathermen with all the greatest computers can't predict more then a few days accurately! Ya can't argue with that. :)
Why should we let "predictions" about thousands of years from now kill the economy & make knee jerk laws and legislation.
Chicken little causes panic and no sound decisions are made in panic mode.

But either way, I don't see why your opinion and mine can't co-exist. This goes for both sides and my perfect middle opinion. :D

Exception
03-08-2007, 10:12 AM
Why do you say that?
There were only 2 sentences that mentioned God in the 10 paragraphs.

And one huge bible quote in the middle in a 50 point font screaming in your face.

There's only two sources from which objections to global climate change come: religious and economical. In many cases they go hand in hand, where corrupt politicians use religion to manipulate the populace. Neither of those has any grounds on which to deny the existence of global climate change, thus they use illogical, unscientific but manipulative arguments to get the less educated and the gullible on their side. (this is called brainwashing, using something called propaganda, something the US government excells at)
I did not say anything about 'your' religion. You should believe what you want to believe, it's fine with me BUT 1) keep it to yourself, you have no right to tell others what to believe. Religion is a personal affair. 2) it is your responsibility to keep the people that use your religion to their own personal benefit in check (they are called hypocrites), and I am in serious doubt that your religion was intended to be used as a tool for corrupt politicians to have their way.

Although I am a complete agnostic, I completely respect your right to have your own beliefs, this I fully agree with this sentence:


But either way, I don't see why your opinion and mine can't co-exist. This goes for both sides and my perfect middle opinion. :D

Exactly. But if religion is used as a basis for policy, logic or a social argument, that is wrong to the foundations of a democratic and decent society. There is nothing worse than people who out of ignorance stand behind someone who is spreading lies and slander about the world we live in, just because they share the same religion.


Weathermen with all the greatest computers can't predict more then a few days accurately! Ya can't argue with that.

No, you can't and that's why we're talking about climate, and not the weather, climate is very much predictable using statistical analysis and extrapolation. Please study before you argue.

I'd say: independence of mind is the most important thing you can strive for, no matter what you believe in.

jasonwestmas
03-08-2007, 10:38 AM
I'd say: independence of mind is the most important thing you can strive for, no matter what you believe in.

Well that sums it up nicely. Reguardless of the supposed facts, Being honest with what you 'do know' can help anyone in doing that as well. This can spare anyone from an unnecessary argument. :)

ted
03-08-2007, 12:14 PM
There's only two sources from which objections to global climate change come: religious and economical.

You are forgetting intelectual that says this is a bunch of HYPE. :)


BUT 1) keep it to yourself, you have no right to tell others what to believe.

Exactly. I don't believe this crop so why should I have to live by your beliefs? You reduce your polution to the degree you think you should and I'll recycle, conserve water, and work to improve the world my way. Don't create legislation mandating your beliefs on me. Pretty simple isn't it? :agree:


No, you can't and that's why we're talking about climate, and not the weather, climate is very much predictable using statistical analysis and extrapolation. Please study before you argue.


Then why won't these so called scientists make thier computer model public? Because it's full of specualtion that was derived to make thier claim seem to be fact. If you don't realize that Statistics, analysis and extrapolation is subject to manipulation and interpretation, then you can't argue. :)

Either way, I respect your right to feel as you do. I personally think it's a bunch of crop and I can agree to disagree.
Discussion is a great thing though. Bring it on...respectfully.

Exception
03-08-2007, 01:04 PM
You are forgetting intelectual that says this is a bunch of HYPE. :)

There is no such thing as an intellectual field of study.
Intellectual means that there is intellect involved. That's all. It's unsubstantial.




Exactly. I don't believe this crop so why should I have to live by your beliefs? You reduce your polution to the degree you think you should and I'll recycle, conserve water, and work to improve the world my way. Don't create legislation mandating your beliefs on me. Pretty simple isn't it?

First, there is scientific consesus on global climate change. Since you are not a scientist, you have no voice in the matter. That's as simple as it comes. It has been proven. It has been proven beyond the working capabilities of asperine. Your argument is to the effect that gravity cannot be proven because you cannot truly say in all truth that it will be here tomorrow. And we cannot. That is where scientifical dialectic comes in where you have a hypothesis that you prove or disprove. That's how science works. It's been proven, so it has no sense in arguing until you can prove that it is not so. Noone has been able to using sound evidence. out of 1000 research documents, 990 say it is so, and 10 say it is not (dont quote me on these exact figures). Those 10 are all traceable to either an energy company or conservative capitalist sources. You can look all of this up in the research library of any good university.

Please be careful, this is not a belief, this is based on matters at hand. This is not religion, this is actuality. Religion has nothing to do with it, nothing at all. It is therefore irrelevant if you believe in it or not. Our planet does not belong to a single individual, we therefore each have a responsibility to refrain from damaging it for those of us who share it now, and in the future. That includes sentient beings who we are dominating by some twisted sense of logic, like animals. 200 years ago it was fine to have slaves, and women were treated as animals, and property. That was a belief. We have progressed from this and relised this was ethically wrong. It is now the objective to include nature in this ethic (this is also called non-anthropocentrism). There are already countries where trees have legal standing. And that shouldn't be so strange considering that things like companies and ships are already treated as natural persons under the law.

Second, there is ample proof around that our environment is suffering under a lot of things other than global climate change. Care to live on polluted ground? I think not. This is not a belief. It is, again, not a religion.



Then why won't these so called scientists make thier computer model public?

It is, but if you don't want to find it, whose fault is it?
Visit a library with scientific documents. There you will find actual research data. Not on some personal webpage frought with unsubstantiated hocus-pocus.


Because it's full of specualtion that was derived to make thier claim seem to be fact. If you don't realize that Statistics, analysis and extrapolation is subject to manipulation and interpretation, then you can't argue.

It is. But consider this, even if those 0.1% morally compromised scientists claim against global climate change (it's not global warming!) are right, and everything else is wrong, what is the harm in trying to prevent it? If GCC tuwns out to be true, and we did nothing, we're going to be awfully sorry!

Now don't get me wrong here, but I thought that your religion tought respect for the natural world as given by god. Perhaps that should be the source of an exploration into positive contribution to helping to make the world a better place. Or do you think it's okay that african people are dying because western companies dump their chemical waste there, or that they do not have the resources to combat desertification, genetically modified insects and other things brought on by the way we desecrate the earth that we walk on?



Either way, I respect your right to feel as you do. I personally think it's a bunch of crop and I can agree to disagree.
Discussion is a great thing though. Bring it on...respectfully.

Sure a thing, but if someone claims the earth is flat, I'm going to take a stance against it. You know, Ptolemy discovered the earth was round, and they hung Galileo for it. Why? Ignorance from the masses and a conservative belief founded in religion caused this. Understand me correctly, ther eis nothing wrong with the religion, but there's something wrong with certain people that practice it, believing they are justified in taking action based on these beliefs. There are a great many wise religious people that deserve the deepest respect.

ted
03-08-2007, 01:37 PM
Exception, Interesting. You reply, then quickly PM me saying we should drop this??? :thumbsdow
Kida underhanded and an example of how some people "debate".:thumbsdow
But consider this dropped. :thumbsup:
Peace.

Exception
03-08-2007, 01:57 PM
That was not my intention, I invited you to continue this in private, as it's against forum policy to discuss these subjects. There was no 'quickly' about it, and I never said anything about dropping it.
The thread has not been closed, you are at liberty to say what you wish.

Lightwolf
03-08-2007, 02:14 PM
Darn the forum policies :p , I want to see how this turns out (and jump in ;) ).

Cheers,
Mike

ted
03-08-2007, 03:34 PM
I invited you to continue this in private, as it's against forum policy to discuss these subjects. There was no 'quickly' about it, and I never said anything about dropping it.


No, you posted a lengthy reply then imediately, (less then 10 minutes to type the PM), PMed me that we should discuss this in private INSTEAD OF on the forum???

I guess it's just an example of seeing it differently. But through deceptive means or trickery. Pretty clear to me. Nuff said. Turn out the lights. :beerchug:

Exception
03-08-2007, 04:00 PM
I guess it's just an example of seeing it differently. But through deceptive means or trickery. Pretty clear to me. Nuff said. Turn out the lights.

I don't see why you would start this row in public when I perfectly respectfully invited you to continue a constructive personal discussion. Yes, shortly after I posted my reply, and realised this was getting outside of forum rules, but since there is a 5 minute time limit, I chose to send you a friendly, respectable message. I reject your accusations of underhandedness, trickery and deception.

If you have something to say to me, Ted, you're perfectly welcome to pm me about it. If you wish to continue the conversation here, there's noone stopping you. But if you want to argue about personal matters, and accuse me in a personal way, I won't participate.

Lightwolf
03-08-2007, 04:02 PM
Darn the forum policies :p , I want to see how this turns out (and jump in ;) ).

I hereby officially retract my previous statement... :tongue:

Cheers,
Mike

ted
03-08-2007, 06:55 PM
I hereby officially retract my previous statement... :tongue:
Cheers,
Mike

I agree. :D

radams
03-11-2007, 02:27 PM
Wow did this thread get off topic...

Anyone else with thoughts on internet access and charges being imposed..or soon to be...or companies holding the internet hostage ?


Isn't that the original comments ?

As to global warming (real or not)...the impact of the economy (real or not)...belongs someplace else...

Thou It should be understood that correcting our environmental mistakes...does NOT need to mean loss in our economy.

It is those who control or hold power with oil and other resources...who do NOT wish to loose that power or control.

We have one of the fastest technological societies and world in the history of mankind....

We can take ideas and science and bring it to market within a decade or less...but how long have we had power cell technology, solar, etc...

It has not been in the interests of those who control our oil, cars, housing, etc...to make that work or market it...thus better, safer, and in the long run cheaper ideas and technology do NOT get known or into the general public...

Here is a good example from our techno world....

How many of you are now looking at the Blu-Ray vs HDDVD battle ? Thou most of you know that we are now really talking about a STORAGE medium...not just a playback medium right ?


So why go with either of those options....when there is a technology that instead of holding 25- 100 gig worth of data...can hold up to 300 gigs -1.5 terabytes worth on a single disk?

Halo graphic storage...can hold more, with a higher throughput....so Why don't we hear much about it ?

Blu-Ray & HD-DVD have been in RnD for sometime and are old technologies that do little to deal with the real needs of storage....

well, I've taken my own OT...now back to our internet access discussions :)

Cheers,

Dave Jerrard
03-12-2007, 10:55 AM
How many of you are now looking at the Blu-Ray vs HDDVD battle ? Thou most of you know that we are now really talking about a STORAGE medium...not just a playback medium right ?


So why go with either of those options....when there is a technology that instead of holding 25- 100 gig worth of data...can hold up to 300 gigs -1.5 terabytes worth on a single disk?

Halo graphic storage...can hold more, with a higher throughput....so Why don't we hear much about it ?

Blu-Ray & HD-DVD have been in RnD for sometime and are old technologies that do little to deal with the real needs of storage....Normally, I'm the type that would be all over this sort of thing. I bought the second portable DVD player that hit the market, for a whopping $1795 CDN in 1999. Then again, that didn't have all this DRM crap that's been infesting both Bluray and HD-DVD. Way back in 98, I was keeping up to date on FMD, or Fluorescent Multilayer Disc, which used a laser to cause layers in the disc to fluoresce at various colors, and each layer would be read independently. Each layer is normally transparent, so the laser would pass through all the layers simultaneously causing them all to fluoresce, each at a different wavelength. The laser light itself is not read, so there's no need for reflective surfaces. The light that is read is actually readable from any angle, above or below the disk surface, since it's not coherent like a laser is. THe FMD format wasn't limited to 1 or two layers; it could have hundreds, providing capacities in the terrabytes. It also didn't need to be a disc. A laser just had to scan across the surface and the data layer would emit their own light, which could be read by a stationary sensor, so this medium was well suited to card formats. But alas, the format got crushed like so many other brilliant ideas, under the weight of the various fees that are involved in getting a format licensed and registered, etc..
There was a great HDTV broadcast format developed int he 90's as well, that used fuzzy logic to piggyback the signal on top of existing NTSC signals, with no loss to either. Station would actually be able to transmit HD content along with their standard content with no increase in bandwidth at all, but this was also crushed by the multi-million dollar fees that were repeatedly required to get any broadcast format granted a license. Natually, only the big studios were left standing because they had the most money, and we're stuck with not one, but several various digital broadcast standards, and the top is another needlessly interlaced format, in a time where interlacing hasn't been necessary for decades. But we got it because that's what the old, shortsighted rich farts wanted.

Enter Bluray and HD-DVD. Gee. 25 or 50 GB? Wow. That's just so amazing, except, I already saw a format in the 90's that could do terrabytes. Ok, so what's so great about these two new formats? 25GB? That's kinda small. That's only about 4 times a DVD, which is about THIRTEEN times the capacity of a Compact Disc.

Ten years ago, that might have been impressive. Fifty GigaBytes ten years ago WOULD have been impressive, but that's still only 8 times the capacity of a DVD. It gets a bit better witht he dual layer formats, but not that much. 100GB these days still isn't that big a deal anymore. SUre, it's nice for movies, but that's not all these discs are going to be considered for.

But while the big battle between HD-DVD and Bluray was going on, both of which apparently need an internet connection so they can be told whether or not they're still allowed to play your discs, Holographic DVDs were also being developed, with capacities way up in the TerraBytes. Just think. I single disc that could contain the entire Lord Of The Rings trilogy, with full 13 track audio, and all the special features, and all uncompressed and still have room to spare! An entire TV series could fit on a single disc. You could also back up all the data on nearly any computer you have onto a single disc. One disc to rule them all. :)

Holographic is great. But unfortunately, the idiots in charge of deciding what format gets picked are, well, money grubbing scum and idiots. Out of the three formast, I figured the worst of the three would be the one that gets pushed. Sure enough, a few years later, it's the one that seems to be selling the most so far (probably due to it costing less than Bluray at the moment). But that's not bad enough. The studios had to get involved and infect both with their DRM crap, and even though they say they're not planning to activate the output resolution downgrade on the composite outputs yet, you can be sure that soon you'll only be able to actually get HD resolution out of these things ONLY if you use the HDMI interface, and unless your TV isn't more than a couple years old, you're not likely going to have that option.

Then again, the master encyption key for every disc released so far has already been cracked (http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/13/hackers-discover-hd-dvd-and-blu-ray-processing-key-all-hd-t/), so those movies will probably start showing up online in DRM-free condition and will by HD compliant with every TV that support component inputs. Personally, these things remind me too much of what Circuit City tried to pull with their DIVX format that competed against DVD nearly ten years ago.


He Who Is Always Amazed At How Well Big Companies Can Screw Up Good Ideas.

Bog
03-12-2007, 03:45 PM
Dave,

It's not the first time a fantastic technology was quashed because it wasn't what The Big Boys Wanted. It won't be the last.

*sighs and chews his copy of Free Culture*

jasonwestmas
03-12-2007, 08:04 PM
Squash and Stretch? Heh, e.g. Lightwave. Fourtunately there is still some 'stretch' in this Character.

radams
03-12-2007, 08:41 PM
Hi Dave,

Yup, I agree with you...

I find it interesting thou that Sony, Panasonic are also trying to sell Blu-Ray as the storage format for data and media...but it was not very well designed for it...

The holographic storage works with a paging format...think of a 2K frame being recorded in its entirety...in one pass rather than being broken up into sections and recorded...
At least from what I've read about the Holographic storage...it would be fast enough to input or output a 2k stream....along with 300 gigs -1.5 teribytes... doesn't that make more sense for MEDIA storage as well as data...

Oh well,

Dave you and I need to sit down & have a drink sometime ;)

Cheers,

Bog
03-15-2007, 02:49 PM
Siggraph. Sitting. Drinks.

Go-go girls.

jasonwestmas
03-15-2007, 08:13 PM
I saw some girls go-go on the newtek screen 3 years ago with george michael :P