I'm afraid I concur. I am quite disappointed in Texas. I don't dislike them by any means, and would still visit their wonderful state. But their legislature folded like a cheap suit on this issue, and I just find that disheartening because if there were any state in the union I would've picked to be a battleground for this, it would've likely been Texas (Florida and Georgia being #2 and #3, due to the large number of airports in Florida, and Georgia due to Atlanta).

That being said, I'm one that refuses to fly anywhere until this nonsense has stopped. I've told my girlfriend that, should we get married, when we get ready to go on a honeymoon or any trip for that matter? If we can't drive there or go by boat, we aren't going. That I refuse to fly until the gate-rapers are gone. I value my liberty and freedom much more than that, and there's more than one way to travel around than on a stupid airplane!

Because for whatever reason, some people seem to think that free software is inferior to paid software, and that a product is only good if you have to shell out money for it. And the more money you shell out, the better it is, because you have to pay for it! At least, that's their thinking. Thus you have products like Norton, McAfee, and websites like DoubleMySpeed and FixMyPcFree (gag) that are actually making money on the same principle, and they do nothing more than a typical end user can do with free software and just a little bit of ingenuity and knowhow, and a cursory glance at Google for directions.

This, plus I gather the MPAA has a part in twisting Google's arm to put certain stipulations in place to cover them. It just doesn't sound like the kind of thing Google would worry about themselves unless there were someone else involved in the deal. All speculation, of course. But food for thought.

This was what I said over on Gizmodo when the story broke there.

In all honesty, if you have a rooted phone, you already know how to stream your own movies from your PC to your phone, or have some other method of getting movies ripped from optical media and into a format that works quite well on your phone (which is either just as good or better than the convenience of downloading through the Android Movie Market in the first place).

I think you're absolutely right about that. When I first started my current job in October of 2009, we were running Windows XP still, but two monitors. It was handy, but I didn't really see the full potential of what having two monitors could do for me as a coder since I still had to fiddle around with maximize and minimize and it was all new concept to me because I'd never used two monitors at once, even though I knew the capabilities were there and had been there for years.

Then we all upgraded to Windows 7 (well most of us anyway. Some are still running XP, but most have jumped to 7), and boy does Windows 7 make it a lot easier to do what you want with your windows! Its multi-monitor support is much more intuitive, so I'm really digging that. The only thing I find odd is that Microsoft still has yet to allow you to directly assign a different background on each window (or if that feature is in there, I haven't found it yet). Also, two seperate taskbars on each window with the task buttons on the bottom representing the apps appearing on that particular window.

Fix these two things, and I would say Windows' multi-monitor support would be perfect. But as it is, it's pretty nice, and quite handy if you're a coder looking at help pages and code at the same time, or two different source code files to compare things or copy bits of code from one file to another or something to that effect.

I'm satisfied with the consumer-end bargains that they're offering for PSN users like myself. The one year of identity theft protection is a big help, plus two game, even downloadable ones, are a nice touch as well. Retail vouchers would've been better, of course.

But the only other thing I can ask is that, going forward, Sony should now be required to answer to a higher-up authority in regards to network security. What I mean is that, since Sony dropped the ball on such a massive scale, it could be argued that Sony should have to retain the services of a third-party security firm (not the government, mind you) to provide auditing and oversight at all times over the PSN, ensuring that this kind of breach can never happen again. Or at least, if such a breach occurs, consumer data is protected against the intrusion. This includes making sure that Sony keeps everything up to date, encrypted appropriately, and completely separate credit card information, personal data, and game-related profiles on their web servers into different locations so that hacking a user's gamer profile doesn't grant access to his/her personal data or credit card info.

It would certainly be the last password I'd ever use.

I use KeePass primarily because it's the only one I've found for Android that works cross-platform anywhere the way I'd like to use it. KeePass plus a secured DropBox account to keep your password database synced across machines (or databases if you want added security with a secondary password for more private-like info) are an excellent combination. Throw in a key file that you keep locally on your person on either your phone or a small-capacity USB drive kept on a keychain for added security.

I did look at Password Safe, but at the time there was no Android version and I needed something I could keep on my phone and access my passwords there too. Keepass fits the bill quite nicely.

Well, I posted in a thread up above that they're an alternative. And I do own both consoles and use both online to varying degrees depending on what game(s) I'm playing. Whether they're a good alternative or even a better alternative is relative to how one is behaving over the other.

At the moment I'd say they're a good alternative for me. Xbox Live is up. PSN is down. And the Wii? Well, it'd be nice to play a game online on it too but I've never found anyone online on the games I own.

But it's a shame, really. I wanted to play some Portal 2 co-op this weekend after finishing up that single-player campaign, and I got the PS3 version and can't download the PC version at home due to my wireless broadband download cap (thanks, Verizon).

Actually, there are other places to go. PC or Xbox Live. No place for Sony exclusives though. But alternatives, still.

I didn't send any money to the cause and have remained neutral, although I have certainly voiced my opinion concerning the fair use of products purchased and owned by end-users for the purpose the end-user wants to use it for. Though I did not provide funds to this cause, I do have opinions on the money that has been donated, and what my wishes would be had I sent him money.

First of all, I do NOT think Hotz has a right to keep the money for himself. That would be quite dishonest and untrustworthy. Instead, I would rather see the extra money donated to the EFF with the earmark that it be used to fund the defense of similar cases like Sony vs. Hotz. I think that would be a satisfactory action as it would allow the donation money to still be used for what it was intended for by someone that should find need for it, even if it isn't used by the original defendant who requested the funds for his legal expenses (in this case, Hotz).

It's an honor thing. It's not that Japan is being stubborn or just refusing to accept help for no good reason. For them, accepting help would be a display of weakness, which is heavily frowned upon. The Japanese highly value honor and humbleness. They don't like to ask others for things like that because it feels like taking charity. They see more honor in pulling themselves up by the bootstraps and overcoming through their own hard work and solidarity.

Remember that these are a people who, for many centuries, had a proud tradition of disemboweling themselves when they screwed up in order to restore their family's honor. That's pretty hardcore dedication to honor. So I don't figure their refusal for help as unkindness or stubbornness. It's just their tradition and ways, and I respect that, so I really don't feel offended at all at their saying "No thanks."

So what you're saying here is that there's someone even better capable than Sony in spewing out nuclear-grade stupid? How exactly do they propose to remove Google from the Internet? That's like removing oxygen from the air in an instant. Actually, I have a suggestion for a better course of action for the MPAA: How about just going back to the business of just making decent movies and quit harassing folks entirely? That way, you get products out there people actually care about, and people don't cringe in anger every time they hear mention of your organization in the news. Just a thought.