And by Apollo 18, they were in full cover up mode.
Of course once the sequel to "Apollo 13" hit theatres, that cat was out of the bag. Odd that they skipped straight to "Apollo 18", and didn't even have Tom Hanks do a cameo.
If the company ran out of funding, would the world's governments just let these folks die, or would NASA and/or a combination of countries end up taking over the supply missions?
Perhaps their business model is relying on the fact that once they get people there, it is very hard to make the decision to stop sending them the necessities for life.
The mouse over text is especially apt here.
Rogers owns SportsNet. And probably some other stations.
On the sports side, their ownership goes even higher up the chain. They own the Blue Jays, and now the are part owners of MLSE (The Leafs, Raptors, TorontoFC, the Marlies - and the specialized TV networks associated with them - plus they own or manage all the buildings these teams play in). The other major partner in MLSE: Bell (who also own part of the Montreal Canadians).
So on the sports side, we can have one company owning the team, the building, the TV station, and the cable/internet/cell provider. That is a heck of a lot of brands working together under the same ownership.
Content that might not exist if it weren't for the CRTC. Networks up here might just lazily buy the broadcast rights for US shows rather than look for anything original.
There is a lot that I don't like about the CRTC, but mandating Canadian content isn't so terrible. Especially since it is so easy for the consumer to watch or listen to whatever they want anyhow. The content rules really just provide incentive to create content in Canada, keeping the domestic industry operating.
Unfortunately, that same protectionist attitude that keeps small Canadian studios and artists going is also being used to protect a few big telecommunications companies from having to actually compete against the big bad US and European network providers.
In much of the west, it is still a duopoly as far as TV and internet goes.
Shaw has a non-compete pact with Rogers for cable TV and internet, giving Shaw the west and Rogers the east. On the telephone side, BC and Alberta have Telus, Saskatchewan has SaskTel, and Manitoba has MTS. I don't know if Telus and Bell have a non-compete pact or not, but either way they do not compete head to head. I do know that Sasktel and MTS have at various times had a relationship will Bell, and certainly all of the telcos share their network and wireless spectrum.
The only arena where you see multiple telcos or cable companies competing with one another is in the cell phone market. Even there, it is mostly just Rogers, Bell, and Telus. Each of them operating multiple sub-brands, each offering the exact same thing as the competitors. Shaw bought spectrum and was going to enter the cell phone market, but unfortunately decided against it.
I suppose you could count the Satelite TV providers as well, which include two companies owned by Shaw and Bell. Another duopoly with a cable company vs a telco.
Actually in this case, the camera would've been hiding right in the neighbor's yard.
Iran: Is this your camera? What is this camera doing here?
US: Nothing. but can we have it back?
Municipal planning has now moved on from trying to do their part to fight global warming (which no one city can make a dent in alone), and towards planning for a future where climate change is a given.
I imagine the rest of the world will be heading towards that approach as well. Rather than avoidance, it is mitigation.
We have a financial system based on unlimited growth, and an entire planet is being altered by our activities. One way or another, this does not end well.
SIlverlight 2.0 is only supported on Intel Macs. So any PPC Mac owners are screwed.
So are people with another platform without a Silverlight implementation, such as Linux, BSD, Nintendo Wii, Playstation, your phone, etc...
I shudder at the thought of a new society being founded by those folks. We'd be handing them an entire planet.
At least they'd be doing less damage to ours from that distance.
Seriously, what's the issue with having an anti-trust chief who is aware of and intends to keep an eye on potential future problems? If regulators had been keeping a closer eye on Microsoft, then maybe U.S. vs Microsoft would have happened early enough to actually make a difference.
I'd rather have one that finishes the job.
Agreed. Instead of one that achieves a guilty verdict, then lets the guilty party write their own settlement. It is unfortunate that the Bush admin came in and completely changed the DOJ's outlook on that case, because the DOJ had been completely successful up until that point.
The comments by Judge Jackson, and the change of administration, were both major victories for Microsoft in what was otherwise a disastrous case.
Funny that this poll comes out now, since just about a week ago I came to the realization that I can't actually do handwriting anymore. I found out when I was trying to write my name legibly instead of with my usual scribble of a signature. Even when I slowed right down, I found I just physically couldn't make the letters anymore. It had been far too long since I'd ever written anything.
Maybe I'd have better luck writing something other than my name, as I won't be conditioned to do it wrong via my signature. But I imagine it'd take a lot of practice to be able to handwrite again, and even more to make it faster than my printing. It never was that legible, and isn't something that is used anymore, so I don't anticipate I'll be trying to recover the skill.
Now that Java is open source, wouldn't it make more sense to use the JVM as the standard runtime, instead of something that "might" not get sued for copying the
Java has already been made to run on
Lawrence Radiation Laboratory keeps all its data in an old gray trunk.
