Actually, I had a silly, simple thought that probably explains it. Light is heavier than Neutrinos, so is actually slower. We haven't actually found the 'real' speed limit of the universe, as we've only been using what we thought was the lightest mass object we could measure.

Now we've found something lighter and suddenly it is 'slower'.

There might be a lighter entity that we can't detect (yet) that is even slightly faster, but will give us a graph-curve to the real propogation speed of the universe.

I wonder how this would affect every *other* measurement that we've been basing on the Speed of Light as the very top end?

That you have a normal job paying a taxable wage (you may not, actually.)

That you actually do anything to earn money off of your money (you may not do a whole lot other than make sure it is in a profitable investment.)

This isn't aimed at people that have a full time jobs and 'invest full time'. This is aiming at people that their whole 'income' is basically just living off their fat amounts of money, making more money than they can spend easily.

That would require them to realize that nuclear power is going to be required if we don't want to be paying 50% of our wages for electricity and oil sometime in the future. Humanity here on Earth needs a greater source of usable energy and oil/gas is not going to cut it over the long term. Neither is just fission over the very long term, but hopefully we have a few means of escaping gravity before things get that serious.

Everything that people have stated (Cost, low amounts of 3D content, finicky technology, possible headaches) are all true, but that doesn't mean I personally don't see them being sold. (I work tech support for a major retailer.)

It's a new technology, it's not going to replace existing HD TVs right this year. On the other hand, it's probably a far bigger proportion of 'new technology' TVs than you would think.

And remember, most TVs come with at least one set of glasses. Most come with a pair. Unless you host football parties, you aren't going to need a dozen spares. So the 'no one is buying the glasses' is a pretty false data point.

I'm actually impressed by how much of an impact it is already getting. Like others have noted, 5 years is closer to adoption times. This is like one year old.

Get Football, Baseball, Soccer and Basketball in 3D at each game and you will probably see the numbers double or triple.

No, he's actually correct here. Soon the US will be a 3rd world nation in medical procedures that have the potential to regenerate nerves, organs and limbs.

Yeah, that's going to stick in people's craw that they have to go to Brazil for the latest advancements to save their lives.

Right? I mean, defensive missiles would be like SAMs and such, not a missile or bomb delivery system that can travel so far...

More BS from IRAN. It's getting to be that whatever they say, just take it in an opposite way.

I couldn't watch TV on our new LCD TV, as it was hooked up to a SD satellite box. Pretty poor quality and I could tell. Now that it is 720p, I'm more inclined to actually watch something on it as it looks much nicer.

That's where this is 'not just a fad' is. It's making amazing amounts of money because a lot of people love it.

If I could afford a 120hz monitor and if my video card supported it, I'd probably play my MMO in full 3D. They are looking at doing it.

It's not just a fad.

Quick link that proves that everything old is new again. Dang movies with sound and talking!

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/related_features/top_100_films/article3817326.ece

...it adds quite a bit. The scene in 'How to Train Your Dragon' where the soot is blowing in the air and the viking appears was amazing. I also thought the massive fight against the Kraken in 'Clash of the Titans' was absolutely incredible.

And I have to wear glasses normally.

It was still worth it!

They are basically trying to set this way too high. It would be like car makers suing individual drivers of their cars for 1.5m for speeding as 'endangerment' of life.

Instead, they should be trying set the bar lower like a traffic ticket. Everyone knows that downloading is form of theft (of copyright materials) but a ton of people are doing it anyways.

Idiots.

If they were trying to impose a reasonable fine system (ie. maybe twice or three times the standard street price of the movie at the time of the infraction) then you might have a point.

But this is merely extortion and racketeering.

More energy into the system does not mean just more heat. That could also increase winds and storm systems.

While I'm not a fan of the current "AGW" I do think we are having an affect on the ecosystem and need to take some reasonable steps to curtails some of the worst excesses. We also need more power generation for our future needs.

That's why nuclear power and other non-fossil fuel power sources are important.

$50,000 (down from the millions, IIRC) is seriously bad news for the litigant RIAA. That means that they have to make money from suing normal people at only $2,000 per song. Think of that effort on their part and they can 'only' prove minor damages.

Yeah, they probably aren't making money on any of these, but a standardized and substantially less fee means that their numbers they use in their pirating statistics just got kicked into the ground. An actual judgment means that anti-RIAA folks can actually state a much more true number that isn't 'billions of lost dollars per year' and back it up on Capitol Hill.

No, it isn't that 'ads are bad' that is the problem. It's the fact that right now, ads are just a vehicle to be used by criminals to try and take over my computer.

If I didn't have to worry about ads infecting my computer with viruses and other malware, I could handle minor to moderate ads on web pages.