Seriously, we've got more important things to worry about in this country that weather people can watch their soaps on channel 4. Why are we wasting money on this.

Here's a wake up call to all those who are watching regular TV and can't afford to get a box. Perhaps they should stop watching so much TV and get a real job

Having been involved in the music industry for many years, and watching first hand from the inside as major retailers like Tower Records have fallen almost directly as a result of pirates. I will say one thing that has happened as a side affect that is a good thing. It's forced musicians to actually write good music.

Five years ago I had all but given up on new music, every single band that came out seemed to be just another corporate generated cookie cutter band. But now that the major source of income for new bands has switched from selling CD's to actually playing shows and selling merchandise, they have been forced to actually write good music, and be better musicians. (in my opinion at least)

Does anyone else notice this?

and they do:

Click here to read an article about the software used for air traffic

you may see this as proof of your point, but ask yourself this question, why aren't they using macs?

So what you're saying is that microsoft should be all knowing and be able to predict every possible permutation of security hole before ever releasing software, and if they don't do this then they should be held liable?

Imagine if we had that same standard for cars. now everyone who has ever died because they bought a car 60 years ago without airbags can sue because the company should have thought of that before selling the cars. This is obviously rediculus. The fact is no one ever said Windows was perfect and infallable and it NEVER will be.

Now, imagine also that microsoft actually finds a defect in their software (which i'm sure happens all the time) I guess you think they should just take out a big add in the paper saying "Heres how to get past our gaping security hole!" or more to the point "Hey hackers, have fun with this one while we twiddle our thumbs not fixing it", Not.

WTF? how did Jews get into this conversation?

and when did Jews become Vampires?

- uh oh, is that blood I smell? I must suck ze blood from ze internets now. I am zo thirzty. BLOOOD

- Jew for net neutrality

regarding everything you said, i agree. and i am not just posting this to hear the sound of my own voice (or keyboard as it were)

It just occurred to me though that there should be a way to only view the positive modded posts, this way you wouldn't have to wade through all the stupid comments that people make and you would only see the posts that someone else actaully thought were good.

or even better, what if you could chose to read all the +1 Funny or all the +1 interesting (or whatever other types of mods there are) as separate threads

um yeah, thats about as much of this thought as i can get out right now in my hungover state of mind

Oh and one last though regarding the anonymous crapflood post, For all the time you wasted writing that post had you ever stopped to think "Hey what can i do to fix these problems" My guess would be no, all you wanted to do is whine and complain about the system. You sir are worthless.

Everything you say here does make sense, however i can think of alternate explanations as well, and you are correct I don't really know. i say however that it takes just as much "belief" and "faith" to believe in a god like being as it does to be an athiest. It's just another choice that we must make because we could spend the rest of our lives pondering the question.

perhaps it is the case that for whatever reason evolution has favored those who do believe in a god. maybe it's becuase they can more successfully get on with their lives and the more important task of reproduction

Getting back to the subject of this story though, i do believe that this is in fact life. i think the only logical next step is to have various teams of scientists come up with their own self-replicating RNA and have them fight , then we can all start placing bets on which strands will win!

The answer to your first question is yes

the second question is obvious, your communication device (you're brain/body) is broken therefore the message is screwed up

And the buck cannot stop with the brain because every action has to have a reaction (and vice versa). I'm surprised however that no-one told me this in answer to my question "Who told my brain to tell my thumbs to move? You did!" This is a valid answer but then you trace it back to what told me to tell you to tell your brain etc... you see that this eventually has to trace back to something that just happened spontaneously, however spontaneous action is not something that jives well with the laws of the physical universe, this is why i say that somewhere along the line something (if you want to call it metaphysical) but something like a god perhaps had to either make the first move (outside the laws of our universe) or is perhaps still making moves. i'm guessing the latter

IMHO nothing can either prove or disprove the existence of God, at least nothing in the physical world. If god created everything, then he must by definition not be part of it because creation is an action and in order for an action to occur there must be two things A) the thing doing the action and B) the thing being acted on.

here is something to ponder for those of you who only believe the the physical world: Close your eyes, and twiddle your thumbs, now think what told your tumbs to twiddle? your brain right? yes, but what told your brain to tell your thumbs to twiddle? this is what i would call god. i am god.

God wants pizza

great idea, but easier said than done though

Sure i agree the U.S. (and the "western" world) has not been very nice in the past and we've given a lot of people reasons to bomb us, but even if we could all of a sudden start being really great people, you would still not be able to stop every single crazy person from wanting to bomb a plane.

And regarding a non-bombable plane, unfortunately i think a non-bombable plane would also be a non-flyable plane. And if i remember correct the terrorists on 9/11 didn't have any bombs (or at least thats what i've been told)

I love this logic that a lot of you are using here, which is basically this: Apple is such a huge company why would they bother attacking such a small company unless that company is backed by someone else

This is pretty much the same logic that has been used time and time again by ultra-conservative patriot types when they try to justify why the United States invaded their tiny republic. "I'm bigger so i must be right, I heard they were backed by communists!"

Oh crap, i hope i don't get sued here, does anyone know if apple patented the analogy yet?

I didn't realize i was griping, but i'll address your points one at a time here:

Commercials yes i realize they make money from the commercials, why don't they just make their own torrents which include commercials? Personally i wouldn't mind a bit, it's not the commercial-freeness of the shows i see online that i like, it's that i can get an entire series all at once and not have to worry about missing an episode.

No TV/Radio/Internet without advertizing? I agree on the TV and the Radio, but i pay for my internet with cold hard cash, without advertising, there may be less content, but advertising has nothing to do with my internet connection, or are you saying that they subsidize the internet with advertising dollars that they make from cable?

Higher Prices yes, perhaps for some the prices will be higher, however if they were to offer many tiers of bandwidth then the prices might actually be lower (assuming that all programing and internet were through one connection) Here's an example. i use an average amount of bandwidth, and watch relatively few shows on cable, so adding the cable shows to my internet bandwidth would not really affect it much, for others however, they might not use the internet much and instead chose to spend countless hours watching some inane completely mindless utterly ridiculus cable programming (such as ESPN) for them, adding the cable would drastically increase their bandwidth and therefore they would have to pay more for it.

Other countries? first, i mentioned absolutely nothing about other countries, but what you say is probably true, and the reason for it is likely that the technology originated in this country therefore since it's been around awhile we now have an antiquated system whereas newly connected countries can put the highest quality systems in right from the begining. its the same reason why there are more cell phones vs landlines in Iraq than there are here. it costs money to change the systems, but at some point you have to do it if you are going to remain competitive.

Exactly!

I've been waiting for someone to say this. Sure, I've used torrents for other activities, but my primary one is watching TV shows because it's simply easier, and as far as i know this should be legal. I think the ISPs (in my case Time Warner) need to realize this and adjust their strategy accordingly. I've often wondered why it is that i really pay for cable TV when i can pretty much get the same stuff over the net. I think eventually all we will have is a network connection and all TV/Phone/Internet will flow over it.

I'm not so sure about that (that the parent was joking) Whatever happened to buyer beware? Do you believe every salesman that comes to your door? of course not.

The fact is, the internet is still the wild west, there are still people selling potions and tinctures that promise to fix every problem. The only solution is for everyone involved to get a little smarter. If you coddle the consumer and protect him from scam artists, they will never learn

Now i don't know the specifics of this case, but obviously if they were straight up lying about their service, then that should be punished. If however they were just giving the customer the information (correct information) which led them to believe that they were going to get something out of it, then i think they should be off the hook. If they win this case, it will set a precedent that might not be good. You will now be able to sue because you didn't comprehend properly what was being sold to you, and who's fault is that?