The mission at the Antartic was complex because we were trying to preserve the ice we were digging through (ice cores). Since what ever is being deployed on Europa isn't likely going to be able to bring back core samples the goal of just melting kilometers of ice could possibly as simple as a piece of radioactive material on a rope.

I bet you're better off with out debit and credit cards anyway.

How about checking ebay for some used Android phones? If you don't need the screen you can get a bunch of great deals on old nexus/htc phones, otherwise you still find loads of phones for under $50. Do some research on which ones are root-able and have USB OTG and you have some pretty decent flexibility with WIFI, Bluetooth, video out, GPU, dual core, etc,etc.

I think what these artists are trying to point out is they spent a lot of time and money making $X, with compression technology and storage being adequate maybe they just want the ~80% of the audio to at least be available somewhere in some format.

Also, why not? Right now downloadable content is sold at the same prices as its "real" counterpart. They don't pay for pressing, printing album art, shipping, depreciation while it sits on a shelf or paying indirectly for the brick stores to pay leases and wages.

So maybe the question is if the artist paid for it and your going to pay for it, why not get it?

Maybe if the prices were lower people would start streaming HD more from Netflix and Hulu instead of buying expensive cable packages!

Couldn't you just get a really cheap VPS and forward port 53 over 22(SSH)? Even run SSH on a different port everyday.

I actually agree that this is a bit dumb but then I think, if we don't do this then some douche bag corporation will and find an equally dumb way to screw with everyone. I can just imagine Unicode font sets coming under fire because they come with some home brew Emoji that is similar to a Copyrighted one and they follow to sue everyone.

For this price it could just be a necessary evil to fund this.

Ahhh Science! Is there anything you can't reason!

Mark Shuttleworth will break into your house in the middle of the night and install Ubuntu Phone on your smartphone, toaster and refidgerator with out you knowing. It's been known for a while not sure why it hasn't become a post on ./

I was picking a middle end system as reference from components and comparing 8320 vs i5 K series Ivy CPUs. Cheaping out on the motherboard is something I would never do myself and will definately never do for others. I've been putting together and taking apart computers for the beter part of 20 years now. Seeing someone with a 3-4 year old build that cheaped out on the motherboard asking why their computer went dead (bad caps) or if they could upgrade certain components and found that they bought an EOL motherboard right from the beginning to save a couple bucks or there is some quirk that the manufacturer introduced by sharing certain aspects of the layout with a modem/usb/network subsystem made this obvious to me.

If you are going to compare Intel vs AMD for gaming you mine as well compare the FX-4100 series against the i5 Ivy. Intel's claim to fame is core by core performance and most games only utilize 4 cores at most now. If we are going to have a "race to the bottom" we can do something like this:

AMD

1. AM3+ Mother board $39.99
2. FX-4100 $104.99
3. 8GB PC 1033 DDR3 $48.99

AMD total $193.97

Intel

1. i5 2310 $184.99
2. Asrock H61 $44.99
3. 8GB PC 1033 DDR3 $48.99

Intel Total $278.97
Both systems when upgraded with a GTX 660 card ($219.99) will play pretty much everything at 60fps+.

Personally I have a FX-6100 + Radeon 7850(about the same price point as the 660) and BF3, Crysis 2, Spec Ops The Line, Assasians Creed series all play minimum 60 fps across the board, buttery smooth. The Intel rig might hit 80fps but if you were to put the two systems side by side would you be able to take "the Pepsi Challenge" and tell the difference? No, they both run at the monitors refresh rate, unless your monitor is 120Hz at which point the Intel system won't be able to hit 120Hz anyway.

But as far as the $300 vs $500 price point most of the cost is a decent mother board but overall I was shooting for Big Box store prices and mid-upper level main boards which for AMD systems would be a better investment anyway since an AM3+ board will still still be good for 2 future generations where the Intel board is already dead in the water.

and slowly dieing of starvation is great.

That is true but your figures assume your 15fps is actually what this person is encountering.

If you want to play games today then why not?

Bear with me for a second. A GTX 660 runs about $300. A few new components (mobo, RAM, CPU) centred around the 660 would be around $300(AMD) or $500(Intel), assuming your case and power supply can handle the upgrade. So you get the GTX 660 today and get decent frame rates just by pluging it in, over the course of the next months/years you save up the cash for the core components you need and you have the luxury or waiting on sales or good deals on Ebay/Kijiji/Craigslist, etc.

This way you can enjoy your games and know it will only get better from there. Otherwise you risk getting caught getting the oooh-shiny that's being pushed on you by the sales person and spending $1K+ on a machine that will only give marginal returns on the equivalent $600 box.

YMMV

They tell me to download from "localhost" where ever that is. Wow is that site fast! Everything I've ever used is hosted there too!

You mean "Don't bother ratting him out to the cops for hitting you, he'll just do it again"