Has he even tried this? I can't reliably login using the picture password setting, and I'm the one that set up the "password". I'm not convinced a video recording would suffice. I could, just as easily, video record your keyboard from a distance, but that's not going to net you my password very reliably either. Not unless you're a chicken pecker.
Joseph Elwell.

Sell it for monies!

My Samsung TV can read every codec I've given it. You can grab the manual here:
http://www.samsung.com/us/support/downloads/UN40C7000WFXZA
Page 40 lists the available codec support.
Page 20 explains how the 3D feature works.

Your confusion about which codec to use might be because the content you produce (just like anaglyph content) is a 2D video. A "Side by Side" video, as played in VLC, will just look like 2 2D images playing next to each other - because that's all it is. People use mkvmerge to take the left eye and right eye and composite them together, literally next to each other. Unfortunately I have not found a simple to use tool that will convert between 3D formats - only tools that will stream.

Here's how it works from a customer's (me) perspective:
when I plug a USB stick in with a 3D mkv file
I start the Media Play feature
I browse to the movie I want and hit play
I pause the movie
I hit the 3D button on my remote control
The TV asks me which format the movie is in, either "Side by Side" or "Top-Bottom", or "2D -> 3D" (which is for 2D content).
I select the appropriate format, so far most content I've found is "Side by Side".
I put my glasses on.
I hit play (because I paused it before because turning on 3D takes a few moments).
Done.

If there's a way to inform the TV that the content is 3D, I have not yet found it. Although, the manual mentions this feature:
        "3D Auto View (Off / On): If 3D Auto View is set to On, a “Side-by-Side” format HDMI signal with one of the resolutions below is automatically switched to 3D. Here, correct 3D information must be sent from the Standard HDMI 3D Format.
          If a 3D failure occurs due to a 3D information error, set 3D Auto View to Off and manually select a 3D Mode using the 3D button or corresponding menu.
          Support resolution (16:9 only)
        1280 x 720p 60 Hz
        1920 x 1080i 60 Hz
        1920 x 1080p 24 / 30 / 60 Hz"

I'd be more than happy to help you test out your video files. You can email me. My slashdot username and my yahoo email account share the same handle.

I have a friend with the Nvidia setup and he can view pretty much all the 3D content that I've found. I have to use stereoscopic player, outputting a signal to my TV, in order to view other formats than the 2 I listed. And of course, Stereoscopic player will convert pretty much any format to any other format (except anaglyph formats can only be a target, not an input format).

Here's some sample 3D content you can compare with:
http://www.3dtv.at/Movies/Index_en.aspx
One caveat, I haven't actually tested that content on my TV. Most of it probably works fine, although some might be too high a resolution to support using Media Play - but I can play those from my Mac outputting over HDMI (but that's more annoying than Media Play).
Joseph Elwell.

I have one of the new 3D TVs. Like Nvidia's real3D, my Samsung LED based LCD TV can view various 3d formats natively (off a USB drive, or streamed over a dlna device). Including "Side by Side" and "Top & Bottom". Other 3d formats can be viewed as outputted from a computer like interlaced (field sequential), Line by Line, Vertical Strip and Checkerboard. There isn't a lot of content available for these Televisions, so with the right marketing you'd get a lot of interest from owners.
Joseph Elwell.

"which were named a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1995"

The UNESCO World Heritage Sites are a joke. Unesco itself made this very clear when they put out a press release denying involvement with the New 7 Wonders list. " Scientific criteria must be defined, the quality of candidates evaluated, and legislative and management frameworks set up. The relevant authorities must also demonstrate commitment to these frameworks as well as to permanently monitoring the state of conservation of sites. The task is one of technical conservation and political persuasion." Who wants to go visit sites that are determined by a bureaucratic process where political persuasion plays more of a role than wonder itself.
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=38482&UR L_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

And have you even been to 20% of the sites? Here's a choice site that wasn't worth going to even before it was removed from the list. An Oryx sanctuary. Here's one I was at recently, Brimstone Hill National Park in St. Kitts and Nevis - it's simply not worth basing a trip around (wheras all of the New 7 Wonders are worth basing a trip around), and it's my opinion that Brimstone isn't worth visiting, even if you're in the area for a few days.
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=38721&UR L_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brimstone_Hill

The problems with UNESCO's list are:
1. It is not ranked/organized, nor are there highlights. No one has enough resources to visit all of them. Or enough time to research all of them to determine if they're worth seeing. (There are currently 851 sites).
2. Political. Be reminded that UNESCO is an arm of the U.N. That means that there are many political influences that go into the nomination process. This means, among other things, that the site's owner must agree to UNESCO mandates. That means that many unique sites that choose not to accept UNESCO mandate aren't on the list. Some of the New 7 Wonders are not UNESCO World Heritage Sites: The Colosseum, and Christ the Redeemer. It should be noted that the Taj Mahal (completed in 1648) was not an UNESCO World Heritage site until 1983; until then I guess it wasn't very important.

I think this new list it useful in the same way that any list is useful. It's a summary. In this case, it's a summary of the most iconic architectural wonders in the world.

And please, why does everyone mention the Eiffel tower? Have you people seen it? It's a radio tower. That might have been awe-inspiring in 1889, but today it's just a radio tower, you don't have these in your country? Where I'm from Radio towers (and for that matter gigantic power line towers) are hopefully far away from your home - because they're an eyesore. Just in case people still love the Eiffel tower, it will forever be a New 7 Wonders finalist.

"Any list of wonders that excludes Angkor Wat is a waste of time." I guess this statement means the New 7 Wonders list is not a waste of time, as Angkor was one of the 21 finalist. And "will remain Official New7Wonders Finalists".
Joseph Elwell.