This has been covered half a dozen times yet no one in the media gets it: 3D that is being popularized strains the eyes and messes with the brain. I've yet to see a movie that states you shouldn't drive for 2 hours after watching it to let your depth perception recover- because it has been hacked at with the method of presentation.

Everyone LOVES 3D that really pops- and to get that level of pop the eyes must be further and further strained outwards. While this is fine for the short term, immediate needs doing it for any length of time is a huge stressor.

Unfortunately I am at home and don't have any of the papers that were published in the late 80's and 90's about these issues. Sega (damn memory) had a unit that was going to be 3D capable but ended up canning it for a variety of issues- including the health of children. Obviously now adays that isn't a concern and money, as always, comes first.

I know of some military groups that prohibit their members from operating a vehicle for 8 hours after performing 2-4 hours of stereo work. They must be driven home by a buddy. That's not over-reacting in my opinion.

Crewmen of submarines must recover their 3D vision after spending so long cooped up with nothing 'far' available to be seen. They're also banned from operating vehicles while in port for some duration.

Why is it any surprise that a developing brain can be traumatized by seeing something that it wasn't wired to see?

Go ahead- screw your kids up. Mine won't be. I've got hundreds of other ways to mess them up :)

Contrary to the humorous jokes about popping balloons, mentos and coke, etc- these do have significant explosive force. When they're at full pressure they can maim. While the first google search of "dry ice bomb accident" turns up a youtube video of a small bottle, one can also see videos from Mythbusters where they used 2 liter containers.

Very quickly you can see that putting one of these inside of a mailbox can do serious damage.

These are no different than the drain bombs of my 'youth' when kids were stuffing them in mailboxes everywhere. Those did cause serious injuries- given the reaction of the lye and the shrapnel from the explosions.

Should Mom be charged? No, she shouldn't, and there should be some common sense applied. But since a 14 year old can't exactly buy dry ice (at least not at the places I fill my CO2 tanks at) then she was supplying him- and if she wasn't supervising him doing this... there is a degree of recklessness that needs to be addressed.

Maybe she doesn't understand how dangerous these things can be? I doubt the kid was wearing a face shield with gloves and an apron to protect himself incase of premature detonation.

As a society we all would pay if this child was injured. That's the overriding concern- and society would be screaming right now if the police had showed up, said "Oh, OK, keep at it" and left... and then the kid was in an accident and cost (lets say an eye) his sight.

You can't have it both ways.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors

We've got a few. They're awesome. You can't see structure more than 2 feet away from the monitor- even with corrected vision.

Now motion performance, that's another issue...

When it can play Flight of the Bumblebee, better than Itzhak Perlman and/or Joshua Bell, then I'll take notice...

Or better still, when it can have new music 'downloaded' into it and interpreted based upon previous styles (such as baroque style)...

Our course was easy. Given some inputs, make them match exactly via the diff command to the outputs. It was really pathetically easy to pass, unless you mis-implemented something (happens).

Code review was checked via a number of methods- usually more hype than reality, but it still happened.

I had a couple of different students submit the same code- different names, variables, orders, etc. What gave it up? They had extra spaces at the end of the lines. Usually two, sometimes three- as if the tab was replaced and rounded up. This matched, space for space, for each function regardless of the name of the function or the variables.

100$ fraudulent. Global search and replace.

Prof passed them both. No warnings, no nothing.

I stopped being a TA at that point.

Not always is a common solution the right one. Many times they lack the requisite low level IO needed to do the job right.

Take, for instance, DDC/CI. I don't know what you're doing and that's fine, but in my line of work we have to talk to the monitor. You ain't doin' that on a virtual machine.

Just because it's virtual doesn't mean it's better.

Lack of experience? Or a lack of give-a-damn or understanding? I've seen 30+ year old "computer engineers" with a decade of experience as system administrators pull this nonsense. They've got experience, they've just got the wrong mindset.

They're like the bad mechanic who replaces parts until finding the problem, or until the problem stops manifesting itself - regardless of whether the problem has actually been fixed.

Your are so wrong when you imply that this is not an intrinsic problem in the US. It is, in fact, the corporate standard behavior for US business. Workers, clients, and investors are all disposable, and exists only to fill the bank accounts of the corrupt executive class.

Here are some examples from today's headlines. And by today I mean this week!

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/17/alec-massey-mine/

Yesterday, the AP reported that Marlene Griffith, a widow of William Griffith, one of the 29 men killed in last week’s explosion at a coal mine in West Virginia, is suing Massey Energy, the owner of the mine. Griffith filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Raleigh County Circuit Court, arguing that Massey’s handling of work conditions at the mine plus its history of safety violations amounted to aggravated conduct that rises above the level of ordinary negligence.

...

Responding to the lawsuit, Nathan Coffey, the Public Affairs Coordinator of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), took to Twitter yesterday to mock Marlene Griffith. Coffey posted a link to the AP story about Marlene Griffith, sarcastically commenting that “Everyone wants free money!”

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-18/goldman-s-staged-explosion-deserves-apology-roger-lowenstein.html

As only someone from Mars doesn’t know by now, Goldman allegedly sold collateralized debt obligation, or bonds backed by mortgage securities, to institutional investors without disclosing that the specific securities were handpicked by hedge-fund manager John Paulson. Paulson was betting on the securities to fall and, for that reason, structured the securities to include losers -- not winners.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/yesterday-germany-today-uk-tomorrow-world-goldmans-response-lawsuits-everyone-q1-stub-bonuse

As expected, the line of people preparing to sue Goldman is now longer than the posers who bought the iPad on launch day. Reuters reports that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who himself has been in hot water over his much lamented decision to sell UK's gold despite protests from the BOE and likely under the guidance of Goldman and JPM, wants an investigation into the Goldman affair by the FSA, and is saying that impacted UK banks will be considering legal action. Furthermore, GB slammed Goldman after the TimesOnline reported that Goldman will pay $5.6 billion in bonuses for just three months work, including 600 million pounds for London-based staff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar_Capital

According to reports by ProPublica/National Public Radio/This American Life that came out in early April 2010, Magnetar "sponsored" mortgage-backed collateralized debt obligations by agreeing to buy the worst tranche (portion) of the CDO, the "equity tranche". The reports claim that Magnetar then shorted (bet against) those CDOs by buying credit default swaps that insured the CDOs. If the CDOs failed, Magnetar would get back many times its initial investment in the equity tranche by receiving the insurance payoff.[2][4]

About the only thing you can't do is go around denying the holocaust in Germany or creating games like Wolfenstien in Germany.

I doubt the Wolfenstien restriction would stick in Post-Downfall Germany. That taboo has pretty much been broken, Company of Heroes was permitted to be sold in Germany despite being able to play as WWII German forces. The developers got around the restrictions by calling the German forces the "wermacht" as opposed to the Nazi's.

Let's just say that they aren't being imported because there's a high demand for foreign work. They don't have skills that American workers don't have.

Why are we importing them, then?

Because we can treat them like slaves because most of them are ignorant to the laws in the USA. They see it as a land of opportunity and are willing to work for less than decent wages to get their feet in the proverbial door. No one usually tells them that they'll have ever-increasing debt the likes of which we haven't seen since corporate script in miner towns was common, though.

We're importing them because someone's making money off it. The recruiting agencies, head hunters, human trafficking rings, etc. All of them get a cut of the already-low wages of the immigrant worker.

Your doubts are warranted. It can't.

You're wrong.

I cite the entirety of Supreme Court decisions, where "conservative" judges and "liberal" judges are deemed to be different and rule differently (and consistently), despite the fact they are hearing the same case and applying the same law. If they were, in fact, applying the law, then there wouldn't be the massive divide there is. Instead, they apply their personal beliefs and nothing else. They then do all they can to apply the law. Only if they can't find any possible way to twist the law to fit their beliefs do they vote against their beliefs. That's the way it's been done for hundreds of years.

Yes legal opinions are "facts", but prosecutors do not issue factual statements saying that they will not prosecute a crime. They state that they decline prosecution at this time, however the acts make be entirely illegal.

You aren't addressing what I said. If the prosecutor says "I've reviewed the law, and not only will I not prosecute this one case, but I have found that the actions taken are not in violation of any law." then that is a fact and does, in fact, evoke estoppel. The only successful application I know of it is in relation to speed limits where one prosecutor carelessly said something to the effect of there existing a grace speed, and someone going to court used that statement to get off. But then, that was in TX when tickets were crimes. They've recently demoted them to the infractions they are in most places, so legal protections no longer exist.

Do you really want to learn anything about law in this discussion or do you just want to remain an ignorant about this shit?

You are chiding me rather than informing me. You are whining "citation needed" when you cite nothing. You are being a bitch about it, then whine that I'm not properly listening to your superior knowledge? You don't even keep your comments on topic. "legal opinions are facts" is what I said, then you said they are, but it doesn't matter because no prosecutor will ever give a legal opinion. I know of one case where that's not the case (and no, I can't cite it), so I know you are 100% wrong. Why should I bow to you when I know you to be giving incorrect information? Why should I bow to you when you demand cites and cite nothing yourself? Why should I bow to you when you complain about me not listening when you don't listen to me?

Apparently, despite your comments otherwise, you are more interested in "winning" an argument that to actually have a discussion about the topic at hand.

It is not illegal to train a 12 year old to drive, when it is illegal for that 12 year old to drive. So why is it illegal to "train" a 12 year old in safe sex when sex is illegal? And by the logic of teaching someone safety causes the act, they should stop giving fire safety classes and make fire alarms illegal because that encourages playing with matches. After all, if you give them a condom, the fuck, so if you give someone a fire alarm, they'll start fires. You seem to be flipping back and forth between whether you think it's justified, whether you think he's justified, whether you think he's right and such. To me, it seems dishonest to pick multiple independent perspectives and switch between them depending on which makes your stronger case. If that's not what you are doing, then please identify the one and only one perspective you've been representing, as it isn't clear to me.

Yes, I understand it needed to be connected to the internet. However UBISOFT has failed in their promise to provide the necessary connectivity to execute the game.

Reminds me of a Dilbert- where Dogbert sells tickets on his 'Dogbert Air', but there are no planes.

Much respect, but those training items are really smoke screen passed on to the individual workers (as if they had any economic power to bribe a foreign official).

I personally know people who have illegally bribed foreign officials. It's really easy. The example I know was in Azerbaijan, not Russia, but still former USSR. There was an elevator in a building without usable stairs. When you show up to get to the room you have rented for corporate equipment, handling communications equipment, the security guard, employed by the government (and thus, a government official, but US standards) requires a cash payment or he'll leave the elevator locked and you can take the stairs (which are always locked). You have two choices, abandon all operations in Azerbaijan, or pay government officials. From the people I know that worked there, there wasn't any way to conduct business that didn't result in breaking US law. You just hid it best you could so that the parent company could deny it.

And places like China, bribery is much less prevalent than those in the US think, but then non-bribes which the US may consider bribes are required by customs. You take lots of gifts with you and hand them out liberally. While not high-cost, they are still gifts given for favor.