um, what?

"... under 12 parsecs .."
an artificial moon that they decided to name "death star"
ewoks
that cheesy scene where obi-wan and vader showed up as force-ghosts
muppet yoda
hammil's terrible acting
the most stereotypical villian ever (deep scary voice, a black helmet and cap ... and so on)
the piles, and piles of action figures and ships that have ended up in land fills

THAT crap was awful.

the problem is, as it keeps getting stated is that when we watched Star Wars 4-6, we were kids so all that stuff didn't bother us. when we watch 1-3, we were adults and it did. 1-3 are not great movies, but let's face it, 1-3 are essentially the same style and quality as 4-6. they have a larger special effects budgets, and more marketing. that's it.

i think the argument is that she couldn't refuse since the professor was in a position of power.

i think it's naive to assume that the people developing and deploying DRM actually think it can't be broken. they probably know a hell of a lot more about the various technologies than we do.

netflix HAS to include DRM. it's contractually bound to do so in it's content licenses.

the point of DRM is not to make it absolutely impossible to copy. the point is to make it non-obvious for the average user (something more than File->Save as ...). DRM will always be broken and everyone with 1/2 a brain knows this.

that's a meaningless statement without knowing the wage / benefits / incentives you are offering.

republicans are traditionally staunch supporters of military spending. it doesn't get any bigger government than that.

the large v. small government is rhetoric. both parties favor large government when it serves their needs. public healthcare wasn't opposed because ideologically it's a step toward "big government", it was opposed because it might upset a very lucrative business investments of upper-class support of many politicians (insurance industry and healthcare).

the votes are a (welcome) side effect, but the real goal is to supply big business with never ending supply of cheap workers.

it's not a question of stopping them. it's a question of whether you are going to give them money. will you?

it already has been made. USB stick computers. plug it into the HDMI slot where it doesn't move. bluetooth mouse, keyboard. done.
http://www.amazon.com/Hossen-M...

seriously? how do you think all of the celebrity footage gets released? sort of like the film of Jay Z getting punched by his sister in law (or whatever it was) in the elevator?

the reason why nothing gets done with security footage of you is that nobody gives a crap about you. google glass won't change that.

you need to go check out the latest google translate. point your camera at any text and instantly translate it into 8+ languages in real time.

personally, i don't expect anything other than for you to mind your own business.

the difference is that w/ glass, you know you (may) be recorded. without glass, you have no idea. covert recording devices are numerous and powerful. if someone *wants* to record you, they will.

i'd be flattered if someone cared enough about me to do so. anyone that uses the term "glasshole" is utterly naive about the technology and has serious misconceptions about what privacy they have while in public places. if you aren't getting recorded and blasted on youtube today, it's not because it can't be done, it's because nobody cares. if someone wants to record you in public, they will ... and every month a new product comes out that's smaller, faster, has more memory, better frame rate, higher resolution, better zoom. there's no law against it, it's legal. it happens and will continue to happen.

wrong, samsung will make both. they made 52 different smartphone models last year. samsung has enough money to do everything 10x, and they do.