Perhaps those who cannot tell the difference between "fair" and "fare", and use the proper one in the right context, should not be the first to demean others.

Seamus Heaney... that name sounds really familiar. It may well be his translation I have read. I agree that it is a difficult story, and I am hoping that Tolkien adapted it more than translated it. Keep the meaning, the characters, the events - but rephrase the wording if needed, slow things down or speed things up as necessary for modern (well, early 20th century) pacing, etc. We will see when it is published, I suppose :)

I agree, though I haven't even seen DoS. Here is my record with the Jackson adaptations:

FotR - Saw 10 times in theaters, own extended edition DVD
tTT - Saw 3 times in theaters, own extended edition DVD
RotK - Saw once in a theater, own extended edition DVD
aUJ - Saw once in a theater, didn't bother with the DVD
DoS - Haven't even bothered to see, in a theater or on DVD / digital rental

The only way to keep up with this trend is to somehow *negatively* watch the next one. Maybe I need to prevent it from being released? Hmmm... ;)

Well played, sir! If only I could mod things on a thread I'm already participating in...

If you aren't a fan of Tolkien's writings, you can turn in your nerd card right now.

I kid, of course... but only just barely...

I have read another translation of Beowulf (not sure which one - it has been over a decade now) and I saw the last CGI film adaptation. It is an interesting story, and with how much I love Tolkien's own fiction I greatly look forward to reading his translation / adaptation. Crossing my fingers for a nice hardbound version, to sit next to my leather bound LotR and Hobbit books :)

Forcing you to use their router? Is this a Comcast-wide policy, or something local to your area? I have never used their router... and for that matter, I even use my own (owned, not rented) modem. I also have a different DNS set up, one that blocks a large amount of potentially objectionable websites (OpenDNS Family Shield).

I've been a Microsoft user myself, since about age 4 (now 30) - so I know Windows backward and forward, and knew DOS pretty well for a time. I'd like to branch out, and a top-notch training course in Linux for free seems appealing. I'm sure I could self-educate if needed, but having a more organized study laid out - for free! - sounds great.

I don't doubt the goal can be achieved at some cost, but they seem to want it for 'less than a penny per unit'. Considering that they admit it is 'a very advanced piece of hardware' I don't see how it could possibly be fabricated and installed for such a tiny cost.

Indeed, the 'woosh' appears appropriate here. From that I take it your response was meant in jest, though how I cannot tell (other than that your comment seemed largely to consist of techno-babble - but maybe that was intentional?). Anyway, I took it as serious and wanted to point out that I don't care how feasible the item they describe is... the cost they want is impossible for anything 'very advanced'.

If I have missed some grand joke, then I apologize :)

Perhaps I should have highlighted the problem I see with their statements. They want "a very advanced piece of hardware" that "costs less than a penny per unit". This is the impossibility in their reasoning, not that it couldn't technically work in some way.

Although, at times I have used facial recognition on my phone - so that could be the 'something you are'... though it falls back to a password or PIN if the recognition doesn't work, so I guess that is a moot point.

Fair enough - I was thinking about whether that was the right way to describe it as I wrote. Thank you for clarifying :)

"SHIELD demands a tool that costs less than a penny per unit, yet makes counterfeiting too expensive and technically difficult to do"

and at the same time

"What SHIELD is seeking is a very advanced piece of hardware that will offer an on-demand authentication method never before available to the supply chain"

These appear to be mutually exclusive.

A text file, encrypted locally with a long password (something I can remember easily, but quite long) and then uploaded to Google Docs for easy access anywhere that I have the decryption software. If I need a password, I just open that file up and copy / paste the password needed - then close it again. If I make a change to a password I can just change it once and that populates to all the other locations where my Google Docs are stored, but it is fully and safely encrypted the whole time.

I even have an app for my phone in case I need it, but there is three factor authentication: my phone's login, a short PIN for the app, and then my full encryption password.