I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.
It tells me that the definitions are too broad to be useful. Oh, crap, I said "broad". Now I'm guilty too!
[...] it's very likely it was a computer generated image and not even a photograph to begin with.
QFT. A friend of mine is a graphic artist who does, among other things, product catalog illustrations. It's standard practice for him to create a 3D computer model and render a photorealistic version of *that* instead of actually photographing the product. The time it takes him to create and texture the model is nothing compared to the time to set up lighting and everything for a photoshoot. That's especially true when you consider the time for retakes because the marketing manager decides the image would look better with the product rotated another 3 degrees counter-clockwise.
I'd be surprised if the close-up pictures of any new product were actually photographs. Model it, then churn out renders from any angle with any lighting effects you want. Yes, even an angle that manages to hide an embarrassing bulge here and there. It's nothing that hasn't been done by marketeers ever since... well, ever since advertising, really.
When you select the link in the text "tool to make it possible to remove the album from your iTunes library in a single step." wouldn't you expect to see an article about the tool and actually have a link to the tool?
I clicked the link and got a Philadelphia NBC affiliate site. The article is titled "Apple Releases Tool to Remove Free U2 Album", so I'm definitely seeing an article about the tool. Within the article, in the first and last paragraphs, are links to the tool.
So what the hell are you bitching about?
The underlying question has absolutely nothing to do with video, digitized from VHS or not. The question is, "How can I securely back up a shitload of data that I don't want to lose?"
Now that you've forgotten about the video aspect and just think of it as bytes, the problem is reduced to one that's been solved a zillion times over. Google "offsite backup".
Personally, I use RAID on my home NAS, and rsync the really important stuff daily to an encrypted 1.5TB drive sitting on my desk at work. If you don't have the bandwidth you could do essentially the same thing by carrying your external backup drive back and forth to your office (or friend's house, or safe-deposit box) weekly or monthly. Have a couple backup drives and just rotate them.
The TOS only restricts you from running a proxy service, not for using a proxy service as a client.
Don't worry. They reserve the right to change the terms of service at any time, so that can change as soon as it becomes convenient for them to do so.
I don't like U2. It didn't auto-download, but I'm annoyed it's in the list at all. Sure, it's just one album. Easy to scroll past, right? No reason to complain? How about when publishers decide this is a really good way to advertise? Release a band's album or a single as a free sample and get it listed on everyone's phone. Brilliant! Except that now I have tons of songs that show up in my "purchased" list that I never purchased, will never listen to, and don't want. They get in the way of the songs I actually *did* purchase and want to listen to.
That's what the complaint is about. Yeah, one album is no big deal. But the precedent's being set, and if we don't complain they're going to decide this is a good idea and keep doing it.
but at one point "research" showed that jeans were responsible for higher risk of cancer
I honestly can't tell whether you misspelled "genes" or there's actually a study that shows there's a correlation between cancer and wearing denim trousers.
The C pre-processor. The whole thing. The CPP is without a doubt the biggest WTF in language design. Hey, this C language is neat and all, but how about if we make it so that before you compile it you have to run it through a whole separate language processor with different syntax designed to do string substitution? And let's use that language to implement comments. And hey, how about using it to import common files? But since it's really just a string substitution, the import really just dumps a verbatim copy of the common file into the one being processed. If you have two identical include lines you get two copies of the common file inserted. Wouldn't that be *great*!?
Okay, I understand the historical context and why it made sense at the time. I really do. But from a modern perspective it's definitely not in any way the sane way to do it.
And for an honorable mention, how about the use of leading whitespace in Makefiles? Not only is leading whitespace significant, starting a line with spaces has a different meaning than starting a line with tabs!
I have a phone with a 3.5" screen. It's just about useless for e-reading. Also, the idea that if all the troubled youth were just given books they'd read them is bogus. They *can't* read and if they could they still wouldn't want to.
I know I'm a dinosaur, but I was reading ebooks on my Palm III with its grayscale 160x160 pixel 3.3" screen. It's certainly not a "useless" form factor. I even preferred it to reading paper books, just because I could carry more around with me. Of course, I like to read. I agree that there's no way a crummy ebook reader is going to convince non-readers to hit the books.