Have you *used* any of the common photo sharing services? I use Flickr. The clients I've worked with that download full 12 megapixel images from my Nikon D90 and 60mm micro-nikkor images would take exception to your resolution characterization.
Flickr *does* has a limitation of JPG only, 20 megabyte maximum per file. I save everything at JPG compression level 12 (i.e. almost no compression) and only the most detail-rich images save out greater than 20megs.
I've had full double-page spreads printed from images the magazine downloaded from Flickr.
It's OK to be stuck in the past (I hate Facebook and Twitter, personally) but dude, at least understand what you're missing out on!
And yes, I've shot Kodachrome and wish my D90 produced images with that 'feel'.
I'm pretty sure state funding for higher education in the USA has fallen to levels below 20% in many states. I know it's really REALLY low in California and tuition is skyrocketing as a result.
The state USED to pay for most of the universities 15-20-25 years ago. No longer. It's now the students, alumni, and research grants from various sources.
Your comment here is exactly why I will never serve on a jury. The last time I was on jury selection we were told to empty our minds of anything we ever knew about the facts surrounding the case and that the lawyers would present their version of reality. It wasn't just "don't go home and research" it was literally "oh, and you can't use any common sense, you have to judge based on the framework we create for you." Yeah, right. That's why they make sure to get the dumbest people on juries. I am a strong believer in Jury Nullification and feel that I am judging the law being applied as equally as the defendant on trial, as our system of laws is way more corrupt than most criminals.
Are you fully aware of the controversy surrounding laptop searches at US Border points? Here is a quick article to get you up to speed:
Basically the current thinking out of the US Government is that you are in a legal no-mans land when you re-enter the USA and the 4th amendment does NOT apply to anyone until the US grants them entry into the USA. When you're at an international airport in the USA, all areas before immigration and customs are legally not inside the USA, or so the legal reasoning goes. Furthermore, you have no choice but to submit your laptop for them to copy. I don't even think you have the option of simply returning from where you came, either.
Everyone in the neighborhood saw it in the theatre and so didn't need to rent it from Netflix.
We saw it at the Castro theatre about halfway through its total run and it was a full upper balcony sellout. It really was an important film to see as together as a community and I was glad to have taken part in what I felt was a community viewing.
My guess: medium sized city in a flyover state with low to zero desire to leave friends/family behind to make more money in a city that may or may not be appealing.
I've seen first-hand at two companies that he's got something to worry about. Not during the interview, but before. At my last two employers it was standard process to do a quick google/facebook check and discard any applicants showing anything remotely controversial as part of their public persona. When you get 500+ resumes for one position, you do everything you can to whittle that stack down BEFORE you start bringing people in for interviews.
I'm not saying I agree with any of it, just relaying my bit of anecdotal evidence.
That's just setting yourself up for getting fired later for lying to your prospective employer during the interview process.
Wow, the quadruple good luck Google DNS server!
It sounds like you're not living the digital lifestyle. That's OK.
If you're living the digital lifestyle using VLC or other players would be second nature and you'd never turn your computer off. I've not turned my computer off in almost 10 years. Since I got an AppleTV, iTunes stays running all the time, too.
If you report a potential copyright/licensing problem to the right people, and they conclude that it is in the best interest of shareholders to take no action, that's okay. In my view, you have fulfilled your responsibility to bring the issue to their attention. You can only do so much.
I thought that would make you complicit and therefore a party to the crime. I always thought that short of an indemnification letter, once you the lowly IT worker knows laws are being broken you have legal exposure, period.