This is what I use. Folder redirection can be a nightmare when it goes awry, but for the most part SBS keeps my files, documents and photos synced across 4 different machines (two desktops, a laptop and a netbook).

If I need to get at files that haven't yet synced because I forgot to turn on my laptop before walking out the door, I just VPN in to my network (SBS does all the setup and heavy lifting, you basically just turn it on and it works) - and either run a sync, or if I don't have time, I'll just access the files on the redirected folder on my server.

Easy peezy.

here you go :

"In one of the mass 'John Doe' cases based on single BitTorrent downloads of films, Malibu Media v. Does 1-13, a pro se litigant made a motion to quash the subpoena. The Court granted a stay of the subpoena, pending its decision on the motion to quash. Unfortunately for John Doe, Verizon had turned over its subscribers' identities 5 days BEFORE the response was due, thus possibly mooting both the stay and the motion to quash. Fortunately for John Doe, the Judge wasn't too happy about this, ordered the information sealed, directed plaintiff's lawyers to destroy any copies, and ruled that they can't use the information unless and until the Court denies the motion to quash."

I've been 'the computer guy' all my life - when I was 13-15, I was volunteering at a non-profit computer repair place that ripped apart donated computers, fixed them, and gave them back to other non-profits like churches and social organizations. By the end of my time there, I was actually teaching weekly repair classes to other volunteers, often 30-50 years old.

Anyways, I'm not meaning to wank off, but when I went to college, I specifically didn't study computer science, because I was pretty secure with my tech abilities, and figured I'd always be able to find a job. I double majored in Psych and Philosophy.

After college, it was a little hard to find a job, but I don't think it had anything to do with my lack of a CS background. I just explained my choice of major at university, and spun it in a positive light. IE "The analytical skills I learned in my philosophy program are directly applicable to the type of complex problem solving needed in IT environments, and in fact give me an edge of 'outside the box' thinking over my CS major counterparts" or whatever.

After I had my first job, college began mattering less and less - employers look more at past experience. In fact, I think it matters so little that I went and quit my job for a year to get a masters in Cognitive Science. No problem finding a job when I got back, and I've since started my own small business IT company that is doing quite well. Point is, if you have the skills, you'll be fine!

well, based on your post, it just sounds like everything else aside from games is less expensive in HK.

in usd -

a game is 60

PC (case, mb, memory) is about 200-250

lunch is $5-12 (one game is about 5-6 lunches)

I don't wear jeans, but I do shop at outlet stores - new dress pants are 20-25

new phones cost 100-300

mobile phone costs are about 60-100 a month.

so yes, a computer game is to cost 50-60.

I'm sort of surprised by the comments on here. I'm approaching 30, so I grew up buying games in the 'good old days' when they were ~$20-35. But if you account for inflation, is $60 really that unreasonable? I mean, I'm not mindblowingly rich, and I am pretty stingy with my money as far as just going out and dropping a 50 bill on something - but $60 for a really good game seems pretty ok. Most of the time, the $59.95 titles will have preorder sales or whatever for $45-50, and if you can wait a couple months, you can usually score top tier games for $39.95.

I'm pretty OK with paying that amount of money for good games - they usually last more than 4-6 movies lengths of entertainment, so that seems par for course as far as entertainment goes. Of course, I never spend my money on bad games - I usually find a way to errr, preview them before committing - so maybe my game buying experience is different than that of the average consumer.

{straightface, dead glare} They're impossible because they don't exist. {/straightface}

I'm not sure what world you're living in, if you think reality TV is any sort of a baseline for how normal society and people think/operate.

yeah, I agree -

but if you are concerned about some given problem and ask yourself 'what can be done?' - and actually can do something about said problem... it seems really disingenuous to bring other people's actions into your personal ethical calculations. You can't just be like 'well, no one else will ever change, so I won't either - despite the fact that I want to change and it is a big deal to me that change happen!'

it's like all those social psych experiments where someone is like blatantly injured in public or something - like a grandmother falls and breaks her hip in the middle of a crosswalk - and scores of people just walk by her ignoring her because they all figure 'it isn't my problem!' or 'someone will surely help her!' and in the end she just is horribly disfigured or dies because everyone just based their own actions on what their expectations for everyone elses behavior.

illogical and stone headed for sure.

are you just trying really hard to be illogical and stone headed, or what?

who cares what the rest of the world is doing? who cares what anyone else in our part of the world is doing either, for that matter. the basis of consideration for ecological impact should always start with yourself, not your neighbor, china, elephants, or whatever. how is what anyone else is doing even relevant? once you understand that basis - ie, your own net impact on the world, measured however - you can begin worrying about other people. and by other people I mean the communities you live in, and directly impact.

if the net ecological and economic impact of you and your communities is unsustainable, it's time to make adjustments - regardless of what is happening in new york or china or wherever. being like 'well new york isn't taking a look at its net ecological impact on the world' isn't a free ticket to be a dickhead and stick your face in the sand despite being aware of the unsustainability of your own existence.

I've sort of been thinking about giving them a try - I already have a 120hz monitor (Samsung 2233rz, which is awesome. 120hz is so nice) so it wouldn't require that much effort. But, I don't know, when I saw this press release I didn't really understand how it was that much better. Is brightness a huge problem with the original glasses?

Also, how is the 3d effect in general? Even worth it? Last 3d thing I owned was the (lol) iglasses in like 1996, with an amazing resolution of like 320x200 or something ridiculous. it was fucking horrible. =/