> (I've seen vinyl rips in FLAC where each track is upwards of 350MB)
That's a stretch.
192Khz * 24-bit = 576KB/s = ~35MB/min
350MB would be 10 minutes long uncompressed
That's for one track, not stereo. It would actually be about 69.12 MB/min or 4.14 GB/hr uncompressed, so, using conservative estimates, 3.105GB/hr FLAC.
Most people are wise enough not to bother with 192KHz, although some could argue for 96KHz, which still puts you at about half of the figures I stated above for a stereo track. 350MB is a 35 minute album done in 44.1KHz/16 bit at uncompressed or likely 44.1KHz and 24 bit done in FLAC or with really good FLAC compression, 48 KHz/24 bit.
This brings up a quick question for the GP, Joe, with the size of hard drives/solid state these days, why should you be so worried about file size? Audio quality makes a big difference in both perception and experience. 350MB for a high quality (audio quality not necessarily musical) album is a better way to enjoy a good (musical) album than a crummy 256 kbps MP3.
Not only is it NOT A MOTORCYCLE! the person talking about it has never ridden a motorcycle.
which is easier on the driver's legs than putting a foot down the way you do while riding most motorcycles.
First all motorcycles. Not most. Second. Who the hell ever pulled up to a stop while riding and thought "Fuck. I have to put my feet down again!"?
Not all. Like it or not "trikes" are considered and labelled motorcycles. As such, your statement is not accurate.
Second, I know a number of people who dislike it due to weaker legs/ankle injuries/etc (and thus, are attracted moreso to the trikes, which, for the record, I HATE).
Yes, that's the wrong way. Allowing lawyers to run free and wild without any thought towards what it's going to look like when you're major fan base starts hating you.
No, that's the ONLY way in the US from my understanding (IANAL). They have a legal requirement to use and defend their trademark or they will lose it.
If the customer issues a chargeback, Chang's doesn't have a leg to stand on.
If the bank doesn't side with the merchant -- photographic evidence is sufficient for any court...
Bullshit. I'm in sales, my company's lost chargebacks with "photographic evidence" plenty of times. The bank sides with their client, the customer almost all the time.
*Mind you, you'll still see plenty of smaller stores putting a minimum on purchases with CCs. They pay a larger transaction fee than big chains typically.
Nintendo has always been very controlling of it's property.
Oh, really? The games don't belong to Nintendo. That's like saying Photoshop belongs to Intel, Apple or Microsoft just because it runs on Windows or OSX platforms.
Many developers have previously stated their intention to allow YouTube users to upload videos relating to their games, without any kind of charge, express permission or revenue-sharing deal.
No, this is like saying Photoshop belongs to Adobe. Nintendo owns the rights to all the games that I've heard of them doing this to, therefore, Nintendo being controlling of its property is a fitting statement.
Think of the children is a legitimate line of thought when it's actually about children and not someone trying to gain personal power or push through a bad policy by using our empathy against us and linking it to a unconnected issue.
Do you really think I'm on some power grab or trying to push through a bad policy with my argument here?
Based on the reasoning you proposed, yes, you're trying to put through a bad policy. Based upon your argument above, we should take away bicycles, skateboards, and any other form of transportation that will allow a child to meet up with an adult they met online (as Belial6 pointed out).
How about this, we allow parents to set rules for their children as well as punishments for breaking said rules? How's that sound?