Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:From the actual law... (Score 2, Informative) 407

by vanka (#30356858) Attached to: Ambassador Claims ACTA Secrecy Necessary
I don't like the secrecy involved, but as some have pointed out it is a necessary (or rather accepted) part of international treaty negotiation procedure. Also remember that in the US once a treaty has been negotiated, it still must be ratified by the Senate* (in some cases. Just because a treaty has been successfully negotiated it does not guarantee ratification by the Senate as ratification requires a 2/3 majority- Kyoto treaty anyone. When the treaty becomes public (and it should) - if you disagree with it, give your senator a call. *This is a simplification of course, the president does have the authority to ratify executive agreements without input from the Senate; but this is done when the president is acting alone in negotiating the treaty (sole executive agreements) or to "fill in" gaps in treaties. For treaties that require additional legislation to implement domestically, the treaty requires the advice and 2/3 majority of the Senate to be ratified (standard treaty process). A president may also choose to pursue a congressional-executive treaty (requiring majority approval in both houses of Congress) to gain support for it in Congress - especially important when the treaty will require new/complex legislation or funding appropriation to implement.

Comment: Re:this is brave (Score 1) 466

by vanka (#30302566) Attached to: Danish DRM Breaker Turns Himself In To Test Backup Law

I remember when I was younger, my mom was given a ticket in Arizona for going 56 in a 55, which seemed ridiculous, but maybe Arizona is one of those states without the officer's discretion.

An officer can always use his discretion. I suspect that in this case the ticketing officer either had a quota that he needed to meet or was being an a$$^$#@.

Comment: Re:Yeah, well... (Score 1) 527

by vanka (#15322651) Attached to: Ken Kutaragi's Famous Last Words
I think that Sony has placed the PS3 a Catch-22 situation: Sony is betting that people will buy the PS3 as a console and once they have it will say to themselves: "We got this thing that plays Blue-Ray movies, why not buy some?" This will then spur the adoption of the BR format.

But here's the problem: you come to the store to get a next gen console; you see the Wii for $200-300, the 360 for $300-400, and the PS3 for $500-600. Which one will you get? Most likely it won't be the PS3. Yes the PS3 appears to be a better value, but only if BR is the format of choice .

So basically, for the PS3 to be a good value and get good sales, BR has to win the HD format war. For BR to win the format war, the PS3 needs to have strong sales as it will beat the next cheapest BR player by 50% price wise. By trying to push the BR format and the PS3 as a gaming console Sony is basically fighting a war on two fronts, never a good position to be in. Time will tell if they win.

Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.

Working...