What you fail to emphasize, is that after about 3 revolutions of this, people get pretty burned out on reading the posts from the people who were banned during each phase of circumvention. This then compounds itself and people say screw it, it's just gonna get fixed, if i'm detected, i'm banned. Then you are once again left with the demographic of people who fall outside of "honest man, dishonest mistake", and are left with the people who are going to do it regardless.

In the security world, it's generally a game of keeping the honest man honest. Anything beyond that is in place to slow down the pro.

First, any ethernet media converters you with coaxial as the medium, are going to be 10BASE-T 10Mbit connections. You will no longer be able to utilize 100Mbit across ethernet. Second, attempting to solder the wires from a twisted pair cable, and pinning it out over 4 shielded coaxial cables, is going to result in an extreme signal degredation and is completely out of the picture as a viable option. The posters above me stated that using one of the original coaxial cable as a base for pulling a snagless Cat5e/6 cable, and that is the direction that you need to take. If that is not an option, perhaps do some research and invest in a wireless setup that will suit your living area.

In summary, please, don't solder an RJ-45 connecter and the 2 relevant pairs to 4 coaxial cables. Please?

If you do, please, send pictures.

This just proves we should all be living by the Code of Harry, just like Dexter!

Dammit, I wish I had mod points to give you for that one. "+1 Explaining human nature to a geek"

> Right-of-way is an implied system, not a hard set of rules.

If I define a rule as something that carries a punishment when you violate it, then right-of-way is a hard set of rules. Even if your jurisdiction does not define it, your car insurance company most likely does. At least where I live, when a collision occurs, one driver must be at fault. Who's at fault is determined by right-of-way rules.

Some right-of-way rules in the laws are not highlighted as such, so they may be difficult to spot. For example, if a pedestrian gets killed crossing the road where he should not be crossing, provided that the driver is in compliance with the laws, the pedestrian is totally at fault thus the driver can go home-free.

Generally, if you're in compliance to laws in terms of passing, cutting lanes, signalling, turning, and stopping, you're in compliance with right-of-way rules.

> If someone decides to give up their right-of-way to you, then you are entitled to slowly and safely proceed to accept the right-of-way from the other motorist.

Although an intention to give up a right-of-way is easy to see, it is impossible to prove after an accident has happened. What if the other driver changes their mind, and you run into an accident as a result? Good luck proving that they have yielded their right-of-way.

When I decide to give up my right-of-way, I do it in very defined situations (like when 2 lanes must zipper-merge), and in a bounded manner. e.g. I limit myself to allow 1 or 2 cars, but no more, to merge in front of me at a busy parking lot exit to not agitate drivers waiting behind my car.

> If two motorists get in an accident because of right-of-way issues, most officers would at the very least give the driver with the right-of-way a warning to not insist on their right-of-way (as most states laws have a clause to this effect).

This is interesting, please cite some such laws - especially after you've said that right-of-way is an "implied system, not a hard set of rules". As far as I understand, insisting on right-of-way does not break any law.

The law is sharing-the-road codified. I believe one should not break the law, but also not do more than what the laws tell us to. The "above-and-beyond" thing, when applied to traffic laws, is a cause of a lot of accidents, and if people follows the rules as literally as possible and drive as much like robots as possible, I believe there'll be a lot fewer accidents.

Porn, untold amounts of porn, and untold amounts of geeks' fantasies never being fulfilled.

You had me by nearly 20 pounds my freshman year of high school. Being picked on isn't about brute strength, it's about attitude. If you don't allow people to push you around emotionally, they won't bother to push you around physically. It's fear that bullies crave and no body will bother with a kid who isn't afraid of taking a beating to stand up for himself. In 7th and 8th grade I had a couple of showdowns with the largest kid in school. He was a giant at 6'3 and over 200 pounds (in 7th grade) and I was about 4'8 and weighed 65 pounds. The first showdown was him trying to pick on me and me standing up to it. The second was him picking on someone else and me stepping in to stop it. The simple solution in situations like this is to point out the obvious. I told him that he couldn''t possibly win... if he beat up the "little kid" he'd look like an idiot because he clearly could beat me up and if somehow I beat him up he'd look like an idiot because the "little kid" beat him up. He never once hit me and realized that he couldn't intimidate me so he just didn't bother.

Violence isn't necessary, especially when you're little. Logic works much more effectively.

Depends what you're talking about. I was talking about PC games which is what Sudden Attack is, which wouldn't cover handheld video games.

Offline single player games exist, they're just not made by Korean developers, and of course they're easy to pirate off Korean sites.

As far as handheld gaming goes, games on Korean cell phones seem to be more varied and a far bigger industry than North America (except for the iPhone) but Korea had a well established industry here before the iPhone really picked up speed in North America. Many Koreans (individuals and companies) have moved to the iPhone but the sheer amount of games available for cell phones here is ridiculous. Standard cell phones have terrible data plans. Most cell phone games are offline games, however there are some multiplayer/mmorpg type cell phone games. People can get big bills on those.

the iPhone data plan here isn't much better, but they sell a portable battery operated wimax router that is the size of a cell phone. Costs $20-$25/month and you get 50 GB/month with it. Peak speeds of 38Mbps and it works underground on the subway. It can generate a wifi spot for whatever you want to game with that can use it. Battery lasts about 5 hours and charges on a standard cell phone adapter (they have those here).

PSPs and DS Lites are very popular here. Most people seem to play single player on those, but it terms of PC games, multiplayer free to download and play rules here.

I'm still trying to figure out the 'value' column and what it could possibly mean. It's not the average, since that's to the right already. It's not the mmph per dollar, since that would infinity for some of them... It's not even a personal opinion, considering that Eclipse/PDT and Zend got exactly the same value, even though 1 is free and the other is not.

I've been forced to come to the conclusion that it means 'we were paid to make this come out better.'

I view Steam as more of a service. It is not pure DRM, they give you something of value to you in return. You can download and play your games on any machine you like, all you have to do is remember your username and password. So you let them manage all your games and they make it convenient. It is a decent trade, where as regular DRM treats you like a criminal, makes it really inconvenient, and gives you nothing of value to you for your trouble. No wonder regular DRM is stripped from games.

I can't beleive that I also get to be the first to say it: Your an idiot!

You get the point, quit crapping in my thread, troll.

We all know the deal. If I wanted to compromise said cellular network, I could use the current published, freely, and openly available jailbreaking techniques. If they legalize jailbreaking of the phones, it is not going to legalize hacking cellphone towers, so the people that are going to do it are already trying. This is just a another preemptive strike by Apple. They are going to lose credibility, because too much press in a short ammount of time for a company can be just as bad as flying under the wire. I think it is time they slip back into the ether and keep quiet for a few weeks.

Sorry, this is soooo flamebait, but...Your an idiot