Works for the DS

IDT-1000?

Skynet sends Arnold Schwarzenegger back in time to fight aliens?

Except in the universe of physical-dimensions, when a body is moving in one dimension with a constant velocity, that velocity is not affected by the body's movements or even accelerations in any other dimension (unless, of course, the environment changes such that it now impedes the first dimension's constant motion). A spaceship in frictionless space moving at a constant velocity forward along the Z-axis will continue moving along the Z-axis with the same velocity even if maneuvering rockets give the spaceship new velocity along the X or Y axis.

Even under your own hypothesis, time must be different than space since time is the only dimension that must lose "speed" when velocity is increased in a different dimension. Consider a spaceship moving at 50% the speed of light along the Z-axis. Adding substantial velocity along the X or Y axis would increase the spaceship's overall speed, and the time experienced by those withing the spaceship would be slower (in agreement with your "conservation of space-time" hypothesis), but there would be no change to the velocity along the Z-axis. Losing that velocity in the X or Y axes would result in restoring the speed of time (as experienced by the passengers) to its previous rate, but not affect the velocity along the Z-axis. Therefore the time "axis" has special properties not shared by the several space axes.

Welcome to the Tamagotchi Generation. We pay for virtual entertainment, not real entertainment.

All nanotech cloaking technology currently employs nanoscopic materials that capture, conduct, and re-emit electromagnetic radiation. It won't work for waves that are not constituted from both magnetic and electronic radiation.

Unless you were trying to evade sonar, radar, IR, and UV detection too.

The first quarter-century there seems pretty likely to me. I hope slashdot is around in 25 years so I can look back and regret my not taking privacy more seriously.

I LOLt.

You make strong arguments throughout your post, but there you crossed the line. 10 years have shown major improvements in web browsing, picture editing, and movie editing.

In 2000, nearly every website was merely unformated text and animated gifs, or they were being encapsulated entirely within a single flash file. Javascript was slow, RSS didn't exist, and 95% of web surfers were stuck with IE5. Pop-up blockers? No (thanks IE5). Ad-blockers? No. Themes and extensions? Only for the 5% not on IE.

I used to use Photoshop 5.5, and while color alteration and the beloved clone stamp were strong tools, that antique program doesn't hold a candle to Photoshop CS4 when creating original art. The difference is even more obvious when you compare free, common photo-editing tools from 2000 to modern ones. Auto red-eye removal works. Facial recognition. Simple file conversion. I wouldn't touch the older programs now given the choice.

Movie editing? What can I say? Have you even seen what people can do with home rigs compared to 2000? It's not simply a mater of processor power. Masking, post-processing, and CGI have all improved to the point that your amateur film editor can cobble together something that looks as good as Godzilla 2000. Sure, processor power needed to improve, but the software to automate so many tasks is what makes modern-day CGI so much more straight forward. And that's saying nothing of the improved file management.

What happens if fan-art popularizes counter-culture versions of the IP characters, like Zelda and Link doing cocaine or joining in orgies? It's true that fan art is for the most part supportive of the original artist's direction, much like the amateur film in question, but without any control over which derivative works are allowed, the integrity of the game character could be obliterated. Even something as mild as suggesting Link is gay, while not inherently or morally negative, could hurt the image and damage sales of the Zelda games in areas that aren't as tolerant.

Sure, small-scale fan-fiction is impossible to control, but for all intents and purposes that type of derivative work only influences the community that created it and finds interest in it. When it comes to something as high-profile as this film, it becomes much more important that the IP holder has some say in how its characters are depicted. However, in general I think companies should be more willing to grant no-fee licenses to devoted fans since it only builds a stronger bond in the community. It's a shame Nintendo is fighting back against this rather than supporting it and sharing in the attention.

Follow these easy instructions.
LMGTFY

And we all know how badly that one turned out. If only that war never happened, then slavery and officially sanctioned power-through-wealth could be still dominate in half the county.

Seriously, it's good to doubt the purpose behind all politics, but in this case, scientists were researching and warning against global warming even when Bush was president (and many of those scientists on bush's payroll were silenced for it). Beyond politically-driven scientific research, a vast amount of study comes from non-profit institutions that have no ulterior motive other than accurately understanding any given aspect of our universe, whether it's about the truth of planets orbiting stars or gaseous molecules in the atmosphere trapping infrared radiation.

And by making exclusive deals with content providers like Wolfram Alpha and News Corp.. When things get tough, the tough innovate and Microsoft returns to making monopolies.

That is precisely how I feel. Why is a series of everyday, physical activities seen as so intuitively not special, but when those same activities are translated into an electronic representation, the process becomes unique? Sure, I can accept copyrighting the particular code used to implement said functionality, but a patent on the process itself makes an arbitrary division between one's actions in the real world and one's actions in the digital world. There are so many examples of business method patents granted by the USPTO that describe the electronic version of business models that have been in practice for centuries. And unlike copyrights, if the "invention" that a patent is applied for isn't new and inventive, it must not be granted.

Take this podcast case: ever heard of a magazine subscription? Book/DVD of the month subscriptions? Honestly, I would like someone to explain to me why this bad patent doesn't cover something like e-mail newsletters.

Data is data. It shouldn't matter if the data is in the form of written language, auditory language or sounds, or static or dynamic visual pieces. It also shouldn't matter if you get the data by spoken conversation, radio waves, or binary streams. If a business method patent isn't limited to a single, explicit representation, but rather it is abstracted to cover any possible infrastructure system it sits on (i.e., TCP/IP), then real life should count as prior art. It's outrageous.

Actually, he very well could be using the word "literally" literally. As you said, he stated that he believes certain shows intend to physically cause harm to his brain. If he really does hold the opinion that those shows display reasoning, taste, or behavior so atrocious that the only reasonable explanation for its transmission is to disrupt and whither the synapses in his brain, then he would be accurate in labeling the programming an assault on his brain.

I say sue them all to hell.