It's the Kangaroos, kangaroos are running a major drug racket. They hooked the wallabies onto the stuff and when they couldn't find their regular dealer, the wallabies went berserk in an opium field.

The Australian police should check kangaroo pouches for their stash. I heard they train joeys to separate and bag the opium while in their mother's pouches. The joeys can also make count money and change, there's some grainy footage on youtube of a wallaby putting a fistful of money in a kangaroo's pouch and coming out with a plastic baggie, the kangaroo was looking the other way. Last I heard the 'Kangaroo boxer' mafia was in a territory feud with the 'Bloody Dingo' gang.

From Y-haplogroup distributions, there's very little similarity between the two. China is mosly O-haplogrooup whereas India is a spectrum with two haplogroups (L and H) that are only found in the subcontinent and The rest are mostly R1a (Indo-European/Indo-Iranian)
Linky:Y-dna distribution
They seem to share a bit of mTdna (M haplogroup).

For a typical rapidshare download, the files are names something weird, fragmented into multiple tars/rars and they're mostly password protected. The user gets all this info from the site that provides the links. The rapidshare servers themselves seem oblivious to the content of the files.

How will rapidshare enforce filtering? crack passwords for every rar, open the content, view it, check it against existing copyright works? I doubt if filtering will deter any illegal file-sharing on rapidshare at all.

I don't think so, afaik it doesn't have a IR sensor, the controllers connect via bluetooth so you'll need a bluetooth remote.

You're skipping over VCD, SVCD and LD when you make the jump from VHS to DVD. Most of these had the same advantages as DVD except that the picture quality was a bit lower on a 700Mb CD than an 4.7GB dvd, but still DVD caught on over time.

My point was that, every piece of technology will seem overpriced and excessive as soon as it comes out, particularly for tasks that have existing technology working well enough for them.
Over time it may become the de-facto standard and we'll start bashing the next format that comes out :)

The same argument was used when dvd's were introduced, people already had VCD and VHS players that worked for them

I have a 40 inch 1080p with a PS3, I tried out the picture quality experiment with a blu-ray and dvd. For a dark movie like underworld, the dvd seemed a bit washed out but the blu-ray was pretty good with deep blacks and nice contrast. Overall not a huge improvement but still better.

The true difference in quality showed up with an animated movie (Kung-fu panda) , the blu ray left the dvd biting the dust.

As for the cost of dicsc, it's coming down, It used to be $40+ for a disc a year ago, this weekend I picked up Terminator 2 and Kill Bill on blu-ray for 9.99 each at Best Buy, they were 6.99 on dvd.

It's quite good, I've had no hiccups yet, been watching blu-rays on it for around a year now.

The controller takes a bit getting used to but most functions like pause/play are mapped to a controller key so you don't have to hit menu everytime. Except in cases where you drop the controller, it hits L2 or R2 and the entire move skips a chapter. The remote is ~$20 and it's worth it, I didn't get it coz my coffeee table is full of remotes already :)

I alongwith 4 other friends own PS3's and I'm the only one who plays games on it, all the rest use it as a Blu-ray/dvd player.

They'll just attribute the loss of revenue to 'increased file sharing' :P

I don't totally agree with you, when you say a long time ago, how long ago do you mean? Homo Sapiens have been on this planet less than 2Ma and civilization can be traced back to less than 8k-10k years. On an evolutionary scale that is iniscule.
We constantly change the climate around us 24/7 what with air conditioners and space heaters all over the world. This seems to be doing the same at a very large scale.

Every species, no matter how tiny has a profound effect on the atmosphere around it, this will in turn change things for better/worse, the success of a species depends on how fast it's able to adapt to the change, perhaps even make it work to it's advantage. For a species to successfully adapt, the change has to be very gradual.

Survival is the most basic instinct in any creature, we're just trying to survive by doing what we do best: change the conditions around us instead of evolving to adapt to them, perhaps that's our way of evolving.

I agree though we shouldn't try to change it on such a large scale, nature comes back to bite us in the ass every time we fiddle with it but it doesn't mean was give in to our fate and die out without trying. :)

I seriously doubt if we can destroy the Earth, I doubt if we can even wipe out all life on it. Destroy our own species, destroy a large majority of lifeforms : absolutely.
All these experiments are desperate attempts to keep our own species going for a few more millenia.

To paraphrase the late George Carlin: The Earth doesn't give a shit! :)

How does globalization work against evolution? If anything it brings radically diverse genes closer, more variations, fitter offspring.

is that like a universal 404 error?

... are my best friends

True, the PS3 has the potential to be the next-gen console already.. ubisoft should focus on something better than a 3-hour Prince of Persia with an extremely annoying protagonist.

How about two giant aerodynamic scarecrows on each wing?