The funny part about this is that, before the release of Top Gun and the Pepsi ad which played at the beginning and "sponsored" the videoptape, new releases on VHS and Beta were pushing $90 in 1985 money. And that was so you could watch it on a 25-32" CRT. Amazing how things change...
While your math adds up, I still can't get past the logic. Is the movie somehow worse if it's viewed two months later? $2
Worse, no, but it's also not topical. Part of the experience of seeing a movie when it premieres is being part of the buzz surrounding the discussion of the film. Humans are a social animal (realizing this is slashdot, I feel this must be pointed out), and sharing experiences - such as books or entertainment - is part of the enjoyment of the entertainment.
So, no, the movie is no worse, but the overall experience is diminished. For a second weekend showing, I'd be in for $30, maybe even $50, for a blockbuster. For a third to fifth weekend - most of the social shine is off of it so, no. Granted, I have a 125" screen and a nice sound system so I lose very little watching movies at home but it's still fun to go "out" with the family to see something brand new.
Yup, one month a year I have to turn off my cableTV and pay rack rate so that I qualify for another year of service. Seems like a pretty stupid game, but it's all I've got.
Yup, they've got my town's balls in a vice. Sure, there's NTC (exclusive to some apartments, those poor schmucks) and Verizon (if 7Mb/768k is your idea of high speed internet), but otherwise it's Comcast or nothing. So it's $90 for 75Mb service, and $89 for 75Mb service plus basic cable. Add $10 to kick in ESPN and the other mid-tier channels that DTV charges $35 for and Sling charges $20. When they own the last mile, you're going to pay.
But then you've just wasted 4 hours of your day and prevented your neighbor, Joe, from getting commission so you've wasted his 4 hours too. To John Deere, there's no loss - you weren't going to buy that tractor to begin with. The dealership lost $30 in Joe's time and incremental costs (copying and such) since they pretty much just pay him on commission and the office would have been open anyway. Nobody cares except you, who now don't have the new tractor you need, and Joe, who just lost 1/10 of his weekly pay because of your hijinks and whom you are going to have to look in the face at Church on Sunday, along with his wife and three kids.
But you didn't buy it, you licensed it. It looks like you bought it, but the agreement you signed only means you own the scrap value of the base metals in the item - not any control or influence on the software that's inside it that allows it to run.
It's how everything is "sold" now. You can buy the scrap, but to operate it you have to agree to a (very limited) license on the 1s and 0s that make it useful.
But I thought government regulation was bad. Or was that on the previous
WTF is with Apple's fear of the number 3?
The iPad 3 was not the 3 - it was the New iPad
Now the iPad Air 3 is a New iPad, but is neither the Air nor the 3.
Is this what you get when you have marketers sit around a table and you ask them to brand your new device revision and you just get blank stares back?
Yeah but they are choosing a far worse projection. That is the issue please don't tell me you're friends with sonic
The Gall-Peters may not be the best choice, and Peters's own campaigning may have been annoying at the time, but it absolutely isn't worse than a Mercator, which is a really, really poor choice.
What about sonic???
You can preserve angles. Technically this is called a conformal projection, with the Mercator Projection being the best known example, though to depict the poles usually stereographic projection is used. Besides chartering the right course, the advantage is that outlines and shapes (at least locally) looks right.
You can instead opt to preserve area (instead of angles). But it is a mathematical fact that you cannot do both.
Correct, but as in a Mercator the shapes only locally look right, it is a poor choice for a world map when we are interested in political and geographical aspects.
If you are teaching children stuff about geography and you are using a single projection, you are either a bad teacher or you have an agenda.
You should use globe for accuracy or multiple projections depending on what you need to be accurate at the time.
This is not about the teaching about projections, but about replacing the one map that hangs on the classroom wall. And from TFA: "Teachers put contrasting maps of the world side by side and let the students study them."
Maybe educate yourself before ranting about imaginary things
Did you know that for the price of a 280-Z you can buy two Z-80's? -- P.J. Plauger