Cerebral Stasis

I'm not worried about being spied on. I make sure that all my private acts are disgusting enough that either whoever would be watching would be quick to turn off the camera, or the camera itself would blow out.Here in the US, something such as that would be a major invasion of privacy. One could find themselves filthy rich via a lawsuit if they discovered a camera in their house.

I've always considered right to be the opposite of left.But then that's just me.I'd agree with KuBi's diagnosis; if it helps someone else, it's good, if it hurts them, it's bad.

You could always try eBay or Amazon... Those are most likely the best places for you to get an inexpensive, yet quality, piece of hardware (outside of the US).

It's strange, but why is it that mp3 players are the only things that can get girls to say "Wow... It's so small. I want it!"? Usually it's the size that counts. Okay, crude, I know, but I just couldn't resist. True, the iPod video screen would be very small, but if it was "too small to watch videos", I'm sure noone would buy it.

I think they're both excellent (great style on the first, especially), but the second seems a bit empty, although that may just be me.Very nice overall. Keep it up.

I think it all fits pretty well together, although it seems a little odd that the text is so much clearer than the render. They usually have about the same sharpness. I'm not saying that it makes your signature any less good, but it's an unusual change.Overall, I think it fits together pretty well.

I'd say get whichever has the most space/best interface/highest functionality. If they're pretty much all the same, then I'd probably say you should go for the smallest, simply for portability reasons.

I'd say the PSP outweighs the Nintendo DS, simply due to the fact that it has more uses/higher functionality than the DS. In short, it can do more. I'd say they're still both almost on par with eachother, though.As for the next gen console wars, the PS 3 and the Xbox 360 are pretty much neck-to-neck as far as can be told for the moment, although the Xbox has a obvious advantage since it has been released first. The Nintendo Revolution is definately the weakest of the trio, but would be a necessary evil if one is a hardcore fan of the Nintendo game franchise.

You must remember that things must be efficient and worthwhile to be built. For example, that army vehicle gets a stealth advantage from it's ability to roll on the ocean floor, but having a car underwater would just mean extra fuel would be needed (since water has more resistance than air) and for normal travel, an airplane or boat would be much cheaper/more fuel-efficient. Furthermore, the ocean floor is very soft, and with the added weight of the ocean itself pushing down, it would be very easy for something as heavy as a vehicle to be sucked below the ocean floor and never come up again. Even if there were underwater cities, there would be much more efficient ways of travelling than via "underwater cars."

If you look closely, above the progress bar, there are the numbers "6/14", which would mean that they are currently playing track 6 out of 14. I must agree; it certainly looks amazing. I've never heard of transparent screens like that. It certainly makes for an overall "interfaced" and "connected" look. To answer a question; the buttons aren't part of the screen. They're real buttons (you can tell because they cast a shadow). I'm not absolutely sure what the advantages of the iPod vs this things is, but as is mentioned, it has a better battery life than the iPod and it can be used to transfer/hold files as well as music, so I'd say that is a definate advantage over an iPod, not to mention it comes in various colors. However, I wouldn't trade an iPod video for an mp3 player that didn't support video, regardless of how sleek-looking it may be.

It is probably a compatibility issue; old drivers and the like, or possibly one of the multimedia cards in his computer is incompatible with the game. I would recommend that he update all his drivers, and if that doesn't work, then he should just sit around and wait for the first patch, which will probably solve his issue.The only other thing that I can think of off-hand would be if he has a taxing program running in the background, or if his computer doesn't have very much RAM.

Strange that he would say that to you when it was he who was nearly hit. By the way, here is an article concerning the more scientific elements of exploding one's CDs due to high speeds. This is probably the reason that CD drives aren't made to go above a certain speed (usually around 52X; I haven't heard of a CD drive that can go faster thus far).

Lol! And while we're at it, let's break into some secret laboratory and steal plans for a prototype speaking toilet! I just can't wait any longer! Seriously; I don't claim to be mod, but let's try to limit the "OMG that's so kewl lolz i want that now lolz cant wait even tho i dont have any choice lolz" posts. It gets rather annoying.

What ever gave you that idea? Could it have been the 5+ people before you that said just that? Anyway, there are some reviews here. From what I can see, it does optimise one's internet if using dialup, but if one is on broadband, it apparently doesn't help any (and may even have negative effects).

Yeah, but with realism comes a higher price tag. With the time required to render scenes and hire the services of this quality and magnitude, the average cost of a video will either go up, or the production companies will cut back in other areas, such as directing, scripting, and acting.As is the case with many movies these days (*cough* War of the Worlds *cough*), effects alone doesn't make for a good movie. It's just like a website; pretty graphics do not trump content.

This brings a whole meaning to the concept of a game being "packed full of explosive gameplay in conjunction with mind-blowing graphics."I've never had a problem with any of my CDs flying apart inside of my CD drive, but one time the drive sucked a CD up into the area behind the CD platform. The computer was a Gateway, so I sent in the CD drive to have it replaced and they did so, not to mention they sent the lost CD back in a baggie. Thankfully, scratched up as it may have been, it still worked. How could I live without SimAnt?

If I ever find myself in a Spanish-speaking country, I'll be sure to watch my accent and syllable emphasis when I ask to meet someone's mother.

The difference is the One Ring-like Elvish text on either side of the render. On first one, it's all across the background, but is hard to read, while on the second one, the text is only at the far left and right edges, and it's much clearer. Excellent job, Mareck; they both look very well-blended and there isn't any parts of them that feel too empty or lacking in color.

I agree with Mav3rick for most of those programs, except, for registry cleaning, I usually use Registry Mechanic. As with Registry Fix, it's not free, but it works very well.

Although it may be stunningly realistic (for the most part), what amazes me more than the realism itself (after all, it's just a bunch of equasions in graphical form) is the amount of time it must have taken to render a scene with such detail.

Jet engines don't push off of the ground; jets take off on runways, and the fuel propels them forward; it has nothing to do with what is behind the jet, be it air, solid, or water (how do spacecraft move in the vaccum of space if there must be something solid behind the explosion?). Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Regardless of how this video may look, it seems as though it very well could be possible. If it was just a video of a submarine combined with a video of a jet, why is it that the jet stands still as it is gaining thrust after it comes out of the water? The fire is building behind it, which shows that it didn't move very much for those few seconds, which would support the idea, since it would take a little while for enough thrust to be created for the plane to be able to overcome gravity. A jet in the air doesn't have an exhause buildup like that.I'd say it could be real.

Sure, it may seem that way, but it's not. This is just a personal fantasy that Moller has been chasing for over fourty years. The reason no large vehicle companies have been working on the concept of flying cars is because they can see it wouldn't be profitable; flying cars would be too expensive/inefficient to bother wasting money on; businesses only put money in what appears to be profitable, and when the costs outweigh the expenses, it's obviously not profitable. To answer your speculation, the concept of flying cars has apparently been tried by different manufacturing companies for many years. I guess they've just finally realised that it just won't work without some leap in technology that would allow them to have the kind of power that a flying car would need in order to be able to get off the ground and stay in the air for enough time to make the car actually useful for long journeys. As I've said, commercial airline flights are just much more efficient at the present time. Notice from jlhaslip: Last two paragraphs added as per report. If this is in the wrong post, please report again.

The same could be said for a contact, a battery, or any other small thing. That's why one must make sure that it doesn't fall out.Assuming it did, of course, one would feel/hear that it was no longer in their ear, and would then stop and look around the general area where they were currently standing/sitting/lying. Chances are they would be able to find it.

It doesn't say. It appears that it has a pre-programmed image that is displayed, since there don't seem to be any wires or means of connecting the screen to a computer or device of any kind.By the way, you're out of luck; this won't be around by Christmas (it may not even be around by next Christmas).

The car is by Moller International, which is alleged a branch of the Moller Corperation. It is not part of any major vehicle corporation; it was, instead, created by Paul S. Moller, a university professor and inventor. The vehicle itself is called the Sky Car. The website claims that they are making test flights within Davis, California over a "specially constructed lake" that is part of Milk Farm Development. Popular Science did an article about the Sky Car, although they weren't exactly optimistic about the it. They claimed it was inefficient and probably won't ever be manufactured. Whether or not they were right has yet to be seen, although research shows that the facts don't look promising. There was a fraud lawsuit filed; Securities and Exchange Commission v. Moller International, Inc. Apparently, Moller sold millions of dollars worth of unregistered stock from his company. In the Statement of Facts, it mentions that the information given concerning the Sky Car is misleading. In fact, it is a prototype in it's very early stages, and there is no proof that it can do what Moller claims it can do. Paul Moller has apparently been trying to create a working flying car for over fourty years, but has thus far had no meaningful success.. I'd recommend that one shouldn't put too much stock in this project (if any at all). It looks like Moller won't deliver.