dvds deserve to die?

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Aharami
i agree with the nuclear weapons and coal based power. Im sure we can find better alternatives to coal. its just that these money hungry companies that want to stay alive doing what they have been doing and not willing to change that keeps old technologies like coal alive. i do agree with the internal-combustion engine to an extent. yes hydrogen cell is cleaner and yes they are cheap (fuel)....but they need to find better ways of storing the hydrogen. usually hydrogen cars have this huge tank that goes in the trunk, taking up all the luggage space. if they can find to store the H-fuel more compactly, then kudos. but i imagine the price tags on those safe cars are going to be quite hefty.

dont agree with prisons or manned spaceflight.

Coal is being used because the only currently viable alternative, nuclear power, has been hamstrung by the enviro-nuts and chicken littles.

 

[Nitemare]

It's easy to bypass spam on dvd with a computer. Right mouse click and go to root or title menu. Just pipe the output to your TV problem solved

 

[emb09]

it makes some sense, if you do not take care of your dvd collection.

 

[RU482]

talking about fuel cells...if you think the fuel (in a uasable form) is going to be cheap...well, the distribution companies have a big surprise for you

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Is that guy a hippie or something?

 

[Joker81]

And not to mention that with dvds and the commercials you can still use the fast forward button(not the skip chapter button sometimes tho) to go through the commercials just as fast as the tapes if not faster.

 

[Electric Amish]

Everything listed there had a time and purpose which it filled nicely. It's called evolution. You can't invent the perfect technology the first time around.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: BigJelly

Its ever other country that uses mines that doesn't give two sh!ts and a fuc# about collateral damage--but the US does.

Which were all supplied by the US or UK.

And on the collaterall damage front, lets just say CLUSTER BOMBS IN CIVILIAN AREAS, ok?

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

digital data don't degrade with reproduction.

Nice english, but who cares if it won't degrade, if indeed DVDs are as frail as the person claims? Most people don't handle discs properly (leaving face up, holding all over the disc, etc.), but of the hundreds I've rented only 5-10 have needed me to clean them during the movie, and only 1-2 have been unusable. DVDs are quite robust, and more than adequately robust if people would not mishandle them.

Most loathsome of all is the fiendish spam hard-burned into DVDs, which forces one to suffer through the commercials gratefully evaded by videotape fast-forwards.

That is VERY annoying. However, I find it only on warnings. Iv'e never had to sit through a commercial. Maybe I can't go to next chapter, but fast forward always works on them.

The commercials seem to differ in every dvd. Sometimes it seems to be just a movie preview or two, which I don't mind. Then, I think I've even seen some name brand commercials. If I try to change chapters or FF, my dvd player spits out "disc is used by another operation." 😕

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Everything listed there had a time and purpose which it filled nicely. It's called evolution. You can't invent the perfect technology the first time around.

good point, though I don't think this article was meant to be so serious as some of you make it out to be.

 

[Ness]

I find it stupid that DVDs are on any list with nuclear weapons.

DVDs should be on the list of things that "need improvement" for the reasons he gave. There is NO good reason to get rid of them, especially seeing as they cost less or the same as audio CDs.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: BigJelly

Its ever other country that uses mines that doesn't give two sh!ts and a fuc# about collateral damage--but the US does.

Which were all supplied by the US or UK.

And on the collaterall damage front, lets just say CLUSTER BOMBS IN CIVILIAN AREAS, ok?

Or the USSR.

When has the US used cluster bombs in chiefly civilian areas?