MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:24:19 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 17:07:06 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

Sure you did......


I was at GI when DVD was conceived, when cable modems were conceived
by GI and Motorola, and when HDTV broadcast standards were created.
That was from '94 through '96 and the HDTV guru was Woo Paik, who
now leads LG.

Doing what exactly?

As if you could understand.

You're the biggest asshole name dropper I've ever seen
on USENET.

Really...

Sun, GI, LL Labs, Nasa blah blah blah YES REALLY!!!!


You worked everywhere and did everything, yeah right.

Did I say that? Ever?


Pretty much the way you make it sound.

Ant time
anything comes up, you only have some superficial knowledge of it or
you write something that is so far outside your normal language
skills that it sounds like a cut-and-paste job to me.

Just because I call retards like you by the names you deserve,
doesn't mean that I cannot write eloquently when I need to or am
employed to do so.

I'm talking about your technical contributions, not your name calling.

I bet you're nothing but a line tech
that takes some voltage measurements and tweaks pots.

Sounds like projection to me.


Sounds like the picture you've painted for us.

Your **** attitude
likely gets you fired time and again, and that's why you've worked
everywhere.

More projection. I never said anything about "working everywhere".

When I was a kid, I worked in manual jobs, many of which were
semi-skilled. Now, I work in electronics, and have had a few jobs.All
of which were skilled.

The stainless steel polishing, and engine building was during that
time, as well as a stint repairing pinball, and upright video games
(pre-Knoxville worlds fair)and delivering them, jukeboxes, pool table,
etc. The engine building was for a very low wage, and I took a better
job.

I have worked in IR thermometry, and in Television (satellite uplink
encoders), and in HV (the LLNL, LANL, NOAA, etc stuff.). Now, I work
in satellite again. The IR job ended because members of my family were
murdered, and I went back to Cincinnati to be with my family, and WAS
going to drop out of a hospital ceiling onto the ******* that did and
kill him before the door guard cop could stop me. My family stopped me
from doing that. The GI job was temporary, only lasting two years,
and we knew that when we were hired. The HV job, despite surviving
911, still had troubles, and there were lay-offs. My current employer
was glad to hire me as I get the job done!

You've done everything because you keep getting shuffled around
like so much dead weight.

I haven't moved around much. I had a work associate previously
whose husband took a different job every two years, no matter what.
Because he liked it that way.

I know your type all too well.

You don't know a goddamned thing, yet you keep calling me a liar,

Well if the shoe fits......

despite the fact that you have done nothing but lie every time you
said it. Your ****ing "know your type" claim is even a ****ing lie,
since not only do you not know my type, but you don't know me at all,
dip****.

Every company has one. Believe me, I know your type.

So **** you again, little boy. You know ****ing NOTHING! You are a
gov tit sucking twit.

WTF are you talking about. gov tit sucking twit? Living in FL? Do
you even know one adversary from another any more?

So, you finally admit that you have been being an adversary toward
me. Funny, my perspective hasn't changed much, since I already knew
that about you.


Your adversarys, can't you comprehend. Knew what about me?

Maybe you should make
yourself a score card or something so you can keep track of all the
people fight with.

Maybe you should stop calling your betters liars.

My betters? Now that is funny.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:04:48 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

Boasting about other peoples accomplishments, and name dropping again, I'm
real impressed.

No. You're a real retard.

You didn't design anything yourself now did you?

You'll never know.

You keep
that name dropping garbage up and you'll end up getting fired again for not
being discrete.

I have never been fired, you retarded ****tard.

I'm sure that Sun and your employer would be ****ed to see
what you're doing to there reputation.

Sun is doing fine, and will continue to do so.

Me talking about their 10Gb/s links does nothing to their rep. If
anything, it boosts it.

Keep trying, dumbass.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:07:30 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

Is that supposed to be proof that I'm wrong? I have a fairly good
understanding of what my rights are when it comes to music/movies that I've
purchased. I also know what was legal with a VCR should also be legal with
a DVR, and it still is, the problem is that the DVR wants to add it's own
set of restrictions that have nothing to do with LAW.

Oh, but they have EVERYTHING to do with copyright law.

Can you really be that stupid?

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:15:15 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

OTOH, why shouldn't I be able to rip my HD DVD to my MythTV box and play
them back as HD? Huh why not? It's only fair use. You just don't get it.

Nope. Fair use was about broadcast signals. You lose.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:45:58 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

My gear has gone up on several weather balloons (NOAA), and looks
at

Your gear?


When you make only three of something (HV supplies, and they beat the
**** out of two of them, and send the third one up in the balloon, and
it is NOT an off the shelf item, it gets VERY personal. So yes, MY
gear. MY HAND ASSEMBLED, BENCH TESTED AND CHARACTERIZED BY ME,
CERTIFIED COMPLIANT BY ME. HV supplies. Custom orders are like that,
as was the half rack 50kV, 250W supply we made for one of the two
national labs I mentioned.

Hell, even the normal production run groups we made for SAIC to go
into the Geiger counters that are used on Nuke subs and ships were
VERY personal devices.

ALL of my **** works top notch. Highest specs in the entire
industry. 0.000006% ripple on an X-ray supply used for looking at
buried gas pipes in city streets, and new production pipes in the
factories where they get made. The better the DC, the better the X-ray
flux, the better the contrast ratio.

Oh I bet it is top notch.


You, on the other hand, have a system rampant with viruses, and a
****y little boy attitude that nobody else in the world could possibly
have escaped such attacks. When in fact, most companies do NOT have
problems with viruses.

I don't have viruses, my customers get them. I don't work for a company,
but I have one as a customer. Guess what, they don't really have problems
with viruses either. It's people like you that do.

Grow the **** up.

I have done what I have done, and all your "liar liar" baby bull****
cannot change that fact.

Same here dumb ass. I've done just as much as you if not more. I even got
an MSM and CM when I was in the service, what about you? ;-)

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:49:37 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 15:09:47 -0700, "Joel Kolstad"
Gave us:


In general I think you're 100% correct that there's been
significant pressure from the RIAA/MPAA/etc. applied to the
well-known manufacturers such as ATI, Happaugge, etc. to *not*
released non-DRM encumbered capture products.


Wrong. It was LAW and the standard from the get go.


Wrong, AFAIK the law never prohibited making HD capture cards with
analog inputs. Unless you could back up your claims.

****ing retards, all of you that don't know about modern Hi Def.

Making some more friends are you?

Read up, little boy. I know you hate wiki, but they know more than
you ever will.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

I know what HDMI is idiot, I use it to connect my stuff. Where does it say
anything about the LAW requiring it? You'd do better to post a link to HDCP
instead of some stupid electrical interface description.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:56:13 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 17:51:19 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

e's not wrong. You have to mount the filesystem with special
arguments to write to it.

No, you don't. ALL drives come up read only on Knoppix Live, and
always will.

You have to make them R/W and it can be done via menu with a few
mouse clicks.

You are so ****ing thick!

You don't even understand what is going on behind the scenes. You
just know how to use a GUI, how lame. Stick with windos, it's what
you deserve.


It does NOT matter that it MAY or MAY NOT perform a command line
operation in the background.

The fact is that it is NOT how you say it is.

You don't deserve ANY OS, with the stupid **** you spew.

It's exactly how it is, whether you understand it or not is irrelevant.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:31:32 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:


Well if the shoe fits......


The shoe could fit up your ass. It would be better, however, if it
were a baseball bat.
Problem is, you'd probably like that.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:01:38 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

Knoppix, it's gui or anything you "click on" have little to do with
the NTFS kernel driver. Try actually installing Linux and working
with it from the command line (for 12 years) and then tell me how
much you know about it.


I have been running linux, BeOS, and DOS, as well as variants of
Windows, and other OSes for years.

Linux, in particular, since '96. I know more about it than you think,
but you spew "liar" every time someone challenges you like a little
two year old.

What Linux were you running in 96? Did you get X running manually? Ever
create your own MODELINE? Ever modify a Sendmail config file? Ever hack a
driver? Didn't think so.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:41:30 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

You'd do better to post a link to HDCP
instead of some stupid electrical interface description.

If you would actually have examined the page, it was there, you
retarded twit.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:01:38 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

I'm a programmer that became and admin out of interest. I now am a
PC tech because it's easy and the pay is good. I'm self employed
and I have tons of free time (too much it seems since I'm burning it
up with you). The real problem is lame-brains like yourself that
think that because they can boot a live-cd they're a pc expert.

No, idiot. I used to install Linux. Now, booting from a LiveCD
ensures that I have the latest auto-detect routines, and likely the
latest drivers available and the greatest ease of service. You do
know what ease of service is, right?

I fix allot of stuff that people like yourself
fixed first. I charge extra for that.

Sure, bub. I don't **** up systems, I fix them.

You're a ****ing dweeb that can't even keep viruses from running
rampant through your company networks, and I am supposed to believe
you fix other people's **** ups? You ARE the **** up, in my view.

Look dude, you're so dense you can't even get it thru your head that I don't
work at a company. IOW, I don't make rules, I just fix things. You just
make up crazy crap and keep spewing like a busted hose.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:42:08 -0400, Nappy Headed Ho
Gave us:


I've had mucho experience with Thomas Conrad stuff. Ran Novell 3.xx and
4.xx servers binding ARC, TCNS, and 802.3 together in some cases. Even
going back further had some dealing with Banyon Vines. Why do you even
bother with the Prongboi? He's a googler, nothing more.

I installed a 40 node TCNS network under DesqViewX machines and a
Novell Netware server back in '93 in Denver. The cards were like $120
each, and it required about 4 hubs IIRC (we wanted expansion
capacity). Not cheap gear, but damn fast. Faster than the machines
or the server. The 486 was just emerging. The only thing faster at
that time was FDDI, but far more expensive. The TCNS was at 100Mb/s
then.

MeatTurd... **** off.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:04:48 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

Boasting about other peoples accomplishments, and name dropping
again, I'm real impressed.

No. You're a real retard.

You didn't design anything yourself now did you?

You'll never know.


Oh, I think we already know what we need to.

You keep
that name dropping garbage up and you'll end up getting fired again
for not being discrete.

I have never been fired, you retarded ****tard.

I'm sure that Sun and your employer would be ****ed to see
what you're doing to there reputation.

Sun is doing fine, and will continue to do so.

Me talking about their 10Gb/s links does nothing to their rep. If
anything, it boosts it.

Keep trying, dumbass.

LMAO, that's the funniest thing you ever wrote. You talking about Sun is
"helping their rep". bwawhahhahhah

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:07:30 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

Is that supposed to be proof that I'm wrong? I have a fairly good
understanding of what my rights are when it comes to music/movies
that I've purchased. I also know what was legal with a VCR should
also be legal with a DVR, and it still is, the problem is that the
DVR wants to add it's own set of restrictions that have nothing to
do with LAW.

Oh, but they have EVERYTHING to do with copyright law.

Can you really be that stupid?

That's it, no more. I'm really done now. You can't even follow the train
of thought. You're insane. Copyright law is not the issue on this, it's
the harware implementation that isn't following the law. I'm not saying
that they are violating the law exactly, but they are making sure that you
can't make full use of the law. See ya chump.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:45:30 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:01:38 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

Knoppix, it's gui or anything you "click on" have little to do with
the NTFS kernel driver. Try actually installing Linux and working
with it from the command line (for 12 years) and then tell me how
much you know about it.


I have been running linux, BeOS, and DOS, as well as variants of
Windows, and other OSes for years.

Linux, in particular, since '96. I know more about it than you think,
but you spew "liar" every time someone challenges you like a little
two year old.

What Linux were you running in 96?

Red Hat

Did you get X running manually?

Easily.

Ever
create your own MODELINE?

For both RedHat as well as BeOS.

Ever modify a Sendmail config file?

I didn't use it for email at that time.

Ever hack a
driver?

My **** worked. I didn't need to hack anything.

Didn't think so.

Do you always answer your own questions, you retarded twit?

Fact is, you just plain don't think at all.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:15:15 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

OTOH, why shouldn't I be able to rip my HD DVD to my MythTV box and
play them back as HD? Huh why not? It's only fair use. You just
don't get it.

Nope. Fair use was about broadcast signals. You lose.

Fair use is about anything you stupid mother****er. It's a basic part of
copyright law, not some technical aspect of broadcasting.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:53:03 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

See ya chump.


Run away, pussy!

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:31:32 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:


Well if the shoe fits......


The shoe could fit up your ass. It would be better, however, if it
were a baseball bat.
Problem is, you'd probably like that.

I think we'll see what your ISP thinks of that one. I feel threatened by
it.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:54:03 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:15:15 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

OTOH, why shouldn't I be able to rip my HD DVD to my MythTV box and
play them back as HD? Huh why not? It's only fair use. You just
don't get it.

Nope. Fair use was about broadcast signals. You lose.

Fair use is about anything you stupid mother****er. It's a basic part of
copyright law, not some technical aspect of broadcasting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Pay attention to the "common misunderstandings" section.

Nappy Headed Ho wrote:

I've had mucho experience with Thomas Conrad stuff. Ran Novell 3.xx
and
4.xx servers binding ARC, TCNS, and 802.3 together in some cases. Even
going back further had some dealing with Banyon Vines. Why do you even
bother with the Prongboi? He's a googler, nothing more.

I know it. I just have this thing about righting wrongs and sticking up for
the underdog. I'm done now I think.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:54:03 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:15:15 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

OTOH, why shouldn't I be able to rip my HD DVD to my MythTV box and
play them back as HD? Huh why not? It's only fair use. You just
don't get it.

Nope. Fair use was about broadcast signals. You lose.

Fair use is about anything you stupid mother****er. It's a basic part of
copyright law, not some technical aspect of broadcasting.



Try this one to see where it applies to your current viewpoint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital..._Copyright_Act

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:56:16 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:31:32 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:


Well if the shoe fits......


The shoe could fit up your ass. It would be better, however, if it
were a baseball bat.
Problem is, you'd probably like that.

I think we'll see what your ISP thinks of that one. I feel threatened by
it.

You gonna cry, baby?

Why? Do you have such an already reamed asshole as to think a shoe
or a baseball bat would fit there?

Also, where do you see that it would be me implementing such an act?

Careful where you stumble in life, chucko. You might fall and hurt
yourself.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:41:30 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

You'd do better to post a link to HDCP
instead of some stupid electrical interface description.

If you would actually have examined the page, it was there, you
retarded twit.

I concede I must be dense, but the words legal and law don't appear anywhere
on the page. There are no references to anything regarding law, only that
this is all a concoction of the typical big tech players and hollywood/riaa
moguls. Nothing says that it's the law.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:04:37 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:41:30 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

You'd do better to post a link to HDCP
instead of some stupid electrical interface description.

If you would actually have examined the page, it was there, you
retarded twit.

I concede I must be dense, but the words legal and law don't appear anywhere
on the page. There are no references to anything regarding law, only that
this is all a concoction of the typical big tech players and hollywood/riaa
moguls. Nothing says that it's the law.

Typical WikiTard, you are.

You glance for three seconds, then run off spouting some lame remark
about how unreliable wiki is.

If you had any brains at all, you would know that the best part
about any wiki page is at the bottom of the page where the references
are given. The page itself is a basic compilation and summarization of
many of those more in depth references.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 21:56:47 -0400, Nappy Headed Ho
Gave us:

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 17:50:26 -0700, MassiveProng wrote:

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 20:42:08 -0400, Nappy Headed Ho
Gave us:


I've had mucho experience with Thomas Conrad stuff. Ran Novell 3.xx and
4.xx servers binding ARC, TCNS, and 802.3 together in some cases. Even
going back further had some dealing with Banyon Vines. Why do you even
bother with the Prongboi? He's a googler, nothing more.

I installed a 40 node TCNS network under DesqViewX machines and a
Novell Netware server back in '93 in Denver. The cards were like $120
each, and it required about 4 hubs IIRC (we wanted expansion
capacity). Not cheap gear, but damn fast. Faster than the machines
or the server. The 486 was just emerging. The only thing faster at
that time was FDDI, but far more expensive. The TCNS was at 100Mb/s
then.

TCNS was always at 100 you ****ing gimp.

So what, dip****? I only worked with it once, ****tard.

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:54:03 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 19:15:15 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

OTOH, why shouldn't I be able to rip my HD DVD to my MythTV box and
play them back as HD? Huh why not? It's only fair use. You just
don't get it.

Nope. Fair use was about broadcast signals. You lose.

Fair use is about anything you stupid mother****er. It's a basic
part of copyright law, not some technical aspect of broadcasting.



Try this one to see where it applies to your current viewpoint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital..._Copyright_Act

You just don't get it. I'm going to explain this once, so please try to
read it thoroughly. The DMCA is the result of a concerted effort by big
business lobbying to make it a federal offense for you to try and make "fair
use" of a "protected" piece of media. Not protected as in covered by
copyrights specifically, but protected as in encrypted. If you break the
encryption, you break the law. It takes the "fair use" issue right out of
the picture. It's actually pretty clever on their part IMO, getting the
federal gov to prop up their buggy whip business like that. Unfortunately
for them though, as pieces of it are tested in court, things aren't going so
well. Lexmark tried to use this BS against a company making knock-off
printer cartridges. It didn't fly, they lost in court. Seems that it was
"fair" to break their measly protection (no real protection at all, but that
isn't really the issue) in order to manufacture a compatible product. Real
patent/copyright law won out. Hopefully more of the same will occur.

HDMI and HDCP aren't required by law, they are required by the RIAA and
MPAA. The DMCA law requires that you don't try and break whatever sort of
cheezy protection scheme they implement, even if it's as simple as ignoring
a single bit flag in a broadcast stream. You see, ignoring the broadcast
flag makes it illegal to record the show, it's not a real copyright law
violation per se. There's a fine line of distinction here, please try to
understand it.

Copying a DVD to a hard disk is completely legal under all constitutionaly
proven copyright law, using DECSS to unlock it is not under DMCA. So the
only point I've been trying to make all along is that real copyright laws
won't decide what you can do or not do, hollywood will on a whim by chosing
whether to "lock" something or not. I'm betting that everything gets
locked.

If you don't think money will buy the RIAA whatever they want, think back at
the congressmen (as in plural) that tried to introduce legislation making it
legal for the RIAA to actively attack filesharing computers that they
"believed" were serving up copyrighted material without any proof whatsoever
and in complete conflict with all current legislation regarding hacking.

I don't want to steal anything, I just want to use what is rightfully mine
to use the way I see fit.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 21:26:09 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

You just don't get it. I'm going to explain this once, so please try to
read it thoroughly.


No thanks retard. Nothing you say carries any credence and is not
worth cluttering my brain with.

You're just another Crappy Headed Ho, that thinks she has the right
to copy whatever she wants.

You are WRONG, little girl.

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 21:26:09 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:

I don't want to steal anything, I just want to use what is rightfully mine
to use the way I see fit.

Then you can put your hand back in your pants any time. That's ALL
you have a right to do, jack-off boy.

Just don't think you get to copy anything you happen to have in your
possession. That's not how the COPYRIGHT works. You ONLY have a
license to VIEW the disc's contents. You own a COPY of it, and you DO
NOT have a right to ****ing rip that stream off the disc and do what
you want with it.

GET A ****ING CLUE, BOY! You no good, Crappy Headed HO!

"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...
Tim Williams wrote:

Five in a row? Forget to take your ****off medicine today numnuts?

It's like a measuring stick of how ****ed you get him. My personal record
with him is six IIRC.

The remarkable thing is, of the 100 posts that appeared in this thread in
the last few hours, and by the looks of it, about 50 of them are
MassiveWrong and the other 50 are yours.

My killfile sense is tingling, I'm afraid to say.

Tim

--
"Librarians are hiding something." - Steven Colbert
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

Tim Williams wrote:
"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...
Tim Williams wrote:

Five in a row? Forget to take your ****off medicine today numnuts?

It's like a measuring stick of how ****ed you get him. My personal
record with him is six IIRC.

The remarkable thing is, of the 100 posts that appeared in this
thread in the last few hours, and by the looks of it, about 50 of
them are MassiveWrong and the other 50 are yours.

My killfile sense is tingling, I'm afraid to say.

Yeah, well I suppose I can understand. I admit that I tend to get a little
OC with things sometimes. Sometimes it's a useful characteristic, sometimes
not. And I guess I've been acting a bit rabid here what with the adult
language and all. ;-) He ****ed me off, what can I say? Killfile me if you
must, but I think you know that I don't often make a practice of ****ing
contests. It happens, just not often. :-)

On 2007-04-14, Joel Kolstad wrote:

A place I used to work at had a copy machine that displayed the current time
and date on its LCD. It was updated every second, and for some bizarre
reason that update seem to take up about a quarter-second... during which
time key presses (e.g., for setting the number of copies or paper size or
whatever) were ignored! @#$@%#*$

We learned to just hold down each button until it was recognized, but I
could never understand how something with such a poor user interface was
allowed to leave the factory.

I wonder how it was allower to enter production.

one possible scenario is that they replaced the LCD with a cheaper one at
some stage (after the design was complete) and the cheap one isn't exaclty
compatible with the firmware but is close-enough that it sort-of works.


--

Bye.
Jasen

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 22:39:49 -0500, "Tim Williams"
Gave us:

"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...
Tim Williams wrote:

Five in a row? Forget to take your ****off medicine today numnuts?

It's like a measuring stick of how ****ed you get him. My personal record
with him is six IIRC.

The remarkable thing is, of the 100 posts that appeared in this thread in
the last few hours, and by the looks of it, about 50 of them are
MassiveWrong and the other 50 are yours.

My killfile sense is tingling, I'm afraid to say.


But your bent retardation is showing much much more.

Your dopey ****tard picture tells the whole story though.

On 15 Apr 2007 04:14:45 GMT, jasen Gave us:

I wonder how it was allower to enter production.

one possible scenario is that they replaced the LCD with a cheaper one at
some stage (after the design was complete) and the cheap one isn't exaclty
compatible with the firmware but is close-enough that it sort-of works.


Your guesses are pretty ****ing retarded. It has nothing to do with
the display, and EVERYTHING to do with the program that was created
for the machine's operation.

"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the link. Unless I missed something, it won't capture HD
quality signals.

I think you're correct there.

AFAIK, there are no (and never will be) any HD capture cards that have
analog inputs.

I want to believe it's just a matter of time, but you might be right. :-(

MP seems to have trouble understanding my point here.

He's part of the problem -- he's using reasoning typical of, e.g., the
anti-gun lobby: People *do* break the law with certain devices (guns/HD
video capture cards/etc.), therefore *the devices themselves* should be made
unavailable, even though such devices have plenty of legitimate uses.

Joel Kolstad wrote:
"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the link. Unless I missed something, it won't capture HD
quality signals.

I think you're correct there.

It will accept SD signals, but no mention of HD input ability anywhere in
the documentation.

AFAIK, there are no (and never will be) any HD capture cards that
have analog inputs.

I want to believe it's just a matter of time, but you might be right.
:-(

I think if we were going to have any, they would have already been here and
drying up. Just like the DVD players that output HD on the analog outputs
and PC HDTV capture cards that don't adhere to the broadcast flag. Devices
that don't handshake are very quickly becoming technological unobtanium.

MP seems to have trouble understanding my point here.

He's part of the problem -- he's using reasoning typical of, e.g., the
anti-gun lobby: People *do* break the law with certain devices
(guns/HD video capture cards/etc.), therefore *the devices
themselves* should be made unavailable, even though such devices have
plenty of legitimate uses.

I think he fully understands my point, he just wants to be belligerent and
slanderous. It seems to be his nature, especially when shown to be wrong
about something. Perhaps he has some legitimate reason to behave that way,
I don't really care any more.

Thanks again. :-)

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 18:26:52 -0700, "Joel Kolstad"
Gave us:

"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the link. Unless I missed something, it won't capture HD
quality signals.

I think you're correct there.

AFAIK, there are no (and never will be) any HD capture cards that have
analog inputs.

I want to believe it's just a matter of time, but you might be right. :-(

MP seems to have trouble understanding my point here.

He's part of the problem -- he's using reasoning typical of, e.g., the
anti-gun lobby: People *do* break the law with certain devices (guns/HD
video capture cards/etc.), therefore *the devices themselves* should be made
unavailable, even though such devices have plenty of legitimate uses.


No, idiot. I'm more like the guns that are out that have circuits
in them that only allow the owner of the gun to fire it.

Bwuahahahahahha! Busted BOTH your lame asses with that one!

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:37:52 -0500, "Anthony Fremont"
Gave us:


It will accept SD signals, but no mention of HD input ability anywhere in
the documentation.

The Black Magic card works fine and is legal.

Way over your head for budget though.

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/pro....asp?prodID=18

"Chuck Harris" wrote in message
...
Tom Del Rosso wrote:
"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message

2) Self check out at the grocery store (some things just aren't
designed to be automated that way)

"Thank you for purchacing the 16 ounce Goulden's spicy brown mustard.
You
saved 48 cents."

...by which time I have scanned the next 3 items, and the scanner
subsystem
acknowledged every one with a beep.

"You didn't wait for me to finish talking. My scanner has a lower
priority
than my speech system. I don't know what to do now. Please wait for
assistance from one of the human workers I was meant to replace."

Which is precisely why I refuse to use the automated scanners. I also
refuse to use ATM's.


I had no sooner scanned a can when the machine complained that I had
removed an item from the bag...problem was that there was nothing in the
bag at that time. When I was approached by the personnel, I told them to
either open a register or I was leaving. They opened a register.

Not to be out done by Home Depot's checkout that demanded that I bag
an 80 pound sack of concrete. Hey, I'd be happy to drop it on the scale!

Or the clerk at Fry's that would rather have me heft a 1500VA UPS up
from the bottom of the cart so she could scan it...I took the scanner from
her and did it myself right in the basket. Gee, no brain required on that
one.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:19:05 GMT, "Lord Garth"
Gave us:

Not to be out done by Home Depot's checkout that demanded that I bag
an 80 pound sack of concrete. Hey, I'd be happy to drop it on the scale!

I'm sure that strain gauge had a bad day.

You are a closet vandal, however, since you knew it would damage the
strain gauge or the calibration of it.