ThunderPeel2001

Probably not. Lol. Tell us how it ends up.

No, that's wrong. Plus there's plenty of ways to convert one format to another... (Plus, plus, PDF is really the last way you want to read a book on the Kindle.) I can think of three Napster-like sites for books off the top of my head, and they've been going for years -- no idea how. Plus there's obviously countless torrents available on sites like Pirate Bay. As the popularity of eBook readers increase, so will word of mouth about these sites. Yes, there's no easy way to convert a book -- but pirates are doing it, and have been doing it, for years. I've no idea how. Plus, it's only going to get easier and cheaper. Hell, you can download a torrent featuring every week's comic releases. People are taking the time to do this(!). And as the market moves more towards being electronic, the idea of staying in analogue in order to avoid piracy will make less and less economic sense -- more people will be buying books online, and will expect them immediately. Refusing to move with the times does not seem a good way to beat piracy. Secondly, as more publishers move to eBooks, they're distributing these files, so there's no need for anyone to scan them anymore... just crack them. That means that there'll be less fringe books being released by big publishers who can afford to give the authors a decent editor, and a meagre wage while they write their books. In the same way the music industry is investing in fewer "fringe" bands, and releasing less content each year. (And more "hobby" books, that are badly researched, poorly written, and are basically like blogs.) Basically eBook readers have finally made it completely possible to pirate something previous unpiratable... And it really worries me -- much more so than with films, music and games. But, maybe I'm just being old fashioned... it's hard to believe the publishing industry would move behind something like this, unless they could see something I can't, but the way I see it, it will ultimately drive down the price of books as publishers compete by making it more convenient to download them legally (as with iTunes, Zune, Spotify, etc.). I hope you're right about authors being able to release things for themselves, and that making up for it, but it doesn't seem to be working out that way in the music industry... without exposure, it seems you're just a drop in the ocean.

Yeah, the stuff comparing it to Citizen Kane is wonderful!

I like these reviews, but I get REALLY tired of the "serial killer" shtick they add. It was faintly amusing in the Episode 1 review, then it became irritating, pointless and ultimately boring. (Not to mention offensive for the sake of being offensive.) Apparently he's a "character" they invented, but still, with such quality commentary, why childishly mess it up? Edit: Looks like they cut that stuff for the Ep 3 review. Funny stuff!

Wow, the prices really are coming down these days! What's so bad about them calling? Did you make a lot of stuff up?

The Kindle stores over 3500 books. Surely that's more than you're likely to read in your lifetime? Pre-copyright books ARE free. Yeah, this is one thing I agree with. The prices are not really that much cheaper. My problem with the Kindle is this: I think it's going to bring about the end of quality books. Here's why: For a time, the only way to hear music was to find a band and watch them play. Then someone managed to capture their sound on a storage device, and you could have that experience without a band. Then someone found a way of sharing that recording for free, with thousands of people, e.g. MP3 files and in the internet. It was almost the same experience people had enjoyed a hundred years ago with a band. With books, it went like this: To read a book, you had to buy it. People found ways of sharing the text for free with thousands of people, but it didn't affect anything because nobody likes reading books on their monitor screen. Then people came up with hardware equivalents to the book itself, where people liked reading using this device... and suddenly the words became devalued, in the same way music has been. The irreplaceable experience of reading an actual book can now be shared with thousands of people at the drop of a hat... I honestly think that once people start sharing book files like MP3s that we're going to see the end of quality literature. A publisher will no longer be able to let an author spend 10 years crafting a book... because the profits are going to be so slight. I really hope I'm wrong, of course, but one of the draws of Amazon is knowing that I'll be able easily grab books for free. (I don't own one, so I'm not engaged in piracy, but I know that's something that crosses my mind -- and I'm sure I'm not alone.)

Cool. Nice to hear your review. Makes me want to give it a shot myself.

Ah. I had some plans, too, if you were going to be up for it, but I eagerly await to see what you do

I wish those guys could be "tagged" so their timer started counting down, and then you could run away... It'd be especially great if they could set each other off.

Thanks Nevsky! That makes it a lot clearer. It's not Requiem for a Dream, good. I assume it's not quite in the same leagues as The Road, either? (Which I didn't see, but heard was very depressing.) I think I might actually watch this film, then.

Who built the giant circle, btw? That's some pretty impressive stuff! Here's what I think Minecraft is missing: - A way for users to send message to people who are offline. - Automated mining tools. (They're slower than manual mining, but they're automatic.) - Trapdoors. - A higher ceiling (I'd love to see some 1:1 replicas of real buildings).

So how can I decide if being "broken" by this film is something I want to experience? Is it harrowing? Will it make be lose the will to live? Will it haunt my nightmares? Will it make me question the point of existence? Will it depress me beyond belief?

Birthday!

Wow. Sounds........ interesting. But how can I decide if I should see it or not if I can't watch the trailer? Can you post some sort of description?

I wish the world height wasn't so low... When are they going to increase it?

Hidden partition?

I think we're all prostitutes.

Who on earth are you?

Ah. Yes, but the ones in the Heart of Gold are throwbacks to Western tropes... and they're only in one episode. (Which I obviously was already aware of ) If every show that featured a prostitute in one episode was listed, I'm pretty sure it would be a very long list indeed... even if they're prostitutes with a "Heart of Gold". *wink* Either way, the amended statement still reads a bit weird: Why does Whedon have prostitutes in every half of his series?

How about an accurate replica of Orthanc? You'll need a LOT of obsidian (That's not my photo btw... but it seemed fitting.) Edit: Actually scratch that. That's what I want to do!

What happy, proud space-prostitutes? You don't mean the Geishas, do you? Also: Angel - No prostitutes. Buffy - No prostitutes. Correct statement: Why does Whedon have prostitutes in every one series? Which just makes you look like a perv. Lol.

One way of looking at the basic structure of politics is this: On personal issues: The left and libertarians say LESS government intervention. The right say MORE. E.g.: Left and libertarians are pro-gay marriage. Right are against. On economic issues: The right and libertarians say LESS government intervention. The left say MORE. E.g. Government spending: The right and libertarians want the government to spent less on public services, and would prefer people buy their own (and therefore tax everyone less -- so they would have more money to do that). People would also have more "choice", in theory. The left say that it's important the government steps in as companies cannot be trusted, so we need more government spending to provide regulated public services. Also, even in situations where regulation isn't needed, those services are expensive, so they should be subsidised to make them available to all. This argument can currently be seen in the US in regards to Healthcare. In the UK it can be seen with University Tuition fees. To me, the fact that the vocal right are against gun control (which, really, they should be for), shows that a lot of the time their reasoning comes through fear... But that's another broad generalisation.

Yep. I think all that stuff is quite accurate... Maybe you don't know any Libertarians, I do! (It's not altogether fun -- at least from my experience, that's obviously a sweeping statement! ) They're against laws on principle, and think the world would be better without them. (It's really quite synonymous with the less fashionable word "Anarchy" -- although modern Libertarians acknowledge the need for some form of government). As for Lefties being pro-drugs and anti-censorship... Yep, that's right, too. Your response to those questions here clearly puts you "Left of centre". Don't see why this would cause you a "meh" moment. I don't thnk you're as far left as you think you are. I've met many hardline Liberals who think that removing the illegality of drugs will improve things massively. Even hard drugs... You also say something about "kids on crack", which makes me think you didn't read the question properly. Obviously the hard left isn't for that, but here's the question again. "Repeal laws prohibiting adult possession and use of drugs." All it means is to make it legal for adults to own and use drugs... Like alcohol and tobacco: There are plenty of laws stopping children getting both those things, but they are legal. FWIW, the argument for this action goes like this: By legalising a drug we have more control over it. For example, there is no need for a black market for alcohol in countries where alcohol is legal and freely available. In Holland, there is no black market for cannabis anymore, and hardline lefts would argue that by legalising the usage of even hard drugs would give the state more control by killing the black market (which has managed to stay strong despite the world's efforts to stop it anyway). As a final point: Discussing these HIGHLY contentious issues is likely to spark massive political debate, so I've tried to be neutral in my responses, and just show a positions point of view, rather than my own.

Yeppers. Plus Purple tells me that fire is disabled, so we can't even activate them.

This is awesome! And deserved of more respect. (I wonder if folk don't just get it... I'm sure Kingz will.)