msmith

I think it's a fair critique despite the inflammatory title. He's not really opposed to 3-D, as long as it doesn't come at the expense of good filmmaking.

There's a goldrush going on right now in Hollywood to cash in on the premium for 3-D ticket sales before the novelty wears off, which means we'll have a lot of fake or lower quality 3-D films.  The 3-D craze really only kicked into high gear last year when Avatar was released.  I imagine that a lot of the titles currently being released were intended to be 2D.

I'm looking forward to what the future will bring. I'm sure the technology will continue to improve and the filmmakers will continue to become more effective at using the third D.

That's a pretty good critique despite the inflammatory title. The MaxiVision48 process he mentions sounds pretty great as well. I definitely notice the jerkiness in some scenes when in the theatre and it always pulls my attention away from the film.

If you read the whole article, you'll see that they're considering paid subscriptions.

In the mockups shown, the tab doesn't extend fully to the edge of the window, which unfortunately means you don't get the "infinite pixels" advantage. The same is true for Chrome on OSX and Windows.

You don't need to be able to decrypt anything to identify an HTTPS flow. An unencrypted SSL/TLS handshake takes place first, before any encrypted data is sent across the wire.

Some firewalls can track this.

Going over the 200MB plan isn't such a big deal, as long as you don't go waay over. I'm in the same boat. On average, even with the occasional overage I'll probably be spending less than I did with the $30 unlimited plan.

I wrote a little scraper to keep track of the money raised over time. The NY Times article really gave them a boost, which eventually flattened out only to pick up again in the last 24 hours.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0AqAXxpwe1BqbdE1FbVFs...

Can you cite the source that leads you to believe that BP stands to make 10x more profit by running a risky drilling operation? I find it hard to believe.

Gmail gives you a way to transfer your archived mail from Hotmail, Yahoo, and most of the other big providers. I imagine Hotmail could do the same, if they don't already.

Could Gizmodo have avoided legal jeopardy if they had used that $5000 to secure an exclusive instead of using it to buy the device?

This is from today (Apr 15). The linked article doesn't have a date but the list of press releases does.

He's saying you should alter your screenshot to make it more obvious that it's not the real thing. Frame it with an image of a monitor, give it a drop-shadow, etc.