I ran across this by chance when looking for something like this... Which I would guess mean it wasn't by chance...

http://n-europe.com/news.php?nid=11753

I still think the Metroid Prime Trilogy is one of my favorite set of games ever released. I tried to re-play it, but after being spoiled with the Wii Control from Metroid Prime 3, I just can't do it...

I really hope this is true... Because it would be the coolest thing ever...

I haven't posted much in a while, busy life... I figure I'll use this post to cover much of what has been on my mind lately...

Politics
I'm not paying much attention to the elections this time around. I pretty much don't care who wins as long as it isn't Hillary. I have a belief that she's putting on an act and is a person who would convert us to communism the moment she's elected. I've been saying she makes Bill Clinton look like Rush Limbaugh...

I'm planning on boycotting the Olympics this year in all forms, all be it I've never much watched any of it anyway. But I really dislike the political runnings in China...

Entertainment
I'm replaying Zelda Twilight Princess for the Wii... I think it's just a really well made game... I like how long it is...

I think Super Smash Brothers Brawl isn't so good of a game... I've been playing it little by little, but it just doesn't feel right to me...

I've kind of set aside Super Mario Galaxy, though I haven't beaten it yet. I've been playing trying to get every star possible rather than to progress quickly though the game. I think I just overloaded myself a little.

I started replaying Metroid Prime 3, though I set it aside for Zelda. It was a good game, but I still feel it could have been oh-so-much better. I tried replaying Metroid Prime (the original), but had difficulty. I guess I got spoiled on the Wii controls for MP3. I kinda wish Retro would re-release Metroid Prime & Metroid Prime Echoes on a Wii disc with the same control system as MP3.

I beat Lost Via Domus (game based on the Lost TV series) and felt it kind of empty. There were a couple things in the game I enjoyed, however, like seeing behind the wall of the Swan & seeing what was causing the electro magnetic disturbance.

I'm anxiously awaiting the next episode of Lost, and am kinda bummed that it's not going to show for a few more weeks...

I wanted to go see Be Kind Rewind, but its apparently no longer showing in theaters (at least not any near where I live)...

I'm very anxiously awaiting the release of Metal Gear Solid 4... I started re-playing both Metal Gear Solid for GameCube (Wii) and Metal Gear Solid 3. All be it I've set them aside for the first mentioned replaying of Zelda Twilight Princess...

I've been trying to search for information on future games, with little tangible result...

Metroid Dread was a game announced a long time ago for the Nintendo DS. Believed to be another 2D Metroid, it was announced in a gaming magazine but never seemed to see the light of day. Scanning in a certain area of Metroid Prime 3 revealed the message "Metroid Project Dread is nearing completion" or something to that effect. Being Metroid Prime Hunters for the DS was announced the same way, it made it seem like this was a confirmation the game was coming, but seemingly not so says Nintendo. In there words there are no 2D Metroid games in development. This still leaves open an unlikely possibility: The Super Mario brothers remake (New Super Mario Brothers) is a 2.5D game (a 2D side scroller using 3D renderings for all characters & objects). The 2D denial could be a ruse to cover up a 2.5D Metroid Dread... Again, unlikely...

Very little info is out about the next Zelda game for the Wii. Rumored to have been in development since 2006, it may in fact be nearing release. The only info I found on the game turned out to be an April Fools joke (apparently an old one) showing artistic renderings for various other games seeming to show a futuristic Zelda. Only info I could find that may be real is that Retro may be contributing to the next installment and it is believed to be a first person style game. This would seem to explain an announcement made by one of the Zelda developers that Twilight Princess would likely be the last of its kind...

Diablo 3 seems to secretly be in development. There appears to be info on number of projects, and with all current projects (most recently StarCraft II's announcement) accounted for, Diablo 3 is likely in development. It will likely be some time until an announcement is made, however, so I'm not holding my breath on this one...

Halo 3's ending seems to more than show opening for a next game. At least, the best ending you can get. Of course the separation of Bungie and Microsoft leaves the question open when will it be developed and who will be making it? Halo 3 did seem very short to me but of all the games I've played online, I feel it is the best... All be it I'm not very good, but I do get lucky sometimes...

Rumor is Netflix may be looking into streaming their online movies to the XBox 360. If they do that would be awesome (assuming they don't charge a per-download fee).

Other Stuff
Adobe Photoshop Express is now online, so go sign up. I've not tried it yet but I will be in the near future.

Logitech SetPoint drivers for their mice & keyboards are (is?) buggy. Logitech seems to push the blame on this issue regularly though. One problem I found was that when scrolling in Outlook 2003, if I'm scrolling in the preview area, both the preview area and emails list scroll at the same time. Logitech places the blame on Microsoft here, and says it's not their drivers. I have successfully been able to prove this isn't entirely true, however, because I upgraded my mouse from a different Logitech mouse which required their Mouseman drivers. Interestingly enough their own mouseman drivers and mice don't exhibit this issue, meaning the SetPoint drivers are playing a direct role in the problem (all be it's possibly not the only)...

My birthday just past and I'm now an age old 31. All be it due to my medical conditions I feel closer to 61...

I'm likely going to be getting a new car soon. This time around it will be a Honda Fit. My current car (which I'm keeping) is a Honda Insight. I have a thing for Hatchbacks...

Speaking of which I just had my insight taken in for repair, and I once again asked them to replace a set of parking lights that have been burned out for the past couple years (I have previously requested they be replaced 3 separate times to no avail). I got a call that evening saying the found every light was working perfectly. This left me believing for about an hour that I had gone insane, and that the lights I've been asking them to fix were never lights. I later found this not to be the case, as the owners manual told me how to take them out myself (a very quick look was all it took), and I ended up replacing said lights, which after having been burned out for 2 years now work perfectly. This literally means there are parking lights on the Honda Insight that the repair center at a Honda dealership have no idea exist, and apparently cannot manage to locate (they're behind a big orange reflector near but separate from the turn signal). I called them back to inform them of this (thinking I was doing them a favor, I specifically made the effort to speak with the guy who told me all lights were working fine as opposed to his manager or something), and was met with disbelief, and apparent disdain... I honestly can't understand why he didn't believe me. You'd think if I had some ulterior motive, I could find something more significant to have a problem with after paying over $1000 for the visit. Said lights cost me all of $3 and change to purchase... And I did express, other than the sub $4 lights, my repair was great... Also, for the record, I do have the receipt for the new lights and matching set of burned out parking lots in my possession. I did get a call back from the dealership on the repair as a whole, as they always call and ask afterwards how the repair went (customer satisfaction survey). The call came a couple hours after my call to tell about the lights ironically. I would have expressed complete satisfaction if it weren't for the response I got when I called about the lights (saying something like there was a small issue but I already called and took care of it). When I informed the woman as to what happened, they offered me a ton of stuff for free (according to her, the stuff she was offering normally costs around $300) but I explained at the time I wasn't looking to get anything for free... Honestly my biggest concern was for the next time they go out, I'd like them to be able to have them replaced without issue (every previous repair I had they gave me checklists indicating all parking lights were working normally). The right side light was very hard for me to reach and literally took about 20 minutes for me to get back in place, so next time I would very much prefer to pay someone to replace them then have to do it again myself...


Whelp, sorry about that little rant at the end. I guess that's all I have for this post. I'm sure there are more things I meant to put here but I can't remember any of them anymore...

If you tried accessing my site over the past week you might have had a little problem viewing it...

Something happened with my host which kind of broke my site...

The fix I'm implementing (I'm not done as I'm writing this) is to rename all files from .html to .shtml, which is the one sure way I found fixed the issue...

Hopefully soon everything will be up an running... I've made it so if you try to access old URL's using .html it will redirect you to the right file... If you get a 404, then I probably haven't converted that file over yet... Hopefully I will be full done soon...

[update: read below to see why I'm wrong]
I just finished watching the plane on a conveyer belt myth (I had TiVo'd it) and am rather disappointed.

There was one key problem that they tested the myth improperly.

That is the whole myth revolves around the plane staying in place relative to the surroundings off the conveyer belt.

You see, when you see the plane take off, the plane is moving PAST the road cones. This means the plane is NOT staying in place and that the plane is traveling faster than the conveyer belt is going backwards. The easy way to see this is that the only way it should have passed those cones is if the plane had already taken off.

For the myth to have been properly tested, the plane should not have moved in relation to anything off the conveyer belt (including the cones it passed). The ONLY myth they busted was that the plane could take off on a moving conveyer belt so long as it could speed up faster than the conveyer belt is going backwards, which is obvious... Assuming the car Jamie was driving was going 25 MPH, and the plane needed a relative speed of 25 MPH to take off normally, then all the plane would need to do is speed up to 50 MPH... Relatively it is still moving forward in relation to the air (and road cones for that matter) around it at 25 MPH and would take off...

This isn't the myth they were given to test, but they didn't seem to understand that... The myth is if the conveyer belt matches the speed of the plane going forward AT ALL TIMES (not the take off speed but the actual speed of the plane at any given second), so the plane stays still in relation to the ground around it, will it take off? The answer to this myth is obviously no.

Perhaps the only argument between people who disagree is a misunderstanding as to what people arguing... I would have never doubted a plane could take off while on a slow moving conveyer belt assuming it could relatively overcome that speed, but if the conveyer belt matched the plane's speed at all times, the plane couldn't get off the ground...

[update]

Okay, so my first comment here proved me wrong on this issue. I had a complete misunderstanding of what was happening, and the comment made here made it clear in a way the episode did not.

The conveyer belt has ZERO effect on the plane, or rather, an infintesmal effect on it. So if you ran the conveyer belt at 100 MPH, the plane would completely ignore the belt. That is because the wheels have no effect on the plane, they free spin and the propeller still pulls the plane forward. Ideally if you got the conveyer belt to go fast enough, it could have an effect on the plane, due to the friction the wheels cause. But we're probably talking speed of light type speeds for the conveyer belt to have any effect. But I'm kind of right on one issue. You see, the plane can only take off if the conveyer belt is long enough for the plane to take off normally. So if you put it on a treadmil, the plane would just fall off the end...

I had posted a while back about the last time I tried to buy cold medicine, I ended up having to put my name & address into a book which as far as I know has me permanently on record for the date & time I bought the stuff.

Well, it turns out California is nowhere near the worst. You see, I went to Oregon for Christmas, and my wife started to develop a cold. So I searched the cold medicine available on the shelf and could not find the Alive Cold & Sinus (the only cold medicine I trust), so I went to the pharmacy counter...

As it turns out, in Oregon you now need a prescription to buy non-prescription medication! Being its Christmas time the only place a tourist can really get a prescription would be in a hospital. And being the price of an emergency room visit, its not exactly economically viable...

The worst part about this whole situation is the medication itself isn't the problem, its the fact that a chemical in the medication can be used for illegal purposes. Being this is the full justification, the road we're on is one where you will eventually need a permit to buy table salt... You see, salt contains 2 primary ingredients, a highly volatile substance that explodes in contact with water, and a highly toxic gas. Two very dangerous chemicals indeed, either of which can easily cause death...

But in the end what is really happening here is that the average joe pays the ultimate price. Those who need the chemicals out of the medications for illegal purposes will continue to get it unabated. Those who need the medication to keep them from feeling so sick are left to suffer without any recourse. The only people hurt are those who follow the law in the first place...

I discovered something yesterday that is really astounding to me.

Apple put forward an iPhone Dev Center with one caveat: Its available to any Apple ID holder who is NOT using a .Mac account. Upon trying to log in an error comes up:

.Mac accounts can no longer be used as Apple ID accounts for this application. Please create a new Apple ID using a different email account to access this application.

This is rather ironic on so many levels. First and foremost, .Mac users are actively paying apple $100 a year for use of things such as their email accounts. Essentially this boils down to Apple discriminating against those stupid enough to pay them money. Not only that, but if I sign up for some service such as Hotmail, one Apple has actively used to contrast the availability of the .Mac service, I can get in with NO problem. None of these even include the fact that Apple still actively pushes the .Mac service forward, coupled with the fact that Apple builds in a lot of features only available to .Mac members...

Secondly, the fact that Apple is discriminating against ANY email address is plain wrong. A couple weeks ago Microsoft drop support of all .Mac accounts, only to re-establish those accounts later saying it was a "mistake". Many people, however, saw this as an active attack against Mac users. What does it mean when Apple PURPOSELY does this to its own users???

Next is more of an annoyance issue. As it turns out, Apple's online Apple ID system is NOT designed to allow use of more than 1 Apple ID. If I'm logged into their discussion forms, and I click logout, I get automatically logged out, as you would expect. If I then try to log in with a different Apple ID, by clicking Login, I end up being logged in automatically as the last account I was using. Apple is actively telling me I can only use the service if I sign up for a second Apple ID, yet their own site does not allow one to get around using 2 Apple IDs.

Last, but certainly not least, is account juggling. The problem is, I can no longer use a single Apple ID on Apples site, period. The fact is that I cannot abandon my long living Apple ID. The reason for this is multifaceted. First off, all my iTunes purchased songs were purchased using my .Mac Apple ID. With all the money I have invested, closing that account is NOT an option... Secondly, I've also made several purchase on Apples site using my .Mac Apple ID. The least of which is the .Mac account itself, which I pay a total of $150 a year for, as I also buy extra bandwidth & storage space on top of the normal $99 account price. Lastly is that all software I purchase online I do so with my .Mac address. This helps me more easily keep track of shareware purchases as it allows for easier recognition & sorting...

When It is all boiled down I cannot abandon my .Mac Apple ID. Which oddly enough should in itself be good for Apple, because it helps ensure I will continue to pay them for the .Mac service...

But the bottom line is, with this new restriction, Apple is actively telling me I'm less important than every person out there who has an Apple ID without a .Mac account. Apple is basically giving me a very strong incentive to cease paying them money, one that when you boil it all down makes no sense to being with...

In yet another case of cops grosely violating the rights of citizens, A police officer in St. George, Missouri threatens to make up charges against an innocent citizen telling him "You want me to show you what a cop does?".

This time the entire thing is caught on tape, so Sergeant Kuehnlein can't exactly back his way out of this one.

Just another case of police overstepping the rights of citizens. All be it his statement made it seem like this is fully justified as a normal thing, which unfortunately seems to be the norm among police officers.

I'm a little stunned over an article concerning a cop being suspended for handing out a Ghetto Handbook. Titled "Wucha dun did now?" the so called handbook appears to factually list slang type Ebonics terms and gives an accurate definition of what they mean.

The article listed a couple terms and their definitions. These terms and definitions outlined in the article do not appear to be written in any type of a derogatory fashion. They appear to be very factual dictionary style definitions.

The thing that confuses me is this: A number of years ago, activists were demanding that Ebonics be deemed a recognized actual language apart from English. There was uproar as to weather or not it should be qualified as such, but the proponents were primarily activists of African American descent.

If activists wanted the language to be recognized, why in the world would they have a problem with an Ebonics To English dictionary being created? To me this would seem like the recognition they were looking for from the beginning.

Essentially speaking, the problem boils down to this: You cannot expect to have Ebonics recognized as its own language, while at the same time complaining when someone creates a guide to help understand the language you are fighting to have recognized.

This is basic hypocrisy on its surface.

I had to make a trip home from work this morning because I forgot my timecard. After getting it (and some breakfast), I headed back to work.

I ended up being stuck in traffic, from what I could see was some type of fire on the conejo grade. When I got close I snapped a picture. I didn't see any students in the area, so I assume the bus was empty at the time (there isn't many places to go on the grade, either up or down along the freeway, as there are no other streets or sidewalks that travel over the grade).

At any rate, I snaped the following picture. Its a bit distorted due to the lens protecter in my iPhone case. I removed it after this.

At any rate, I got a full shot of the bus itself. It was pretty much out by the time I got next to it.

If you were to ask NASA 2 months ago what the warmest year on record is to date, they would have stated 1998, seeming to show Global Warming as a modern and real issue.

Someone wondering why some ominous data was apparent in the graph released by NASA reverse engineered their algorithm, and it interestingly turns out that NASA's software was suffering from a Y2K type bug.

NASA was contacted and they proceeded to quietly fix the error, and released new data. That data shows the warmest year on record did not occur in 1998... It occurred in 1934.

Its interesting to note that many Global Warming theory advocates were spewing this data right and left before (and the originator of the flawed data became visible due to his accusation that the Bush administration was trying to silence his data), however upon release of the correction both NASA and the same advocates have been inexplicably silent... If it weren't for the fact that an outsider discovered the bug in the first place, it would have most likely have never even been detected...

If Global Warming theory advocates are truly unbiased and only site facts, as all of them claim to be doing, then why be so silent about anything that might call in to question many of the arguments? The only logical reason is the pure and simple fact that those professing Global Warming theory are at the very least just as biased as they try to claim those who discount the theory are.