On 2022-03-19 11:44 p.m., Alan wrote:
> On 2022-03-19 9:45 p.m., David Johnston wrote:
>> On 2022-03-19 5:45 p.m., Alan wrote:
>>> On 2022-03-19 4:36 p.m., David Johnston wrote:
>>>> On 2022-03-18 5:10 p.m., Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> So first the Ukraine war gets Trump re-elected, and _then_ Putin
>>>>>> invades
>>>>>> Latvia. Maybe Trump nukes France and the UK to get that little
>>>>>> problem out
>>>>>> of Putin's way? No, _those_ orders likely would not be obeyed, I
>>>>>> should hope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John Savard
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, Biden negotiated the removal of the nuclear weapons from
>>>>> Ukraine when he was Obama's vice president.  That tells you what
>>>>> Biden thought as he put in ZERO guarantees for the protection of
>>>>> Ukraine.
>>>>
>>>> I bet you also wonder why Obama took so long to mobilize the USAF to
>>>> stop the 9/11 attacks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Beat you to it... 😉
>>
>> Just to the facts, not to the joke.
>
> Really?
>
> I made precisely the same joke:
>
> 'He probably believes that Obama should have prevented 9/11, too.'
>
> :-)

Ah. I must have missed it.

On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 15:20:55 -0400, J. Clarke
<jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 19 Mar 2022 19:25:58 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
><jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 6:59:41 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:
>>
>>> 'The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances comprises three
>>> identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in
>>> Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by
>>> its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and
>>> Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
>>> The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the
>>> Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and
>>> France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.
>>>
>>> The memorandum prohibited the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and
>>> the United States from threatening or using military force or economic
>>> coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. As a result of other
>>> agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus,
>>> Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.'
>>>
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances>
>>
>>So since the United States didn't invade Ukraine, _it_ is not in violation
>>of the Budapest Memorandum; it was _not_ required to defend the Ukraine
>>if someone else, including one of the other signatories to the Budapest
>>Memorandum, invaded it.
>
>The Budapest Memorandum doesn't require anybody to defend anything
>under any circumstance. All that it requires is that somebody
>complain to the UN, which is only slightly more beneficial than
>complaining to their cat.

I suspect the North Koreans wish nobody had "complained to the UN" way
back in the early 50s when they tried to take the entire peninsula.

Of course, it helped that the Chinese Seat on the Security Council was
occupied by Nationalist China, and that the Russians decided to boycot
the meeting and so could not use their veto.

I wonder if Commie China has figured out yet that, under their
one-China policy, this means that China is /still/ part of the UN
alliance at war (suspended but not ended) with North Korea?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On 19/03/2022 19.57, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 3/19/2022 5:16 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>> On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 7:10:09 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:

>>> BTW, Biden negotiated the removal of the nuclear weapons from Ukraine
>>> when he was Obama's vice president. That tells you what Biden thought
>>> as he put in ZERO guarantees for the protection of Ukraine.
>>
>> Even I knew that Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in the early/mid 1990s, and a brief web search confirmed that.
>>
>> Does reality not matter to you?
>
> Sure.  Got URL to back that up ?

Search for "Budapest Memorandum" and you will find literally scores
of pages giving its history and implications.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Psalm 82:3-4

On 2022-03-20 10:34 a.m., Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
> William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:138638cc-710c-4e95-aece-51a638344090n@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Saturday, March 19, 2022 at 8:57:32 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire
>> wrote:
>>> On 3/19/2022 5:16 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>>>> On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 7:10:09 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 3/17/2022 11:26 PM, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 9, 2022 at 7:11:08 AM UTC-7, Thomas
>>>>>> Koenig wrote:
>>>>>>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 6:28:55 PM UTC-7, Lynn
>>>>>>>> McGuire wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dude, you really have a bad case of TDS. Have you
>>>>>>>>> thought about taking anything for it ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If Trump, de Santis, or someone of that ilk gets elected
>>>>>>>> in November of 2024, my homeland, Canada, will be in
>>>>>>>> essentially the same position as the Ukraine just prior
>>>>>>>> to the invasion... given that Trump was rescued from his
>>>>>>>> most recent bankruptcy by Russian oligarchs, it is
>>>>>>>> difficult to take it seriously that he sees Russia as any
>>>>>>>> kind of threat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Assuming Trump is indeed in Russia's pocket, why did he
>>>>>>> berate Germany (and Merkel personally) for not doing more
>>>>>>> for its defense? Would it be in Russia's interest to have
>>>>>>> a well-armed Germany?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (Scholz, Merkel's successor, has now agreed to do what
>>>>>>> Merkel would not do for Trump, by the way.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a good question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But it does have an answer:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a) If Trump is a Russian asset, it's in Russia's interest
>>>>>> that not everyone knows it; he has to at least *look* like
>>>>>> he's looking out for America's interests, not Russia's.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> b) It isn't in Russia's interests for Germany to become
>>>>>> well-armed. However, it _would_ be in Russia's interests
>>>>>> for America to withdraw from NATO, so that the countries of
>>>>>> Europe would lose the protection of American nuclear
>>>>>> weapons.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If one views Trump's berating of Merkel as setting up an
>>>>>> excuse to do just that, there is no contradiction between
>>>>>> that and Trump advancing Russia's interests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This also can address another issue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been pessimistic about the consequences of the events
>>>>>> in Ukraine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the U.S. should have, on its own, provided Ukraine
>>>>>> with the near equivalent of Article 5 protection... since
>>>>>> 2008 preferaly, and just before Russia invaded at the
>>>>>> least.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since it didn't, Russia had the opportunity to threaten the
>>>>>> U.S. with nuclear attack if it interfered... and so it
>>>>>> didn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Latvia is as far away from the U.S. as Ukraine, and it was
>>>>>> also formerly part of the Soviet Union. So events in
>>>>>> Ukraine do raise... some room for doubt as to whether or
>>>>>> not NATO commitments will be fully honored in the event of
>>>>>> a Russian invasion of this NATO member.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It doesn't even really matter if I'm wrong, because we're
>>>>>> doomed if a global thermonuclear war starts too, not just
>>>>>> if Putin conquers the world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the situation is not binary. Putin may indeed be too
>>>>>> cautious to invade a NATO member under current
>>>>>> circumstances.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, then, we're OK, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, dear, no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The fact that Ukraine fell under Biden's watch will be
>>>>>> emotionally unappealing to Americans, causing at least a
>>>>>> slight fall in his popularity, and remember how close the
>>>>>> 2016 and 2020 elections were?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I mean, Donald Trump just recently stated that if he were
>>>>>> President, Putin wouldn't have invaded, because Putin would
>>>>>> know that Trump doesn't fool around. (Ivana might tell you
>>>>>> differently, of course.) Of course that remark seems
>>>>>> ludicrous to sensible people, but Trump's supporters have
>>>>>> lapped up more unbelievable things he has said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So first the Ukraine war gets Trump re-elected, and _then_
>>>>>> Putin invades Latvia. Maybe Trump nukes France and the UK
>>>>>> to get that little problem out of Putin's way? No, _those_
>>>>>> orders likely would not be obeyed, I should hope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John Savard
>>>>> BTW, Biden negotiated the removal of the nuclear weapons
>>>>> from Ukraine when he was Obama's vice president. That tells
>>>>> you what Biden thought as he put in ZERO guarantees for the
>>>>> protection of Ukraine.
>>>>
>>>> Even I knew that Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in the
>>>> early/mid 1990s, and a brief web search confirmed that.
>>>>
>>>> Does reality not matter to you?
>>>>
>>>> William Hyde
>>> Sure. Got URL to back that up ?
>>
>> Yep. And I bet you could find a few if you just looked.
>
> According to Wikipedia (and literally every other source), Ukraine
> agreed to give up its nuclear weapons (and became a signatory to
> the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1994). The last ones
> were transferred to Russian within two years.
>
> In 1994, Bill Clinton was President, and Al Gore was Vice
> President.
>
> Is your dick too small to admit you made a stupid mistake? Or do
> you have some magic source that conclusive proves that *every*
> *other* *source* is wrong?

Are you too stupid to notice you're addressing your comments...

....to someone who has it right?

>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#Denuclear
> ization
>
> https://tinyurl.com/3rz98vkd
>>
>> But you won't, because if you look you might find something you
>> don't want to believe.
>>
>> It seems that only partisanship matters to you.
>>
> I know you are, but what am I?

So you're admitting that Lynn McGuire is just a sock for you?

Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:kv0c3htlk9fe7k07q3cjcdo4hhmnrh5o2q@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 09:40:59 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>>news:m9a93hhodflq5f6eafe1v5u1r89lbrunle@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:01:50 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
>>> <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 9:02:24 AM UTC-4, Michael F.
>>>>Stemper wrote:
>>>>> On 17/03/2022 23.03, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, Jibini
>>>>> > Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>> >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
>>>>> >> news:950eae54-34c2-45c2...@googlegroups.com:
>>>>> >>> My vague memory was that Pinot Grand Fenwick, in a very
>>>>> >>> good year, had a special ingredient that powered their
>>>>> >>> bomb. Perhaps, instead, this was the fuel for The Mouse
>>>>> >>> on the Moon?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >> It is, indeed. That DVD should arrive today or tomorrow.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > 2005 wants its overdue dvds back. It's available on Amazon
>>>>> > Prime TV for $3.99
>>>>> Watch it once for four bucks versus own it for twelve
>>>>> doesn't seem to make sense.
>>>>
>>>>How many times do you think you'll watch it, in your life?
>>>
>>> A valid point, and yet it must be kept in mind that, just
>>> because it can be rented /today/ does not mean it will be
>>> available /tomorrow/. Or next month. Or next year.
>>>
>>> Most DVDs last a long long time, when properly stored. The
>>> exceptions appear to be mostly manufacturing defects, such as
>>> bit rot, the secret code on the rim rubbing off (as opposed to
>>> being permanently applied, so it can't rub off), or
>>> second-layer problems. Or use of an "unknown opcode" -- but
>>> the Scenes Menu can usually get you past that, and a newer
>>> player may well recognize the opcode.
>>
>>Or cheaply made DVD-Rs with pirated content, but I do try to
>>avoid those.
>
> I've been suckered into those a couple times. In both cases, I
> eventually found a /legitimate/ version available and replaced
> the el-cheapo.

I only have once, with the same end result.
>
> If the film was out of copyright, of course, such a film was not
> "pirated". Just an el-cheapo.

Never had much interest in stuff like that.
>
> Still, an el-cheapo DVD is better than an el-cheapo VHS,

The quality of VHS degrades with each generation of copying. By the
fourth or fifth generation, it's trash.

> since
> the DVD is usually actually produced by a company that knows how
> to produce them.

The one DVD I got from the Yo Ho Movie Club was made *from* a VHS
tape, that was at least a fourth or fifth generation copy. It was
basically unwatchable.

>It took three tries with the original /Night of
> the Living Dead/ until I found an el-cheapo VHS tape that didn't
> run out of tape before the film ended. What the first apparently
> two did was record it in LP, but only use enough tape for EP.
> That doesn't happen with DVDs.
>
> Some studios make DVD-Rs of their own, which are, of course,
> legitimate. In some cases, when I had to replace a DVD that
> stopped playing (a rare occurrence), the replacement turned out
> to be a studio-produced DVD-R.

Not all that uncommon for non-big-studio films.
>
> When I last investigated it, BD-Rs had been tried and found
> wanting, so instead of a studio-produced BD-R you get an "mod"
> ("manufactured on demand") BD.

I only own a handful of BDs, only on stuff not available any other
way (like the later seasons of The Expanse.)
>
> These studio-produced DVD-R/mod BDs are, of course, older films
> that don't have much demand but do have some. They may include a
> trailer. They may have chapter stops every 10 minutes, but no
> Chapters menu. They are /definitely/ for people who want to
> watch the movie! Little or no effort is put into cleaning them
> up. Those that were originally DVDs, however, both turned out to
> be the original DVD program, just redone as a DVD-R.

The mastering process can be a major expense if one wants to do it
right. There's a minimum number of expected sales needed to justify
it.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:ve0c3h1k6a40rltl23dqs9cefg8a5g8nuo@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 08:29:24 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"pete...@gmail.com" <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote in
>>news:aaf1c868-b4e6-4abe-80ed-678d3a935fe6n@googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 9:02:24 AM UTC-4, Michael F.
>>> Stemper wrote:
>>>> On 17/03/2022 23.03, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, Jibini
>>>> > Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>> >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
>>>> >> news:950eae54-34c2-45c2...@googlegroups.com:
>>>> >>> My vague memory was that Pinot Grand Fenwick, in a very
>>>> >>> good year, had a special ingredient that powered their
>>>> >>> bomb. Perhaps, instead, this was the fuel for The Mouse
>>>> >>> on the Moon?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> It is, indeed. That DVD should arrive today or tomorrow.
>>>> >
>>>> > 2005 wants its overdue dvds back. It's available on Amazon
>>>> > Prime TV for $3.99
>>>> Watch it once for four bucks versus own it for twelve doesn't
>>>> seem to make sense.
>>>
>>> How many times do you think you'll watch it, in your life?
>>
>>Can you loan out a streaming "purchase" to a friend? Or several
>>friends?
>>>
>>> Some movies are worth getting in the best permanent format
>>> possible (I'm looking at purchasing LOTR for the 3rd time, now
>>> that the Extended Edition is available in 4K, and has been
>>> properly color balanced).
>>>
>>> The Mouse that Roared is a cheap and cheerful comedy, intended
>>> as pretty much disposable entertainment, and certainly not
>>> made with the thought that ordinary people would ever want to
>>> own a copy.
>>
>>In 1959, *no* movies where made with the thought that ordinary
>>people would ever been *allowed* to own a copy, dumbass.
>
> Hell, they mostly weren't even made with the thought that they
> might be shown on /TV/.

Also true, though it was beginning to be a thought.
>
> A lot of processes -- wider screens/films, "3d", smellorama,
> sensurround -- were designed, either wholly or in part, to
> /prevent/ the film ever being shown on TV.
>
> However, /some/ collectors were able to acquire films on (IIRC)
> 8mm. Hence those really inferior versions of out-of-copyright
> films: the 8mm print used was seen so often it lost a few frames
> here and there.

Those, however, were not "ordinary" people, which is who we're
takling about.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

In article <XnsAE6166AF852D2taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>news:ve0c3h1k6a40rltl23dqs9cefg8a5g8nuo@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 08:29:24 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"pete...@gmail.com" <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>news:aaf1c868-b4e6-4abe-80ed-678d3a935fe6n@googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 9:02:24 AM UTC-4, Michael F.
>>>> Stemper wrote:
>>>>> On 17/03/2022 23.03, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, Jibini
>>>>> > Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>> >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
>>>>> >> news:950eae54-34c2-45c2...@googlegroups.com:
>>>>> >>> My vague memory was that Pinot Grand Fenwick, in a very
>>>>> >>> good year, had a special ingredient that powered their
>>>>> >>> bomb. Perhaps, instead, this was the fuel for The Mouse
>>>>> >>> on the Moon?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >> It is, indeed. That DVD should arrive today or tomorrow.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > 2005 wants its overdue dvds back. It's available on Amazon
>>>>> > Prime TV for $3.99
>>>>> Watch it once for four bucks versus own it for twelve doesn't
>>>>> seem to make sense.
>>>>
>>>> How many times do you think you'll watch it, in your life?
>>>
>>>Can you loan out a streaming "purchase" to a friend? Or several
>>>friends?
>>>>
>>>> Some movies are worth getting in the best permanent format
>>>> possible (I'm looking at purchasing LOTR for the 3rd time, now
>>>> that the Extended Edition is available in 4K, and has been
>>>> properly color balanced).
>>>>
>>>> The Mouse that Roared is a cheap and cheerful comedy, intended
>>>> as pretty much disposable entertainment, and certainly not
>>>> made with the thought that ordinary people would ever want to
>>>> own a copy.
>>>
>>>In 1959, *no* movies where made with the thought that ordinary
>>>people would ever been *allowed* to own a copy, dumbass.
>>
>> Hell, they mostly weren't even made with the thought that they
>> might be shown on /TV/.
>
>Also true, though it was beginning to be a thought.
>>
>> A lot of processes -- wider screens/films, "3d", smellorama,
>> sensurround -- were designed, either wholly or in part, to
>> /prevent/ the film ever being shown on TV.
>>
>> However, /some/ collectors were able to acquire films on (IIRC)
>> 8mm. Hence those really inferior versions of out-of-copyright
>> films: the 8mm print used was seen so often it lost a few frames
>> here and there.
>
>Those, however, were not "ordinary" people, which is who we're
>takling about.
>

And of course these extraordinary "people" may not have had access
to the prints they thought they did..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOby05HSGQM
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Monday, March 21, 2022 at 9:19:23 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:

> I wonder if Commie China has figured out yet that, under their
> one-China policy, this means that China is /still/ part of the UN
> alliance at war (suspended but not ended) with North Korea?

I'm sure they're fully aware of this, and it doesn't bother them at all,
since they have no compunctions about failing to live up to their
international commitments when it suits them.

I mean, you could even say that about some countries that _aren't_
totalitarian dictatorships.

John Savard

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 13:53:33 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>On Monday, March 21, 2022 at 9:19:23 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> I wonder if Commie China has figured out yet that, under their
>> one-China policy, this means that China is /still/ part of the UN
>> alliance at war (suspended but not ended) with North Korea?
>
>I'm sure they're fully aware of this, and it doesn't bother them at all,
>since they have no compunctions about failing to live up to their
>international commitments when it suits them.
>
>I mean, you could even say that about some countries that _aren't_
>totalitarian dictatorships.

The People's Republic of China is explicitly a signatory of the Korean
armistice you know.

On Monday, March 21, 2022 at 3:37:05 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 13:53:33 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >On Monday, March 21, 2022 at 9:19:23 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
> >
> >> I wonder if Commie China has figured out yet that, under their
> >> one-China policy, this means that China is /still/ part of the UN
> >> alliance at war (suspended but not ended) with North Korea?
> >
> >I'm sure they're fully aware of this, and it doesn't bother them at all,
> >since they have no compunctions about failing to live up to their
> >international commitments when it suits them.
> >
> >I mean, you could even say that about some countries that _aren't_
> >totalitarian dictatorships.

> The People's Republic of China is explicitly a signatory of the Korean
> armistice you know.

Well, I was replying to Paul Person's post, not attempting to analyze
the totality of the actual real-world situation, which would indeed
imply that the PRC was officially at war with itself (although there is
an armistice in that war).

John Savard

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:53:54 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
<taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>news:kv0c3htlk9fe7k07q3cjcdo4hhmnrh5o2q@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 09:40:59 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>>>news:m9a93hhodflq5f6eafe1v5u1r89lbrunle@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:01:50 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
>>>> <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 9:02:24 AM UTC-4, Michael F.
>>>>>Stemper wrote:
>>>>>> On 17/03/2022 23.03, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, Jibini
>>>>>> > Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>>> >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
>>>>>> >> news:950eae54-34c2-45c2...@googlegroups.com:
>>>>>> >>> My vague memory was that Pinot Grand Fenwick, in a very
>>>>>> >>> good year, had a special ingredient that powered their
>>>>>> >>> bomb. Perhaps, instead, this was the fuel for The Mouse
>>>>>> >>> on the Moon?
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >> It is, indeed. That DVD should arrive today or tomorrow.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2005 wants its overdue dvds back. It's available on Amazon
>>>>>> > Prime TV for $3.99
>>>>>> Watch it once for four bucks versus own it for twelve
>>>>>> doesn't seem to make sense.
>>>>>
>>>>>How many times do you think you'll watch it, in your life?
>>>>
>>>> A valid point, and yet it must be kept in mind that, just
>>>> because it can be rented /today/ does not mean it will be
>>>> available /tomorrow/. Or next month. Or next year.
>>>>
>>>> Most DVDs last a long long time, when properly stored. The
>>>> exceptions appear to be mostly manufacturing defects, such as
>>>> bit rot, the secret code on the rim rubbing off (as opposed to
>>>> being permanently applied, so it can't rub off), or
>>>> second-layer problems. Or use of an "unknown opcode" -- but
>>>> the Scenes Menu can usually get you past that, and a newer
>>>> player may well recognize the opcode.
>>>
>>>Or cheaply made DVD-Rs with pirated content, but I do try to
>>>avoid those.
>>
>> I've been suckered into those a couple times. In both cases, I
>> eventually found a /legitimate/ version available and replaced
>> the el-cheapo.
>
>I only have once, with the same end result.
>>
>> If the film was out of copyright, of course, such a film was not
>> "pirated". Just an el-cheapo.
>
>Never had much interest in stuff like that.

Just because it's so old it's no longer copyrighted doesn't mean it's
not worth watching.

And then there is /Sita Sings the Blues/, which is "copyleft"ed.

>> Still, an el-cheapo DVD is better than an el-cheapo VHS,
>
>The quality of VHS degrades with each generation of copying. By the
>fourth or fifth generation, it's trash.
>
>> since
>> the DVD is usually actually produced by a company that knows how
>> to produce them.
>
>The one DVD I got from the Yo Ho Movie Club was made *from* a VHS
>tape, that was at least a fourth or fifth generation copy. It was
>basically unwatchable.

I read the reviews of the (very few now) films I am looking and hoping
for to avoid exactly that problem. Also pirating.

But the /DVD/, considered as a /DVD/, still played all the way
throught he film, right? Didn't stop 2/3 of the way through, say? And,
being manufactured (presumably) by a company that does that for others
(and usually inserts a screen to that effect at some point before or
after the film), is as likely to last for decades (stored properly) as
any other DVD.

That's what I was referring to: el-cheapo DVDs are superior to
el-cheapo VHS in purely physical terms. The programming can, as you
note, be just as bad.

I was /very/ glad to find /Charade/ done by Criterion because I knew
it would be done as well as possible for something so old. It was also
two minutes longer than the el-cheapo -- and those two minutes were
/all my favorite bits [1]/, which the source used by the el-cheapo was
lacking, clearly (to me) because the 8mm copy the el-cheapo used had
been played over and over and over at those places until it literally
broke into pieces in the projector.

[1] Anyone who has seen the film can probably guess which ones they
were. OTOH, the VHS tape the el-cheapo replaced was super-green: I had
to adjust the color on my TV every time I saw it, and then adjust it
back. Such is the fate of really popular old movies.

>>It took three tries with the original /Night of
>> the Living Dead/ until I found an el-cheapo VHS tape that didn't
>> run out of tape before the film ended. What the first apparently
>> two did was record it in LP, but only use enough tape for EP.
>> That doesn't happen with DVDs.
>>
>> Some studios make DVD-Rs of their own, which are, of course,
>> legitimate. In some cases, when I had to replace a DVD that
>> stopped playing (a rare occurrence), the replacement turned out
>> to be a studio-produced DVD-R.
>
>Not all that uncommon for non-big-studio films.

I'm not sure what this refers to. Most non-big-studio films I own DVDs
of are on regular DVDs, not DVD-Rs.

And the ones I was referring are, by definition, big studio films, as
it is big studios that are putting them (and the mod BDs) out.

And some were popular enough to be released on a normal DVD
originally.

Note: By "DVD" and "BD" I am referring to a mass-market production
run, where a very large number of copies are produced and sent out for
sale everywhere. "DVD-R" and "mod BD" refer to discs sold (so far as I
can tell) only online and produced only when purchased. Indeed, for a
while, at least, Amazon was actually producing (burning) the DVD-Rs,
using content provided by the major studio.

>> When I last investigated it, BD-Rs had been tried and found
>> wanting, so instead of a studio-produced BD-R you get an "mod"
>> ("manufactured on demand") BD.
>
>I only own a handful of BDs, only on stuff not available any other
>way (like the later seasons of The Expanse.)

When my last DVD player died, I replaced it with a BD player. The
discs I bought then were either for P&S DVDs that were letterboxed on
BD, or were very long films that were split over two sides (either on
one DVD or one each on two) on DVD, but were on one side of one disc
on BD.

Since then, I have also bought BDs when they were all I could find
(not necessarily all that existed, I don't always look beyond Amazon)
or when they cost less than the DVD (sometimes by what I would regard
by quite a bit). Sometimes what cost less was a BD/DVD combo pack --
less than the DVD or the BD by itself.

Unlike the transition from P&S VHS to letterboxed VHS, or from VHS to
DVD, I fell /no/ desire to replace DVDs with BDs. It isn't just
economics; I actually /prefer/ the DVD-style menus. For one thing,
they are readable, something that cannot always be said about BD menus
due to their choice of font size.

And it isn't as if the people putting out BDs are any smarter than
those putting out DVDs. I have a BD that, when inserted, immediately
starts playing the film and has /only/ a popup menu -- which requires
you to let the film play in the background while you work the menu.
This is /worse/ than the worst DVDs, which at least have a Main Menu.

Well, except those few that don't of course -- the ones that play when
you put them in and, when the film is over, re-start it. Great for
video store demos, not so great for my preferences.

>> These studio-produced DVD-R/mod BDs are, of course, older films
>> that don't have much demand but do have some. They may include a
>> trailer. They may have chapter stops every 10 minutes, but no
>> Chapters menu. They are /definitely/ for people who want to
>> watch the movie! Little or no effort is put into cleaning them
>> up. Those that were originally DVDs, however, both turned out to
>> be the original DVD program, just redone as a DVD-R.
>
>The mastering process can be a major expense if one wants to do it
>right. There's a minimum number of expected sales needed to justify
>it.

Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:bhvj3hlnp2q6j9ss2k9jo1ieb44mrq4jlh@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:53:54 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>>news:kv0c3htlk9fe7k07q3cjcdo4hhmnrh5o2q@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 09:40:59 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili
>>> Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>>>>news:m9a93hhodflq5f6eafe1v5u1r89lbrunle@4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:01:50 -0700 (PDT),
>>>>> "pete...@gmail.com" <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Friday, March 18, 2022 at 9:02:24 AM UTC-4, Michael F.
>>>>>>Stemper wrote:
>>>>>>> On 17/03/2022 23.03, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2022 at 6:12:16 PM UTC-4, Jibini
>>>>>>> > Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>>>>>>> >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
>>>>>>> >> news:950eae54-34c2-45c2...@googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>> >>> My vague memory was that Pinot Grand Fenwick, in a
>>>>>>> >>> very good year, had a special ingredient that powered
>>>>>>> >>> their bomb. Perhaps, instead, this was the fuel for
>>>>>>> >>> The Mouse on the Moon?
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >> It is, indeed. That DVD should arrive today or
>>>>>>> >> tomorrow.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > 2005 wants its overdue dvds back. It's available on
>>>>>>> > Amazon Prime TV for $3.99
>>>>>>> Watch it once for four bucks versus own it for twelve
>>>>>>> doesn't seem to make sense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How many times do you think you'll watch it, in your life?
>>>>>
>>>>> A valid point, and yet it must be kept in mind that, just
>>>>> because it can be rented /today/ does not mean it will be
>>>>> available /tomorrow/. Or next month. Or next year.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most DVDs last a long long time, when properly stored. The
>>>>> exceptions appear to be mostly manufacturing defects, such
>>>>> as bit rot, the secret code on the rim rubbing off (as
>>>>> opposed to being permanently applied, so it can't rub off),
>>>>> or second-layer problems. Or use of an "unknown opcode" --
>>>>> but the Scenes Menu can usually get you past that, and a
>>>>> newer player may well recognize the opcode.
>>>>
>>>>Or cheaply made DVD-Rs with pirated content, but I do try to
>>>>avoid those.
>>>
>>> I've been suckered into those a couple times. In both cases, I
>>> eventually found a /legitimate/ version available and replaced
>>> the el-cheapo.
>>
>>I only have once, with the same end result.
>>>
>>> If the film was out of copyright, of course, such a film was
>>> not "pirated". Just an el-cheapo.
>>
>>Never had much interest in stuff like that.
>
> Just because it's so old it's no longer copyrighted doesn't mean
> it's not worth watching.

Very true. But most of what was made back then isn't subject matter
that interests me.
>
> And then there is /Sita Sings the Blues/, which is "copyleft"ed.
>
>>> Still, an el-cheapo DVD is better than an el-cheapo VHS,
>>
>>The quality of VHS degrades with each generation of copying. By
>>the fourth or fifth generation, it's trash.
>>
>>> since
>>> the DVD is usually actually produced by a company that knows
>>> how to produce them.
>>
>>The one DVD I got from the Yo Ho Movie Club was made *from* a
>>VHS tape, that was at least a fourth or fifth generation copy.
>>It was basically unwatchable.
>
> I read the reviews of the (very few now) films I am looking and
> hoping for to avoid exactly that problem. Also pirating.
>
> But the /DVD/, considered as a /DVD/, still played all the way
> throught he film, right?

That one did, yes. It wasn't a long flim, well within the normal
record time for a VHS tape.

> Didn't stop 2/3 of the way through,
> say? And, being manufactured (presumably) by a company that does
> that for others (and usually inserts a screen to that effect at
> some point before or after the film), is as likely to last for
> decades (stored properly) as any other DVD.

I wouldn't count on the pirated stuff lasting long enough for the
post office to deliver it.
>
> That's what I was referring to: el-cheapo DVDs are superior to
> el-cheapo VHS in purely physical terms. The programming can, as
> you note, be just as bad.

Very true.
>
> I was /very/ glad to find /Charade/ done by Criterion because I
> knew it would be done as well as possible for something so old.

Criterion does excellent work. I believe the remaster the original
film where possible and go from there.

> It was also two minutes longer than the el-cheapo -- and those
> two minutes were /all my favorite bits [1]/, which the source
> used by the el-cheapo was lacking, clearly (to me) because the
> 8mm copy the el-cheapo used had been played over and over and
> over at those places until it literally broke into pieces in the
> projector.
>
> [1] Anyone who has seen the film can probably guess which ones
> they were. OTOH, the VHS tape the el-cheapo replaced was
> super-green: I had to adjust the color on my TV every time I saw
> it, and then adjust it back. Such is the fate of really popular
> old movies.

It may have originally be transferred to VHS from an 8mm film, and
the film may have deteriorated to the point where *it* was green.
It's common enough on cheap film.
>
>>>It took three tries with the original /Night of
>>> the Living Dead/ until I found an el-cheapo VHS tape that
>>> didn't run out of tape before the film ended. What the first
>>> apparently two did was record it in LP, but only use enough
>>> tape for EP. That doesn't happen with DVDs.
>>>
>>> Some studios make DVD-Rs of their own, which are, of course,
>>> legitimate. In some cases, when I had to replace a DVD that
>>> stopped playing (a rare occurrence), the replacement turned
>>> out to be a studio-produced DVD-R.
>>
>>Not all that uncommon for non-big-studio films.
>
> I'm not sure what this refers to. Most non-big-studio films I
> own DVDs of are on regular DVDs, not DVD-Rs.

But it's not uncommon for indie films where the people who are
doing the DVD don't expect enough sales to justify the expensive a
full production run. Certianly more common than for big studio
films.
>
> And the ones I was referring are, by definition, big studio
> films, as it is big studios that are putting them (and the mod
> BDs) out.
>
> And some were popular enough to be released on a normal DVD
> originally.
>
> Note: By "DVD" and "BD" I am referring to a mass-market
> production run, where a very large number of copies are produced
> and sent out for sale everywhere. "DVD-R" and "mod BD" refer to
> discs sold (so far as I can tell) only online and produced only
> when purchased. Indeed, for a while, at least, Amazon was
> actually producing (burning) the DVD-Rs, using content provided
> by the major studio.
>
>>> When I last investigated it, BD-Rs had been tried and found
>>> wanting, so instead of a studio-produced BD-R you get an "mod"
>>> ("manufactured on demand") BD.
>>
>>I only own a handful of BDs, only on stuff not available any
>>other way (like the later seasons of The Expanse.)
>
> When my last DVD player died, I replaced it with a BD player.
> The discs I bought then were either for P&S DVDs that were
> letterboxed on BD, or were very long films that were split over
> two sides (either on one DVD or one each on two) on DVD, but
> were on one side of one disc on BD.
>
> Since then, I have also bought BDs when they were all I could
> find (not necessarily all that existed, I don't always look
> beyond Amazon) or when they cost less than the DVD (sometimes by
> what I would regard by quite a bit). Sometimes what cost less
> was a BD/DVD combo pack -- less than the DVD or the BD by
> itself.

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:07:52 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
<taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>news:bhvj3hlnp2q6j9ss2k9jo1ieb44mrq4jlh@4ax.com:

<we appear to be mostly in agreement>

>> But the /DVD/, considered as a /DVD/, still played all the way
>> throught he film, right?
>
>That one did, yes. It wasn't a long flim, well within the normal
>record time for a VHS tape.

The original /Night of the Living Dead/, at 96 min would have fit on
what, if memory serves, was called a "C120" VHS tape at SP. But most
el-cheapo's were EP, with very small amounts of tape in the cassette.

>> Didn't stop 2/3 of the way through,
>> say? And, being manufactured (presumably) by a company that does
>> that for others (and usually inserts a screen to that effect at
>> some point before or after the film), is as likely to last for
>> decades (stored properly) as any other DVD.
>
>I wouldn't count on the pirated stuff lasting long enough for the
>post office to deliver it.
>>
>> That's what I was referring to: el-cheapo DVDs are superior to
>> el-cheapo VHS in purely physical terms. The programming can, as
>> you note, be just as bad.
>
>Very true.
>>
>> I was /very/ glad to find /Charade/ done by Criterion because I
>> knew it would be done as well as possible for something so old.
>
>Criterion does excellent work. I believe the remaster the original
>film where possible and go from there.

Generally, yes. /It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World/ was from a
restoration that could be called "heroic", given what they had to work
with and how they chose to do it. Their /War & Peace/ (Bondarchuk) is
from a longer print than Ruscico had, but is still not complete. But
those are exceptions.

>> It was also two minutes longer than the el-cheapo -- and those
>> two minutes were /all my favorite bits [1]/, which the source
>> used by the el-cheapo was lacking, clearly (to me) because the
>> 8mm copy the el-cheapo used had been played over and over and
>> over at those places until it literally broke into pieces in the
>> projector.
>>
>> [1] Anyone who has seen the film can probably guess which ones
>> they were. OTOH, the VHS tape the el-cheapo replaced was
>> super-green: I had to adjust the color on my TV every time I saw
>> it, and then adjust it back. Such is the fate of really popular
>> old movies.
>
>It may have originally be transferred to VHS from an 8mm film, and
>the film may have deteriorated to the point where *it* was green.
>It's common enough on cheap film.

That is quite possible. It was also quite irritating, hence my
excitement when I finally got it on DVD, then my disappointment with
the el-cheapo, and then my relief when Criterion did it and gave its
length as 2 minutes longer. They may be prone to confusing 4:3FS
(1.33:1) with the original aspect ratio of Academy (1.37:1) but then,
nobody's perfect and the actual result is invariably very well done.
>>>>It took three tries with the original /Night of
>>>> the Living Dead/ until I found an el-cheapo VHS tape that
>>>> didn't run out of tape before the film ended. What the first
>>>> apparently two did was record it in LP, but only use enough
>>>> tape for EP. That doesn't happen with DVDs.
>>>>
>>>> Some studios make DVD-Rs of their own, which are, of course,
>>>> legitimate. In some cases, when I had to replace a DVD that
>>>> stopped playing (a rare occurrence), the replacement turned
>>>> out to be a studio-produced DVD-R.
>>>
>>>Not all that uncommon for non-big-studio films.
>>
>> I'm not sure what this refers to. Most non-big-studio films I
>> own DVDs of are on regular DVDs, not DVD-Rs.
>
>But it's not uncommon for indie films where the people who are
>doing the DVD don't expect enough sales to justify the expensive a
>full production run. Certianly more common than for big studio
>films.

I don't seem to have noticed this trend, but perhaps I have simply not
been looking. It's not that hard to spot a DVD-R: a burned DVD-R, even
one burned over the entire surface, doesn't look like an actual DVD.
Non-studio DVD-Rs, of which I have a few, tend to only burn part of
the disc, making their status even clearer.
>> And the ones I was referring are, by definition, big studio
>> films, as it is big studios that are putting them (and the mod
>> BDs) out.
>>
>> And some were popular enough to be released on a normal DVD
>> originally.
>>
>> Note: By "DVD" and "BD" I am referring to a mass-market
>> production run, where a very large number of copies are produced
>> and sent out for sale everywhere. "DVD-R" and "mod BD" refer to
>> discs sold (so far as I can tell) only online and produced only
>> when purchased. Indeed, for a while, at least, Amazon was
>> actually producing (burning) the DVD-Rs, using content provided
>> by the major studio.
<snippo>

>> When my last DVD player died, I replaced it with a BD player.
>> The discs I bought then were either for P&S DVDs that were
>> letterboxed on BD, or were very long films that were split over
>> two sides (either on one DVD or one each on two) on DVD, but
>> were on one side of one disc on BD.
>>
>> Since then, I have also bought BDs when they were all I could
>> find (not necessarily all that existed, I don't always look
>> beyond Amazon) or when they cost less than the DVD (sometimes by
>> what I would regard by quite a bit). Sometimes what cost less
>> was a BD/DVD combo pack -- less than the DVD or the BD by
>> itself.
>
>The only BDs I own are first four seasons of The Expanse (bastards
>haven' release season 5 on disc yet) and a miniseries on the great
>kingdoms of Africa, both of which were only available on BD (which
>is to say, season 4 of The Expanse, made by Amazon - the first
>three seasons are available on DVD).
>
>I expect there will be more in the future.

I've been expecting this for about two decades -- from the hype I
thought Blu-Ray would completely drive out DVDs -- but that hasn't
happened yet. Well, except occasionally and, even then, it isn't clear
to me that no DVDs were ever made, just that there aren't any
available.

As if all the DVDs of a particular title had been sold and only the
BDs were left.

OTOH, modern DVD players, the last time I checked Amazon, appeared to
me to be BD players in every respect except, of course, for not
actually playing Blu-Ray discs. HDMI, enhanced DVD, wireless
connectivity -- it was all there in both DVD and BD players.

>> Unlike the transition from P&S VHS to letterboxed VHS, or from
>> VHS to DVD, I fell /no/ desire to replace DVDs with BDs. It
>> isn't just economics; I actually /prefer/ the DVD-style menus.
>> For one thing, they are readable, something that cannot always
>> be said about BD menus due to their choice of font size.
>
>My television was the cheapest model availabe at Walmart, so
>there's no detectible difference between DVD and BD when played on
>it.

Mine is a 4:3 NTSC set with a picture tube. The 1080p from the BD
player is converted to S-Video. So it is no surprise that /I/ don't
see a difference.

What's more interesting is that, when I downloaded a Prime HD film and
watched it, then deleted the download and restarted it, the streamed
version was SD, and I didn't notice any diminution in quality there --
and I was watching it on an HD device, so I /should/ have seen a
difference, if it were significant enough to be noticed.

This is very strange. VHS used to have ads for digitally scanned
films, showing the new! sharp! digital image side-by-side with the
old! pokey! non-digital image. These made sense, since both were VHS
and you could /see/ the difference. Whether what you saw was real was,
of course, a different question.

These mutated into ads, on VHS tapes, doing the same with VHS and DVD.
These were less impressive since a VHS tape doesn't suddenly become
able to show DVD-quality images just because of the lable. And, when I
replaced my digitally-mastered two-tape fully-letterboxed [1]
/Ben-Hur/ with the DVD /they looked the same/. They were, in fact,
twins: the same digital scan was used for both. But that the DVD was
not noticably superior was ... interesting. The DVD's sound, however,
was probably better; DVD sound is generally an improvement on VHS, in
my experience.

Now I am seeing these ads, on a DVD, comparing plain-jane Blu-Ray with
the new! amazing! 4K Ultra, claiming that, just as a BD has more
colors than a DVD, so a 4K has more than a BD. Well, maybe so, but I
can't really tell, can I, since I am watching this on a DVD. In fact,
the only way I /could/ tell is if I had 4K equipment and were watching
it on a 4K disc.