Mine was Apocalypse / ApX (a hack of Havok, which was a hack of something else, which was a hack of Emulex/2, which I think was a hack of Forum?), around '92.
I, too, remember recruiting ACiD guys to help out with the menu art.
I was (briefly) part of a BBS "movie" group that made movies using "Commodore 64 Graphics" which were actually just made using the C64's unique character set. It would record back every cursor movement and character change, so you could make a really cheesy animation that often turned out to be really fun to watch.
You'd actually have to add delays by moving the cursor to allow enough time to read the captions/speech bubbles. It was pretty funny because it would be much slower on a 300 baud modem vs. a 2400 baud, so you had to be careful how you tuned your delays.
There was also "real" BBS software like wildcat and MajorBBS ...
I also remember some very, very active and high quality boards that ran citadel ... citadel was sort of the HN of the BBS world ... no ANSI, no fluff, just quick command keys and all high quality discussion.
Someone local to me had launched a pay-for-membership based MajorBBS that had something like 16 phone lines in. MajorBBS was the only thing I had seen that could support so many users at once. This was around the time I had stopped running my own BBS, before college.
This meant it could offer an active chat room, and it had a MUD game that everyone loved, called TeleArena.
For me, TeleArena was fun because I'd write scripts that would automate playing the game for me when I wasn't there.
I ran a 10-line worldgroup (majorbbs) in Boulder, circa 1996.
I had this weird software I licensed which let people play Doom against each other, over the phone line, simulating a local IPX network ... MPGS (Multiplayer game server) by a company called APCi.
As soon as we hit $100/kWh in the next year or two, that oil is worthless [1] (Tesla will supposedly hit this target when the Gigafactory is at full capacity).
There are other uses for oil besides gasoline that are not going to be displaced anytime soon. Jet fuel, home heating(could be if solar gets exceptionally cheap, but unlikely anytime soon), asphalt, plastics, etc. Those uses alone probably can't support oil at even its current depressed prices, but it will hardly be worthless for decades to come.
heating with oil is expensive. solar panels actually can heat well. just heat a block of concrete. the concrete is the battery. electrodacus is doing this now.
Burning natural gas is among the cheapest forms of heating we have, and it works 24/7/365 and at all latitudes. Solar heating using a slab as a heat reserve requires re-engineering houses completely and may be impossible in a lot of places that don't get a lot of sun during the coldest months.
sure, nat gas works great where lines go to your house. I was at a house in the seattle area last weekend (a well developed metropolis) where people had propane. Solar goes everywhere, but depends on good weather to be useful.
Perfect statement of someone who more than likely lives within a city with public utilities. However, there are actually a large amount of people in rural U.S. that have to use either Oil or Electric heating (in which both are expensive). In These rural area's, Oil heating is the norm and in order to convert to an electric heat there are extensive cost's involved (which most people in these area's cannot afford). Living in a city (especially west-coast) has certain amenities that the rest of the U.S. does not. Complete solar power in rural Wisconsin or the Dakota's for example isn't a real viable option. There is much less sunless then the west coast and extreme season weather changes (humidity, rain, snow, hot/cold).
Also need to design and build with materials that maintain as constant a temperature as possible. Double glazing, insulated walls, floors and roofs, orientation to the sun etc.
That oil will still be worth trillions for the next two decades. It won't be worthless until the global economy has moved very substantially off of oil. It won't even plunge toward worthless until demand begins to dramatically fall off, which isn't going to occur in the next two or three years.
The Saudis will likely have time to liquidate a very large portion of Aramco and its oil assets before the market for oil dries up too much. In 20 years they can exhaust over half of their oil reserves (by some estimates, they'll be a net oil importer by 2030-2035). They'll sell well over ten trillion dollars worth of oil in that time.
It will take decades to shift the global economy and industry off of oil. In ten years, the majority of cars on the road globally will still be burning gasoline. That hopefully won't be the case in 20 though.
Burning gasoline isn't the problem, burning gasoline that's sourced from the ground is. It's possible to use a lot of electricity to run gasoline combustion backwards, turning CO2 and H20 into gasoline. It's currently not economical due to electricity prices, but it may be a better option to retrofit gasoline production rather than automobile fuel consumption.
I'm not sure what part of this you're not getting. They're selling off a small stake of the state-owned oil company to diversify how they make money. They'll use the remaining money + new income from the corporations they'll build/buy to import oil. This isn't a hard concept to follow.
No, they will use that money to pay their inefficient and unproductive, sometimes parasitic public service workforce. Then their religious schools and holy men, then buy more weapons.
A couple of fun things hidden (or not exactly) in this video:
There's no missing a couple of Neal's swordfighting buddies at 1:07.
Wondering where the camera stand is? Look for its reflection in the window behind Bill at 1:52.
What car did Bill drive to the meet-up? Probably not the Model X. My money is on the Porsche 959 shown at 2:17.
(It's also a safe bet that the meet-up actually began at the Burgermaster, since that's in Bill's neighborhood. That way Bill only has to make one round-trip to Seattle instead of two.)
I'm totally failing to get the joke with the shovels and pickaxes at the corner of Boyer & Howe at 2:40. (Surely not a macabre gag as they cross towards Lakeview cemetery...)
And of course the gaggle of kids in Madison Park at 2:54 are observing the moon through a telescope.
The Model X in the video has a WA license plate "7EVES", the title of the book. Since Neal lives in Washington, it makes seems to reason that it is his.
Bill might well drive a Model X and any number of other cars -- his daily was an armored mid-90's Lexus LS for many years -- but if there's a Porsche 959 parked at the south Kirkland Burgermaster, the odds are overwhelming that it belongs to Bill.
This because only 345 Porsche 959's were ever built, and none were eligible for import into the US. That is, until Bill made himself instrumental in the passage of the show and display importation exemption* so that he could buy one.
It looks like Bill drove that dark-blue Model S that you could see around 0:50. You can tell that it's not a Model X from the interior seat configuration.
Bill is a known 959 enthusiast [1]. Considering that only 345 were ever made and only a handful of those were imported into the US, I'd say that car is very likely his.
The timeline looks like they started in Seattle, drove through the arboretum, over 520, went to the Kirkland Burgermaster, drive by his office by the Bluetooth SIG, endeding at Houghton Beach Park in Kirkland just north of Carillon Point.
What's puzzling here is that Wright proceeds with his charades as though he somehow knows the real Satoshi will not emerge to call him out on it. (There is some precedent for this: a long-dormant account controlled by the real Satoshi stirred to disclaim the identity of Dorian Nakamoto in 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/03/06/bitcoin-c...)
If Satoshi disclaimed the identity of D. Nakamoto in 2014, why wouldn't he disclaim the identity of Craig Wright today?
I do not believe, for an instant, that Wright is Satoshi. But given the history, it seems plausible that Wright might have once been in the know as to Satoshi's true identity. Should he know the real Satoshi(s) to now be absent, it would likely embolden him to undertake this scam...
>If Satoshi disclaimed the identity of D. Nakamoto in 2014, why wouldn't he disclaim the identity of Craig Wright today?
One reason he might disclaim Dorian is that he simply wanted the poor man left alone. The claim that Dorian was the creator of Bitcoin was not only completely ridiculous on its face, but also a huge intrusion in the life of a clueless old man.
Wright has brought a bunch of ridicule upon himself, but it's his own fault.
It probably wasn't the real Satoshi that posted the comment on that site.
His @gmx.com email account had been compromised so it's very possible the poster gained access just by issuing a password reset. Some old CMS systems also issue generated passwords sent to your email upon registration, so the password could have been obtained that way as well.
The GMX account password could be reset by knowing the accounts date of birth. The p2p foundation site leaked the date of birth used by the account there.
(the date used was the day of the year that eo6102 made private gold ownership unlawful, and 1975-- when it became lawful again)
Given that he has the balls to attempt to pull off this kind of con which is transparent to anyone with half a clue, I doubt that the knowledge the real Satoshi could discredit him would weigh that heavily.
"If Satoshi disclaimed the identity of D. Nakamoto in 2014, why wouldn't he disclaim the identity of Craig Wright today?"
If I were Satoshi, I really wouldn't like to make a precedence to come forward whenever some clown claims he's Satoshi. As jere mentioned, the first time (Dorian case) Satoshi probably felt pity for an old man.
> If Satoshi disclaimed the identity of D. Nakamoto in 2014, why wouldn't he disclaim the identity of Craig Wright today?
What if he knows the real Satoshi and that the real Satoshi wouldn't out him? For example he knows that the real Satoshi is deceased and/or won't come forward.
The instant case is one of material omission rather than false statement, but there is a substantial amount of case law recognizing that material omissions should be treated the same as false statements.
You might be answering a slightly different question. If there is material omission, the "poisonous fruits of the illegal search" conducted under the fraudulent warrant may be inadmissible in a trial.
But that's separate than whether the intentional omission is itself illegal. Is there any legal consequences for a law enforcement agency to mislead a judge through omission to obtain a search warrant?
Clearly these sort of omissions are happening, especially in the context of parallel construction, and arguably they are technically perjury, but have there been any cases where law enforcement officials have received punishment for this?
