this?

[link]

others came up in this search:

[link]

I was rushed last night. It's recognised, and DVDs work fine. It's Blu Ray discs that have a problem, and I can't work out where on their site to download Mac software to play them, and my trusty VLC-plays-everything fails. It tells me I need a library for AACS decoding, and although I've followed the instructions here, no dice.

So, apparently, Blu Rays and OS X are "a thing". I've only been able to find two products that really say they do it (VLC's support is experimental, also non-existent for me). And they both play my first test discs unacceptably jerkily. I'm disappointed.

I had no idea this would be an issue.

Also, they both display the same disc menus, which are not the menus I see on my standalone Blu Ray player. I haven't verified it, but I don't see any immediate way to see all of the extras. So I have an increasingly large collection of movies that I can't watch on my computer like I've grown used to.

There also seems to be a licensing requirement that my computer be connected to the internet when I play the disc. But at this point I can't honestly be arsed to explore that.

I did not see this coming.

Anyone here with a Blu Ray drive on a Windows machine? What's the support like?

I'm connecting over USB 2.0 on a 2.53 GHz Intel machine with 4GB RAM--is it likely that it's a hardware issue?

I really wish the Fry's sales assistant hadn't been such an idiot. He didn't know what BD-ROM meant. When I'm reading off the back of the box faster than the person paid to do so...well, you can see how much I don't know about Blu Rays. Knowing less is pretty dicey.

How is Fry's return policy? Even if you end up out shipping it might be worth while.

Restocking fee, apparently.

Someone on lifehacker suggested MakeMKV which can either rip or stream UPNP, so if that doesn't work--back to the store with a *suggestion* it's not my fault. I have two weeks to make up my mind.

How Yahoo Killed Flickr and Lost the Internet

This is the story of a wonderful idea. Something that had never been done before, a moment of change that shaped the Internet we know today. This is the story of Flickr. And how Yahoo bought it and murdered it and screwed itself out of relevance along the way.

I don't see anything in that incredibly tl/dr; article that suggests another site that's competing in the space where Flickr provides me value--as a hobbyist photographer, where else are people hosting their portfolios?

500px.

I'm not actually looking for a competitor--I'm perfectly happy with flickr. It just seemed to me that the sweet spot that most of the people I know use flickr for was not even touched on in the article. Is it really that much about social networking that not-professional photo portfolios sites don't even get a mention? Because Facebook or Instagram are all they mention that I saw.

I searched for 500px and it wasn't anywhere before the comments, at the least.

Yeah, what they're talking about is not how I use flickr at all, nor would I have been happy if it ended up that way. I also don't feel like it's a wasteland. The users I'm interacting with are still actively posting photos.