From the Everything Has a Cost and Unintended Consequences Files

3D is the next big thing™. I don't actually believe that. For me, it was fun to see the first time at Disney World in some of their shows, but I don't need something to jump out at me every few minutes just because the show is in 3D. I got a lot bigger thrill in going from a 2D to a 3D advanced graphics card (the FPS went through the roof!) when I was playing Quake 2 oh so many years ago. And HD TV has been a great move up.

There are people who are betting a lot of money on 3D in movies and on TV, but here is where it gets fun.

So "the advent of 3D projectors is severely cutting the amount of light that reaches the screen because projectionists are not changing out the 3D lenses for 2D screenings as they should." Using the wrong lenses creates sub-optimal 2D pictures. If you read the article, it goes on to say that they have put so many controls in place that it makes it difficult to make the swap between movies. They are afraid that the bad guys are going to rip them off, so they spend lots of effort to make things difficult - on the evil-doer and the guy who has to support the projector.

The article sums it up this way:

"So in this case, Hollywood's threat model of losing revenues through unauthorized copying and redistribution overpowered its *other* threat model of losing business to home entertainment systems and Blu-Ray. At the projector level, I'd have thought the latter was the worse threat."

I think our default position for so many things in our lives is to make them more secure, but given our inability to evaluate risk, we often create more problems than we solve. I preach it at work and home - keep things simple. Some complexities are required, but others we impose upon ourselves.