Slashdot Mirror

I *am* using Firefox (2.0.0.1), and the link works just fine for me. I middle clicked, and it opened in a new tab. Are you having problems clicking?

I used a standard HTML anchor tag, with the url as the href attribute and as the body of the anchor. Slashdot added a space inside the body, presumably to make it page-width friendly.

Here, I'll try it again:
http://www.darkknight.ca/images/Peanuts_1954_318.g if - href and body are the same
the image - href still links to the image

I *am* using Firefox (2.0.0.1), and the link works just fine for me. I middle clicked, and it opened in a new tab. Are you having problems clicking?

I used a standard HTML anchor tag, with the url as the href attribute and as the body of the anchor. Slashdot added a space inside the body, presumably to make it page-width friendly.

Here, I'll try it again:
http://www.darkknight.ca/images/Peanuts_1954_318.g if - href and body are the same
the image - href still links to the image

http://www.darkknight.ca/images/Peanuts_1954_318.g if

Wow, only 3 articles later, and more media industry trampling. Now the trampling is on artists (the mixers).

On a personal level, I've always had mixed feelings about hiphop and mixing from other artists, especially when used without permission. But at a gut level I tend to agree it's a different kind of creativity and creation, and the end result is exposure of old (and new) music in ways never heard before. The final net result is positive for all parties involved.

The research I was able to do showed pretty clearly using other artists' work in mixes is tacitly allowed with a wink. The artists getting additional exposure are getting free advertising. (I'd be happy to know if there are artists out there who really don't want their art in others' mixes.

This clearly underscores the RIAA's hypocrisy in that their thesis includes the tenet they are out to protect the artists, but if more exposure, and ultimately more happy consumers and sellers all around doesn't fit the definition of "protection", I'm at a loss.

In the meantime unknown artists who may have never seen the light of day get world-wide exposure. Sales across the genre, and from the borrowed genre (I just had to go out and get the Steppenwolf, after hearing the mix with "Magic Carpet Ride") go up. Everybody could be happy.

But I keep forgetting it doesn't seem to be about being happy (on all levels: aesthetic, profit), it's about power and control. The RIAA wants to control something they feel slipping out of their hands and they seem more desparate every day.

I keep thinking it'd be interesting to organize some loosely structured boycott or activity against the RIAA, but as I mentioned in my very recent post the irritation factor alone may be enough to push consumers away.

I'm always reminded of a favorite Peanuts cartoon (kudos to slashdotter Patrick Furlong for finding that old cartoon for me) where the RIAA behaves much like Lucy... they want "us" to have fun, but give us minimal leash to do so... and even then when they see we've figured a way to have fun with so little leash, they want to take that away too. Stupid gits!

I would also love to see a cross over story arc of Spider-Man and Batman with John Romita Jr. and Jim Lee alternating between titles (Jim Lee doing Spider-Man, and Romita Jr. doing Batman). You wouldn't have to search for writers, because every stellar comic writer of recent times would be fighting tooth and nail to pen this.

Talk about a fanboy's disgustingly drenched wet dream!!

OK, so I am a big nerd, so sue me.

Check out my site, The Dark Knight for a review/summary of The Dark Knight Returns. It's in the storylines section. Batman did in fact kick Superman's ass. Get over it.

This link tells about the battle between an aging Batman, and a superman weakened by a nuclear winter.

In a way, Batman has gone crazy; crazy with doubt and violence.

Anyhow, you can read it for yourself.

Synopsis of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns (and a great photo of Superwuss getting his teeth kicked in) is here .

Batman clearly had the upper hand before, during, and after the fight -- which makes it obvious the he "won". The fact that he decided to let Superwuss live doesn't mean that Batman lost. He not only beat Superwuss physically, he absolutely schooled him mentally.

Synopsis of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns (and a great photo of Superwuss getting his teeth kicked in) is here .

You're forgetting that Superman has a conscience, and a seriously panzy-ass code of ethics. Unfortunately, this makes him just a little bitch with biceps.

Batman will scheme, plot, plan, and easily outsmart the man of steel... because this absurd strength is all Superman has. Batman has an extreme mental advantage.

I think it's odd that Batman beating Superman is a "ridiculous stretch" in your opinion, while Superman reversing the flow of time with something as stupid as changing the rotation of the earth is acceptable to you.

Check out (synopsis of) Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns . Batman kicks the livin' dogshit out of Superman -- and it's much more plausable, in the comic book world, than Superman rewriting the laws of the universe by just flying really fast against the rotation of Earth...

Has anyone read the Frank Miller graphic novel?

From this synopsis:

"I want you to remember, Clark... in all the years to come... in your most private moments... I want you to remember my hand at your throat... I want you to remember the one man who beat you..."

Essentially Batman kicks Superman's ass.

y