Slashdot Mirror

Agreed. Although it is actually worse then 5% !

Here is a list of ALL the movies that came out in 2017. Out of the 704 movies released in 2017 only ~14 were good IMHO. That is, 100 * 14 / 704 = 1.988%

And that IS including the dumb, dormulaic, mindless-action, pop movies:

- Cars 3
- Despicable Me 3
- Dunkirk
- Guardians of the Galaxy 2
- Thor Ragnarok
- Wonder Woman

Roughly ~2% of movies are good, the rest are garbage.

/sarcasm Here's to another 126 Hollywood shitty re-makes that no one asked for! Maybe the sixth remake of Robin Hood will be the golden ticket. *snicker*

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/ga...

That movie was released in 2000. It seems the term "battles royal" or "battle royale" was first used in this context as early as 1671. 1.a.a fight participated in by more than two combatants; especially : one in which the last fighter in the ring or the last fighter standing is declared the winner.

Battle Royal in pro wrestling goes back at least to Wrestlemania 2 which took place on April 7th, 1986.

> "Likes" almost became the new "law".

The Orville even did an episode on that: Majority Rule (aired in 2017) which was a repeat of a Black Mirror episode Nosedive (aired in 2016), which is similar to a Community, App Development and Condiments (aired in 2014)

It's actually worse then that. Security (or the lack of it) -- whether it be public security (prevention of intrusion) or personal security (protecting your rights) -- can be summarized with two phrases and how they are linked:

1. Follow the money, and
2. Rise of Good Enough aka Worse is better

This gives the TL:DR; conclusions;

Security can be measured short-term or long-term,
Security is only a means to an end.

That is, for most companies there is (almost) no long-term financial gain but there is a real short-term expense if you take security serious

For example:

* Banks have a lot more to lose if they don't take security serious -- both short term and long term.
* Some fly-by-night company may lose short-term (expense), but long term no real benefit if they ignore security.

Let's take a hypothetical case of 2 companies, working on products that have identical features:

Company A = Does the bare MVP (Minimal Viable Product), security issues are largely ignored, or just barely acknowledged. Security is "good enough".
Company B = Takes security serious. There code is battle hardened against Fuzz testing.

Company A takes 12 months of development before they ship.
Company B takes 24 months of development before they ship.

Q. Which product is going to be more (financially) successful?
A. Company's A.

Q. Why?
A. The public does not value security -- they don't know how to. Let's pretend there is a buffer overflow problem that company A ignored but company B fixed. What is the probability of it actually happening? Company A said the ratio of risk:expense wasn't worth it while company B valued it.

We saw this _exact_ same thing happen in early Operating Systems when they moved from being single-tasking to multi-tasking would allow programs to stomp over another applications memory. This was inconvenient so eventually hardware was developed to stop this following the Separation of Concerns philosophy. Even today there are good reasons why a program would want to read another process's memory (debugger, automation), and there are bad reasons (malware).

Security is only a means to an end.

This raises the question:

* How do you prioritize security issues?
* How do you make sure everyone values security issues?
* How do we make sure bad security practices are made a priority and fixed?
* How are companies that use bad security practices punished?
* When security gets in the way of functionality / performance what needs to change?

If security issues were prioritized over functionality almost NOTHING would ever ship.

Where is the line drawn between idealism and pragmatism?

Security not being taken serious has created all sorts of opportunities to be hacked. We can certainly do better in this area. Education is the key.

I thought this (4 page take from a robot in a similar situation as yours) was an interesting take on the status of comics today although I'm a webcomic guy, never been an actual comic BOOK reader, so I don't know if its accurate or not. You could also cast a wider net, and read some reviews and other discussion by searching for 'comic book reviews', 'comic book blogs', or other similar searches on your preferred search engine. Perhaps there may some sort of community on reddit, facebook, or another community site where people who are specifically into comics may have insight if nothing turns up here.

Here are some sites that may have interesting info:
https://comicbookroundup.com/
https://www.cbr.com/category/c...
https://comicsverse.com/
http://comicbook.com/
http://www.denofgeek.com/us/bo...

I was more thinking of these mice.

Replying to myself because I hit submit too fast.

Can these writers be that surprised that it's getting harder to make a living when much of the industry has a fear of anything original? Den Of Geek lists 120(!) movie remakes or reboots currently in progress (as of 3/15/2017). TV seems to be less paralyzed, but they can afford to throw shows out and see what catches.

Those 120 remakes... http://www.denofgeek.com/us/mo...

Interesting article on the collapsed Halo movie. Seemed like it could have been pretty cool.

Stock tires make your car look like an AMC

> does not mean that Pacific Rim is just as bad /Oblg. Everything wrong with Pacific Rim 9 minutes.

But yeah, movies are independent of one another. Same lame-ass story, remakes, reboots, reimagining, refuse, year after year.

* 57 movie remakes and reboots currently in development
http://www.denofgeek.com/movie...

Maybe this issue will figure into the upcoming movie.

http://cdn-static.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeek/files/styles/insert_main_wide_image/public/demon-seed.jpg

Maybe porting them for the OS of the Steam console could give some extra reasons.

I would buy a surak-class shuttle instead. Am I the only one who thinks it looks the same? [1]

[1]: http://application.denofgeek.com/images/m/75spaceships/main/surak.jpg

The plot of episode 3 details how a mans life is effectively ruined by perfect recall*.

Forgetting all the fun of interesting stats generated by this Wolfram project, is that what you want?

Peace,
Andy.

* spoiler alert for those of you who have not watched this brilliant series

interestingly enough, there may be a remake of Starship Troopers in the works: http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/1157184/starship_troopers_and_the_state_of_hollywood_scifi_remakes.html

There is also due to be a Cloverfield 2, apparently. http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/820796/cloverfield_2_still_on_the_cards.html

Avatar? Pass, that movie looks like a bad video game. Cameron's Aliens and the original terminator and the only films of his I've willingly sat through twice.

I thought Dan O'Bannons PKD adaptations were okay, Total Recall made for entertaining mainstream fare and Screamers I enjoyed (although it's far from being a good film). Alien is an example of what a good script can become when it's given over to someone with talent. It wasn't until the studio saw some of Ridley Scotts pre-production art that they realised what they had. Most hack directors would have seen a bug-eyed monster B movie, Scott saw something else entirely.

The time was right for Alien, by way of the never-made '70s Dune movie that a few of the team, O'Bannon and Geiger included, had worked on. Not to discount the 'Star Beast' script but what you see on screen was a group effort. I don't want to give the impression I'm pissing on the guys grave, the studio execs and writers reponsible for Alien3 and onwards have been pissing in that hole for a very long time.

Alien was a small part of what O'Bannon was responsible for.

I just emailed fox at askfox@fox.com
Will it work? Probably not. Worth a try, though. Feel free to reuse and send your own!

Hi!

I am and have been a fan of many Fox shows. But over the years I have noticed a disturbing trend of show and network sabotage! Good shows with many devoted fans are cancelled. Episodes are shown out of order, causing continuity problems. Scheduling is shifted around repeatedly. And, of course, great shows are moved to Friday night. Please, help me understand - is there someone with a sadistic god complex hijacking your schedule? Or do you draw names out of a hat? Why is Fringe off for two months? It is doing great and I'm dying to see what happens next...but the writers' strike showed us that being off for so long is next to a death sentence. Why is Dollhouse starting it's run on Friday nights? I understand it is unproved, but if you look at the internet, there is a whole slew of Joss Whedon fans who will watch anything he does...can't you try to get new fans, by moving it to a more convenient time? Sure, Joss fans may watch no matter when you put it on, but I assume you want to grow beyond that. One would think that you could put it on a different night and then get the Joss fans PLUS others as well, others who may have stuff to do on Friday nights.

There is a good article about others who feel this way here: http://denofgeek.com/television/216974/what_has_the_fox_network_got_against_its_own_scifi_shows.html

And discussion of that article on slashdot, a well known and respected community:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1156631

Gain more fans: Make smart scheduling choices! Or at least offer us some transparency into why you cancel or move shows!

Thanks!! I hope to keep watching!

Me

There are a couple other sites that give a lot more detail on the clips that were shown. From the description it seems easy to piece together the overall storyline of the film. If you don't want to know what the storyline is then don't read these links

http://denofgeek.com/movies/144620/star_trek_four_full_scenes_and_new_trailer_reviewed.html http://www.empireonline.com/empireblog/Post.asp?id=313