Slashdot Mirror

For example, I'd rather watch Futurama than Temptation Island 2 (I'd even rather watch it than the Simpsons sometimes!)

At least a promise of continuing Futurama after The Simpsons is gone would be good...

HERE

Futurama
P.O. Box 900
Attn: Futurama
Beverly Hills, CA 90213-0900

Send those letters! Snail mail is the only thing they listen to. Not online petitions or e-mail!

Isn't that the phone used by Jamey on 24? If so, that was a clever ad move by Samsumg...
BTW, I just accessed 24's site for the first time, and on Jamie's profile, it mentions "recruited by CTU after Microsoft fired her for creating open-source software related to intelligence gathering" and "UC Linux user group (sorry, no URL, it's a flashmedia page). Really cool...

Isn't that the phone used by Jamey on 24? If so, that was a clever ad move by Samsumg...
BTW, I just accessed 24's site for the first time, and on Jamie's profile, it mentions "recruited by CTU after Microsoft fired her for creating open-source software related to intelligence gathering" and "UC Linux user group (sorry, no URL, it's a flashmedia page). Really cool...

{hmmmm} Then I wonder what the web site contract is based on. Obviously Fox is deluded into thinking it has something of value that they're going to allow you to use, but what do you give them?

In my mind this (and this) simply state that said storage space and network traffic are my property or rental and that their spam is theft, trespass, and vandalism.

I wonder how much the personal satisfaction of terminating the business of a spammer for the benefit of users everywhere would be valued at?

Some good ideas to think about, thanks.

What is "consideration"?

Web sites have terms of use, so it seems to me this could work. I do plan to run it past a lawyer at some point, but haven't gotten to it yet.

Now I feel nauseated that I've actually wasted brain cells on remembering this stuff.

Thats the same thing people do with movies.

If they make it hard to get shows, they will start a black market for shows :(

Instead of getting a friend to go to Korea and get lord of the rings on vcd, I'll have to go over to catch up on Fox's 24.

This is FOX... the same network that initially cancelled Family Guy, only to bring it back after they received a lot of letters. From what I recall, FOX didn't initially know they had a gem with Malcolm in the Middle either.

Bottom line is, if enough snail-mail letters are sent to FOX (trust me on this, networks give snail-mail more weight than e-mails), there is a possibility that the show could be saved. It's worked in the past for the original Star Trek (thus its third season) as well as Roswell (thus its second season).

In the case of Roswell, fans sent thousands of bottles of tabasco sauce to The WB as a show of support. With The Tick, perhaps fans can instead send... spoons?

This is FOX... the same network that initially cancelled Family Guy, only to bring it back after they received a lot of letters. From what I recall, FOX didn't initially know they had a gem with Malcolm in the Middle either.

Bottom line is, if enough snail-mail letters are sent to FOX (trust me on this, networks give snail-mail more weight than e-mails), there is a possibility that the show could be saved. It's worked in the past for the original Star Trek (thus its third season) as well as Roswell (thus its second season).

In the case of Roswell, fans sent thousands of bottles of tabasco sauce to The WB as a show of support. With The Tick, perhaps fans can instead send... spoons?

I suspect that at this point "The Family Guy" is pretty much unkillable; just like Jerry Lee Lewis. Every time you start throwing dirt on its coffin it somehow manages to claw its way back to the surface.

This all sounds a little strange so off I trotted to philips to chuck Nebula in there search engine (to no avail) then on the front page was there new other form of time saving life changing device... a fridge that scans barcodes as you put stuff in it. One massive pic of a barcode sat deed centre of the homepage. Do I remember this from a cretin TV programme on FOX, Dark Angel perhaps?

Be afraid....

Now that I'd find impressive -- Fox putting one of its shows up against another Fox show!

See Fox.

That sounds like part of a "Futurama" episode.
Good thing you posted that logged in -- now you can sue him for residuals when he steals the idea.

aside from The Simpsons, it's probably the funniest show on the air.

If you like the simpsons, and funny shows, do yourself a favor and watch The Family Guy. I mean, damn, how can a show be this funny every week? The dad and the baby have pretty much stolen the whole show, but you can run a show off those two characters alone. You can catch most of the third season so far on newsgroups too.

I don't know how many people are fans of the show, but I fear not enough people for Fox to keep it on the air...

We are not far now...
--

or it will turn us into Radioactive Supermen like I saw on Futurama.

__________________

2001-05-20 23:32:45

After seeing "Oktober skies" I had a few days where I really wanted to Launch a rocket of some sort. There is just something about building something and having it go that is amazing!

And then somebody comes along and calls your trip to the moon a hoax!

CONSPIRACY THEORY (9:00-10:00 PM ET/PT) In Stereo-CC

MOON LANDING QUESTIONED ON THE ALL-NEW SPECIAL 'CONSPIRACY THEORY: DID WE LAND ON THE MOON' FEB. 15 ON FOX

NASA put a man on the moon for the first time in 1969 -- or did it? Could the entire moon program have been an elaborate deception staged to fool the public? The conspiracy theories are investigated in the all-new one-hour special

CONSPIRACY THEORY:DID WE LAND ON THE MOON Thursday, Feb. 15 (9:00-10:00 PM ET/PT). (SP-0139) (TV-PG)

Yes, Fox is still at it! If you visit Mayor Quimby's official campaign site using Netscape under Linux, you get a nice message indicating that you're a second class citizen. Idn't that special?

People are willing to humiliate themselves on national TV for $500k, and backstab, lie, and suffer insect-infested open sores for a shot at $1G.

So I have not doubt that many will get into a hacking contest, trying to win $10k, where the downside is just vague concerns of abstract concepts being threatened in the future.
-----
D. Fischer

Sorry 'bout the broken links shoulda checked them.

here's ones that work:

Walt Disney Company

Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc.

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.

Paramount Pictures Corporation

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.

Universal Studios, Inc.

Warner Bros.

Those at least work, not sure how helpful they are ;) (particularly since about 50% don't load uless you have Javascript enabled :()

I haven't actually seen the movie yet, but one of the things that turned me off when I saw the trailer was the glaring incongruity between the character art and the computer-rendered backgrounds.

Like many other animators before them, the folks at Bluth's studios appear to have fallen victim to the blind pursuit of the so-called holy grail of CGI: photorealistic rendering.

Because computer-generated imagery is still very much in its infancy, many people mistakenly assume that the ultimate goal is to be able to generate images that look absolutely true-to-life. Yes, that can be one goal of CGI, but that should definitely not be the only goal.

Artists in traditional media have long eschewed realism in favor of stylized renditions of reality, usually to better emphasize certain features or emotions better than realism would allow. If photorealism were the ultimate goal of visual art, then hand painting would have simply become obsolete when photography was invented.

Fortunately, some people are busy doing research on techniques and algorithms that can be used to coax non-photorealistic images out of a computer renderer. This newly emerging field is called non-photorealistic rendering (NPR), and it has already been used very successfully in commercial efforts, most notably the television series Futurama (which uses a specific NPR technique called cell shading). I for one was extremely impressed the first time I saw those great smoothly-animated (but still cartoony-looking) 3D ships flying through space in the very first episode of Futurama.

Fortunately, the future of NPR looks very promising. Adventure Gamer has a short but informative article on the state of NPR in adventure games. The site also has a preview of an upcoming game called Runaway, which makes extensive use of NPR for character art, and looks absolutely stunning. Download the runaway trailer, and prepare to be flabbergasted by what you see. (Yes, it really is 3D rendered!)

It's too bad it didn't occur to Bluth that attempted photorealism in the background art would look just plain silly next to hand-animated characters. I guess they were just pushing for the "Wow!" factor; the average Joe Sixpack is more impressed by flashy freedee 'puter graphics than he is by the seamless and immersive environments than NPR can afford.

• Universial Studios
• Paramount Pictures Corporation
• Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc
• Sony Pictures Entertainment (owner of Tristar and Columbia)
• New Line Cinema (owned by Time-Warner)
• Disney Enterprises, Inc
• Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation.

"Fresh from their Pepsi promotion, and in direct competition with the Simpsons alcopops (okay, there's no alcohol but you can feel the e-numbers, man), the Spice Girls have are endorsing Spiced Guiness, which they say just goes to show that girls these days have the power to drink anything."

It comes as no surprise that Guinness Brewery want the nicey nicey Spice Girls to endorse their drink:

• In the UK it was first marketed as an eccentrics drink with their "Friends of the Guinnless" ad campaign.
• Then they had some wonderful special effects ad campaign with the whole world being encapsulated in a drop of Guinness.
• They had the fertile soil campaign, which subtly suggested that Guinness makes you more potent.
• Then they had the "thinking man's drink" with some interesting black and white pictures, and most recently the "Good things come to those who wait" which is variously some chiselled looking surfers, or an old Italian bloke who can still swim out to see and back in the time it takes for his Guinness to settle.
• Finally it has come to Spiced Guinness, to appeal to the ladies, who they have so far failed to appeal to with their mostly male-oriented campaigns. Up until now, you would get the occasional girl drinking "Guinness and black[currant]" (the blackcurrant to take away the sour stout taste), or perhaps the odd pregnant woman who has been told by her doctor that the extra iron will do her and the baby good.

Now, however, this new drink looks set to appeal to a whole new segment of the market and heralds a paradigm shift into a new era of sexual equality in Guinness drinking.

It would have been a damn shame if all of us Irix users had been blocked out just because we don't run Linux... I mean how else would I have gotten all of the "hot" and late breaking information about such hits as Worlds Wildest Police Videos?

;)

I checked the page source, found the URL it was supposed to have sent me to, and entered it by hand. It gave me the page, and opened yet another window for the site's navigation bar. Then the main window puked: Not Found. Apparently the Nav Ticker calls on some command URL: http://www.fox.com/uni_nav/FSComman d:check_time that gives the retrieval error. I'm not up on Javascript. Anybody know what this is supposed to be doing?

For the record, I'm using Netscape 4.61 on a Mandrake 6.1 installation.

Unlike some more pure geeks (I guess), I enjoy some good animations and well designed eye candy on a web site. I like to be given the option of skipping animations and whatnot, but I usually let them load and watch them (the first time ;-).

The first time I visited the Vigilance game site, I found the introduction informative, interesting and even a little fun.
Considering Fox is a television network and aims for visual pleasure of its viewers in general, I don't see why they wouldn't use lots of eye candy on their website.

I have a problem, as I reported to them twice by E-mail, with their limiting of the possibility of even viewing their site without certain technologies / platforms. I do not have a problem with the use of Flash animations or any other kind of eye-catching material. The web is not, as some may try to purport, all about "information". Yes, its a great information source, but its also about entertainment.

I enjoy being entertained, and some days, I even enjoy being advertised to ... I'm a real person ;-).

Have a nice day all ...

1. Disable javascript.

2. (optional) Watch the "cool" flash intro at http://www.fox.com

3. Actually enter the site at either http://www.fox.com/flash_front.html or http://www.fox.com/nonflash_front.html

1. Disable javascript.

2. (optional) Watch the "cool" flash intro at http://www.fox.com

3. Actually enter the site at either http://www.fox.com/flash_front.html or http://www.fox.com/nonflash_front.html

1. Disable javascript.

2. (optional) Watch the "cool" flash intro at http://www.fox.com

3. Actually enter the site at either http://www.fox.com/flash_front.html or http://www.fox.com/nonflash_front.html

The 30-second Flash Intro on fox.com makes more sense if you consider it this way:
Watch TV for a while. The TV format has 30-second intros (basically). It seems to work pretty well, considering the number of people that continue to watch TV.
Now when you get done watching your couple hours of television, notice at the end of some show a reference to a web address: www.fox.com. Hmm, why not? Go over to your computer, fire up www.fox.com, watch another 30-second intro just like you've been watching for the past few hours on the television, and lapse back into advertisement land and learn all about Ally McBeal on your new favourite website.

Or something like that.

Generally speaking, all of this requires that you _not_ be the average slashdot reader, but I think you can see what I'm talking about anyway.

"Geeks, Where would you be without them?"

What idiots they are! I guess I won't be going there to check out what programs they will be showing on their network. It is a good thing there aren't such silly requirements on watching network TV.

-Jason

In my experience customized content is inevitably of the form, "Browser foo on platform bar gets to see the real page. Everyone else gets told to upgrade."

Now there are times when it is justified. But by and large it clearly is not. Don't believe me? See www.fox.com for an example!

Regards,
Ben Tilly

I just loaded it under Opera 3.60 on Win98 with no problems. It did point out that I'm missing RealPlayer G2 and Macromedia Flash Player though.

Loading under IE5 on Win95 (I have to VNC for the Opera machine) it installed VB Scripting and still provided the same message. The only difference I could see between the two was the extra colours because I was VNCing in 8bit mode.

Now linux: VNC in 8 bit mode again (Netscape 4.51/Export). I certainly see what you mean, it tells me this.

I especially love the button on the bottom of that page ("Return to fox.com - just bounces you back again!)

Tried changing the User Agent string (using junkbuster) to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98) without success. Looked at the code and noticed that it's all done with Javascript. Turned off javascript - now the document "contains no data".

Decided I don't really want to see fox.comanyway!

Oh - lynx version 2.8.1rel.2 just gives [EMBED] for / and blank for /frameset.html.

I just loaded it under Opera 3.60 on Win98 with no problems. It did point out that I'm missing RealPlayer G2 and Macromedia Flash Player though.

Loading under IE5 on Win95 (I have to VNC for the Opera machine) it installed VB Scripting and still provided the same message. The only difference I could see between the two was the extra colours because I was VNCing in 8bit mode.

Now linux: VNC in 8 bit mode again (Netscape 4.51/Export). I certainly see what you mean, it tells me this.

I especially love the button on the bottom of that page ("Return to fox.com - just bounces you back again!)

Tried changing the User Agent string (using junkbuster) to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98) without success. Looked at the code and noticed that it's all done with Javascript. Turned off javascript - now the document "contains no data".

Decided I don't really want to see fox.comanyway!

Oh - lynx version 2.8.1rel.2 just gives [EMBED] for / and blank for /frameset.html.

I just loaded it under Opera 3.60 on Win98 with no problems. It did point out that I'm missing RealPlayer G2 and Macromedia Flash Player though.

Loading under IE5 on Win95 (I have to VNC for the Opera machine) it installed VB Scripting and still provided the same message. The only difference I could see between the two was the extra colours because I was VNCing in 8bit mode.

Now linux: VNC in 8 bit mode again (Netscape 4.51/Export). I certainly see what you mean, it tells me this.

I especially love the button on the bottom of that page ("Return to fox.com - just bounces you back again!)

Tried changing the User Agent string (using junkbuster) to Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98) without success. Looked at the code and noticed that it's all done with Javascript. Turned off javascript - now the document "contains no data".

Decided I don't really want to see fox.comanyway!

Oh - lynx version 2.8.1rel.2 just gives [EMBED] for / and blank for /frameset.html.

http://www.fox.com/nonflash_front.html I mean, at least have an else in their big if-tree that says, "if I don't know this browser, I'll assume it's not broken"

This could be the future for all of you radical non-Microsoft web users out there.

"Geeks, Where would you be without them?"

"Geeks, Where would you be without them?"