Slashdot Mirror

I started this series, and finished it out of sheer "I want to say that I've managed to get through the whole thing".

It does have some things that I like I think that Covenant (the main character) is a bit over-the-top when it comes to self-loathing, but despite that, it's interesting to see a series that focuses so much on despair. The magic is interesting -- a ring that can be phenomenally powerful, but only occasionally, and tends not to be there when one would like.

That being said, the read is also very tedious. I'd even call it the most tedious fantasy series I've ever read, and I tend to like fantasies that one reads slowly through (Paula Volsky is a hellofa writer). The books are quite similar to each other and start to blur together. At some point, you get tired of the sheer overload of "pure and clean" and "dark and twisted" and "appears clean, but is actually corrupted" imagery. At six books, each book having about a zillion pages and spending a huge portion of its time in this kind of imagery, it doesn't take a short attention span to start to wonder whether there's anything else.

Second, while the darkness of the series is nice for a change, I at least occasionally like to see good things happen. Real life at its worst just isn't anything like this. Covenant just loses, loses more, appears to gain and then the reader realizes that he actually lost. Just when you think things can't get worse, they do. All through the series.

Third, Covenant is a caricature. The reader cannot identify with him. I like my main characters to be understandable -- something where I have a vague idea why and how they operate. Covenant is just too much.

I agree with one respondent that you're too harsh on Covenant for the rape of the teenage girl. There were some awfully extenuating circumstances...and most of the rest of the series deals with Covenant's self-loathing for what he's done and what follows.

If Donaldson sped up his books -- a lot -- and varied his theme from purity/corruption over the *huge* number of pages in the series, I think that there might really be something there.

Before FOX, UPN, etc., the "4th network"
was PBS. And as much as you say that
Battlestar Galacta was "good for its
day" (faint praise indeed), PBS had a
space themed show that kicked Galactica's
ass: Carl Sagan's COSMOS. The spaceship
on COSMOS was something even the most
nitpickiest theoretical physicist could
agree with, a "ship of the imagination".
It explored the mysteries and wonder of
space far better than Galactica did. There
was even a hint of drama in COSMOS that
Galactica couldn't approach. Week after
week, the Galactica was chased by Cylons...
oooo, killer robots! Yeah, it was cool
when I was seven. But in COSMOS, there
were hints that humanity wouldn't leave
the cradle because we weren't wise enough
to not destroy ourselves. I know that
COSMOS was a documentary and that Sagan
was practically a caricature in the '70s,
but I still think it was better than
Battlestar Galactica.

I would handle this by making Pippin and Merry the narrators. They would be telling the tale to hobbit children (the movie would open with the scouring of the shire, then the kids would ask to tell the story about Bilbo).

During the story they would flash back to Merry and Pippin squabbling about the details. In some cases they would show Merry's version and Pippin's version. Sometime more childlike sometimes more gruesome.

What would be 100% essential is to show how Bilbo initially hid the nature of the Ring from readers. He kept a separate copy of "Their and Back Again" for his own uses. Basically, one would tell the "redacted" version. The other would counter "you should tell them the real story", etc....

The interaction of the narrators with the Hobbit children would be what made the tale magical. Different narrators would portray the Orcs(Goblins) in different ways. That would show up in the screen.

What is certain is that the terrible caricature of the Murkwood elves from the Cartoon would have to go. Merry and Pippin's experiences with Legalos would make their impressions of those elves very clear.

> Even I can see that there are some problems that Evolutionary Theory hasn't adequately explained, the nonreducible complexity problem perhaps foremost among these. And that's a pretty fundamental problem.

No, it's utter bullshit. Behe claims that a certain step in biological history could not be the result of evolution and follows with the conclusion that some Intelligent Designer must have intervened at that step.

The problems with Behe's claim are manifold. First off he uses a strawman caricature of evolution rather than the theory that real scientists use. (I.e., he thinks that evolution can only procede along a direct path to some goal, with a fitness advantage at every step along the way.)[*] Second, scientists have since pointed out that there really are evolutionary precursors to the system he claims to be irreducibly complex. Third, his inference of an intelligent intervention is a non sequitur. (The correct conclusion - if not for his other errors - would be a simple "I don't know how we got from point A to point B.")

Intelligent Design, as it is currently being offered, is just a renaming of Ignorance Theory.

* Notice that stone masonry arches are irreducibly complex, but we build them one stone at a time all the same.

I agree that the Sci-Fi miniseries was quite good; about a thousand times better than that horrible David Lynching the earlier try got.

Personally, I think Dune would actually be a harder series of books to interpret for the screen. There is far too much internal dialogue and other non-visual, non-aural information. Having said that, my big complaint about both adaptations of Dune is that they go overboard on costumes, etc. to the point of making the characters into caricatures.

It would be nice to see what could be done with a big budget and a cast/crew that was as passionate as Jackson and bunch are about the LOTR.

Replace the pictures of people with a rooster and a cat. Problem solved

Meanwhile, the Chicago Maroon reports the University of Chicago is facing a problem with students who aren't potty-trained. Nate Claxton, who appeared on a panel at the university's Center for Gender Studies, said that, in the Maroon's words, he "knew people who had contracted bladder infections because choosing a gender bathroom bothered them so much that they did not go to the bathroom all day." Here are some more highlights from the panel:

Members of Feminist Majority, Queers & Associates, and the Center for Gender Studies organized the panel as part of the Coalition for a Queer Safe Campus. "Going to the bathroom is a moment where definition is very important in choosing a door," said Mary Anne Case, one of the panelists.

She pointed out that many women's restrooms have a caricature of a person in a dress on it. "Going into it implies that we are willing to be associated with that image. There are only two [images] to choose from. This moment involves an act of self-labeling."

The feminists, "queers" and gender studiers want unisex bathrooms:

Ana Minyan, the moderator of the panel, said that bathrooms will be called gender-neutral, rather than co-ed, because, "this terminology is generally used to refer to two sexes while the gender-neutral tends to be associated with more diversity and fluidity within the sex-gender continuum. As our aim is to make everyone, no matter what their gender and/or sexual persona is, more comfortable, we are using the term gender-neutral."

One Roger Simon thinks it's a great idea: "I believe that if all parts of the body were treated equally, and there was not so much emphasis on genitalia, than people could move beyond gender differences and grow mentally and socially." Well, call us small-minded, but the idea of going to the bathroom and having a girl at the next urinal doesn't exactly put us at ease.

If there were high-quality titles with strong gameplay that happened to veer into those areas, I wouldn't summarily reject them just because of their content. And even if the games that covered that material were crappy, I still think that the fact that they'd offer a unique experience (however grotesque) would give them some inherent value.

For example, in Postal 2 you can apparently urinate on people, which makes them vomit. Gary Coleman also appears as an NPC in the game. I don't know if Postal 2 is any good or not, but those are some pretty unique gameplay elements, and the title deserves recognition for that. Whether those gameplay elements are desirable or not is an entirely different issue.

> I haven't seen Seven, but if it's like most psychological thrillers then the killer isn't portrayed as the protagonist.

No, but he's a central fixture of the film, and he plays a very up-front and personal role toward the end. He also isn't treated like an evil caricature.

> The reason Manhunt disturbs me is because it is the player's character who is doing the brutal murdering for someone else's entertainment.

But within the context of the game, Cash is no better or worse than any of his opponents. They're all vicious murderers who have been put in a kill-or-be-killed situation. And your character isn't lionized for his actions -- in fact, the more violent you are, the more the antagonist cheers you on.

Manhunt is a meditation on violence, not a celebration of it. It doesn't make any judgment calls -- it just puts the situation in front of you and lets you decide how you feel about it. I don't see anything wrong with that.

The bell is a warning: It could be the police, so get ready to run. But even if the cops come, they'll be waylaid by an imposing lock - giving my friends time to scramble down the fire escape to the street below.

Consider the dates of the uses of space treaties. How many countries were able to access any sort of resources in space then? (How many are now? And how many are likely to be able to any time soon?) And then consider how likely commercial explotation is, even now.

Then consider the fact that the General Assembly is a one-country-one-vote democracy.

It's something of a caricature to paint the GA as a means for voting money from the rich and powerful countries into the poorer countries' pockets. But the fact that such a treaty got enacted is hardly surprising. You've got 180 countries that can't even reach the table the pie is on, and a handful of others. Naturally, you get a law that says the pie belongs equally to everyone, whether they can actually do anything about it -- or even contribute to the pie-making -- or not.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist only until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury."
- Alexander Fraser Tyler, "Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic"

Sorry, wrong answer. Just because a show contains slapstick doesn't mean that's all it has. Family Guy had it all. There were obvious sight gags of course, but it had enough obscure references to satisfy even the most hardened MST3K fan. (Note: I said hardened. Not bitter and jealous.) I've watched every episode countless times but still, just once in a while, I'll catch something new, even something small like a tiny sign in the background I never noticed before. There are all kinds of jokes coming at you and just because many of them are easy to spot doesn't mean the show has no subtelty. It has it where appropriate.

That said, Simpsons hasn't been funny for at least five years. And trying to compare old school Simpsons to Family Guy is riduclous because they were totally different styled. Nowadays it seems like Simpsons just wishes it was Family Guy and they try to force the show into a style of humor that just doesn't work best with it. Characters have become bizarre caricatures of their former selves. This style of humor just doesn't work in the Simpsons and it ruined a great show. It's right at home in Family Guy though.

I deprecate the use of consumer operating systems where they need not be. I hate any server that has a mouse, even a keyboard attached. The cow pasture and theme-ing and other such things that found their way into Windows 2003 proves MSFT is not a serious server company, and I don't trust anyone who doesn't sell their own hardware with the OS.

Aston was okay, but I found it to be a hack of something better. I have found many small things that didn't work quite right and it pisses me off it costs money. It should cost $5. Not $35. That type of product is sufficiently commoditized no longer to warrant a significant portion of the cost of an entire operating system.

I think Harry Potter and related merchandise is an abomination and contributes to retard fantasies kids have about being empowered in ways which aren't even real. I'm all for boosting self esteem. But invent a fusion reactor, not pretend you can fly on a broomstick. Reality is so complex and wonderful why the invention of primitive unreal alter-realities for the sake of fantasies is beyond me. At least Tolkien's worlds are complex enough to be fascinating at the structural level. Jerk Kunt (JK) Rowling is a absent minded ass that just lets her mind wander and she makes crap up as she goes along. To me this is transparent. Think before you write should be a requirement.

Matrix now officially sucks shit. I wish all the pseudo philosophy had remain canned in the ass of that fucking idiot transvestite transsexual Larry/Lana Wachowski. Like American Graffiti vs. Star Ware, Lucas's fame continually destroyed his creative capacities. These Wachowski freaks went from interesting to preachy fuck-heads. I hate them now.

This Red Dwarf book will be investigated at your behest.

Monster Inc was good, but the pro-Communist child programming DISNEY owns it. While the programmatic assimilation of your child's thoughts seems absent in this film, im ever watchful of thier lurking totalitarian ambitions.

I still think Cohen and Groening can pull off some more Futurama episodes. Hell, Comedy Central would be assholic if they didn't pick it up. Groening has 15 or 16 years of Simpsons, I think he knows how to make a long running successful series. Fox was assholic not to support it.

About ATHF. The first season has the best density. A lot of the newer ones are a bit light. Watch: Bus of the Undead , Mayhem of the Mooninites, Space Conflict From Beyond Pluto , Revenge of the Mooninites , MC Pee Pants, Dumber Dolls , Love Mummy, Interfection , PDA , Mail Order Bride , Cybernetic Ghost of Christmas Past from the Future , Super Bowl, Super Computer, Super Spore, Super Sirloin.

If I want drama, I'll find an Anthony Hopkins movie. Action: Pacino, DeNiro movies do just find. James Caan. Anyone from Goodfellas. Godfather. Donnie Brasco. Even Sopranos. Stuff like this. Anime just doesn't add enough where people leave off to justify dealing with the medium. Anime always reeks of being written by some ostracized sexless freak whose only capability in life is to draw, which is useless for the most part. It does nothing to help ensure the survival of the human race and doesn't seem more entertaining that things done in the typical renditions of dramatic or action oriented material. Strange expressions and caricatures of humans and bizarre animals don't qualify as imaginative in my book nor are they ever likely to be accompanied by anything but ridiculous dialog. Everyone always points to Ghost in the Shell or whatever that is called and Bebop. I remain unimpressed.

Some of the new SP's are good. Metro Sexual and Cartman's internment of Butters to get to Casa Bonita were funny.

Weekend was decent.

You people really need to pick one of the two:
A) bumbling, incompetent retard who can't pick his nose without someone dusting cocaine on his finger first, or
B) cunning, devious, criminal mastermind of Illuminati-like proportions and power

Those two caricatures are mutually exclusive, but a lot of you seem to see Bush as both.

The problem is while Bush himself is A), there are quite a few B's that do his finger dusting while whispering what he should do next.

And this is the same inept monkey your buds are accusing of having zapped this article out of existence?

You people really need to pick one of the two:
A) bumbling, incompetent retard who can't pick his nose without someone dusting cocaine on his finger first, or
B) cunning, devious, criminal mastermind of Illuminati-like proportions and power

Those two caricatures are mutually exclusive, but a lot of you seem to see Bush as both. Perhaps the paranoia is pickling your eyeballs or something.

I'm sure that with your vast experience of homeless people, and their situations, we can now finally declare this issue closed and put it behind us, as being just a moot point of crazy hoboes acting like assholes and obstructing justice.

Seriously though, either you have very subtle sense of humour (which seems plausible) -- in which case you may to add bit more hints as to above being funny caricature of a closed-minded simpleton -- or you are the one not taking his/her medication.

He also seems unaware that Blackboard started out as a small dot-com using open source software. They built "critical university systems" primarily Perl. I believe their heavy-duty apps are now written in Java. I interviewed there in their early days and the personnel seemed to fit his caricature of open software geeks, yet he seems to approve of their product.

Like others, I'm a bit ashamed that such an extended caricature of the free software movement affects me like it does. But it really is remarkable how good Howard is at knocking down straw men. Where does he see anyone advocating free software as a means of avoiding all software costs?

Of course, his point (such as it is) is stronger than that. He seems to say that, if quality matters, one ought to go with proprietary, closed source software. Which prompts the question: Are Apache, Linux, FreeBSD, Emacs[1], LaTeX, etc., merely successful aberrations in an unsuccessful paradigm? (If so, what can one say about security holes in IE, IIS, etc? Are those unfortunate aberrations of a process that is destined to bring out quality software?)

Rather than creating argument after argument explaining why free software will never work, he ought to spend some time explaining why so many users (including technical managers) believe that free software is already working well for them.

[1] Replace with VI depending on your religion.

Incorrect translation. The scene in Ghost in the Shell where Kusanagi is "possessed" by the Puppetmaster and goes into a long lecture about the nature of life to Batou is a prime example. Listening to the English dub, it comes out sounding like nonsense. The subtitles are slightly better, but there seems to be no effort made to capture nuance...and Japanese is a very nuanced language.

Caricature voices and speaking. The marketroids that control English-language distribution must still feel that anime == cartoon. The childish voices (Rick Hunter in Robotech comes to mind) and conversely, the exaggerated adult voices, (ie. The Colonel in Akira) serve to trivialize the characters and stories.

Censorship. Kusanagi "is having her period." Tetsuo is "better off riding a chick" than Kaneda's bike. When shit happens, people say "shit" not "darn". English translations are like watching a network-TV version of the movie.
Also, Japanese has a structured honorific-coarse spectrum of verbal expression which obviates swear words - one can be quite profane in Japanese by simply changing verb forms. The nuances of this may be approximated by injecting profanity into the English translation, which does not happen.

* It's by Rob Enderle; if you want to waste some time, look up some of his other 'stories'.
* It is entirely composed of faulty arguments, inflammatory statements, bad caricatures, and ad-hominem attacks.
* Therefore, how could it be considered anything but flamebait?

When I saw the intro on slashdot, I figured it was probably by that creep Enderle; then I clicked through, and saw that I was right. I'm sorry I wasted my time, and possibly enriched his corrupt advertising coffers.

Also, note--I have a job, one that is a bit more substantial than being President of an imaginary Research Group named after myself that likely has one member. Knowing that Enderle is an ignorant linux-bashing asshole doesn't make me a "Zealot"; it makes me a rational human being. However, his categories don't allow for that, since he redefines "Zealot" to mean "some lunatic who disagrees with me".

Hey I'M a stupid european! YOU sound like the caricature of the AMERICAN REDNECK asshole. Do you think us europeans say "Ah those american twits!" everytime the USPTO burps some clumsy patent or some frivolous laswuit is filed? Get your head out of your ass... (ok, I fed the troll but hell! if all Murdock's FOX does is feedback these brain-farts I'd gladly jail the whole bunch for the sake of National Security).