Slashdot Mirror


Brawndo, It's Got Electrolytes. It's What Plants Crave

"This week's film blogs have been left aghast as Mike Judge's grotesque fictional energy drink Brawndo from the movie Idiocracy became a reality. To recap: Fox wouldn't support a film about Brawndo, the energy drink that destroys plants, debases the human race, and makes those who drink it 'win at yelling' but they are now putting wholehearted support behind the actual drink?" And if you haven't seen Idiocracy, you are missing out. It is the smartest stupid movie I've seen. Whoever did production design on that thing deserves an Oscar.

397 comments

  1. Nothing. beats. the. great. taste. of. Slurm. by OriginalArlen · · Score: 2

    It must be true, I saw it on the Internets....

    --

    Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
    1. Re:Nothing. beats. the. great. taste. of. Slurm. by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      I just can't stop drinking this delicious ooze.

    2. Re:Nothing. beats. the. great. taste. of. Slurm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Power Thirst Energy Drink.

      You'll have so many babies. FOUR HUNDRED BABIES. (It's a rather clever video. :)

    3. Re:Nothing. beats. the. great. taste. of. Slurm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Sorry, the second video is much better than the first and I would suggest skipping the first all together. Both of these movies are made by the same person featured in the summary. The summary video isn't as good as this so-called "second video" is.

    4. Re:Nothing. beats. the. great. taste. of. Slurm. by Kremmy · · Score: 1

      You are not correct.

      The first video was a work of art, pure genius. The second video was a lame attempt at reclaiming past fame, it stunk. Both videos have now become so well distributed among the unwashed masses that they are merely annoying when Yet Another Lamer goes crazy and links to them while spewing about how insanely great they are.

      Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarge, you're breaking my heaaaaaaaaaart.

  2. Except for Soylent Cola by technoextreme · · Score: 3, Funny

    But you know it varies from person to person.

    --
    Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
  3. Idiocracy by opec · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I had to be dragged kicking and screaming into watching Idiocracy. I thought it would be another bland, generic comedy full of juvenile humor and low jabs at the government.

    Now I tell everyone that they must go and see it. Mike Judge is a genius when it comes to social commentary (see also: Beavis and Butthead, Office Space, King of the Hill). He has really corrected (distorted?) my view of our sinking-ship society.

    1. Re:Idiocracy by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      I thought the same thing at first, though I did watch the movie voluntarily. It managed to be funny and interesting, and I'd probably watch it again. (That's probably the best thing I could say about a movie... I'd watch it again. With so many movies, there's rarely a reason to watch the same one over again.)

      I don't think I'd call it genius, but compared to most 'comedies', it's definitely a cut above.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:Idiocracy by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If nothing else when at a friend's house I tell them they have to watch the first 15 minutes. I have numerous engineering friends, peope who fit the description of the couple that never had kids.

      Usually they're hooked after that.

    3. Re:Idiocracy by Neoprofin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I rushed to see it because I love Judge's other work and really enjoyed the premise of it.

      I was sorely disappointed with the movie however. For me the laugh potential of a fat redneck say "he talks faggy" is one, sadly the line was repeated roughly every ten minutes. The social commentary is fine, we can all see the Costco with a thousand aisles, but from all the hype it got from people I know about being hilarious I just didn't see it.

    4. Re:Idiocracy by Eggplant62 · · Score: 1

      ...our sinking-ship society."
      Now with MORE MOLECULES!!
    5. Re:Idiocracy by Darundal · · Score: 2

      http://brawndo.com/ This is not good...

    6. Re:Idiocracy by Wellspring · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK so I just saw this last night for the first time and it was funny. Not the funniest I've ever seen but you won't be sorry you saw it, I assure you.

      What you MUST do is go to the Brawndo site and view the commercial.

    7. Re:Idiocracy by Original+Replica · · Score: 2

      The website actually says "It's got what plants crave!" in the logo. ....

      This is exactly why we breeding licenses for humans.

      --
      We are all just people.
    8. Re:Idiocracy by ucblockhead · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Having everyone refer to normal relatively intelligently spoken English as "talking faggy" was part of the social commentary.

      Just browse at -1 here to see what it refers to.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    9. Re:Idiocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you have no soul

    10. Re:Idiocracy by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I wasn't a big fan of the movie. It wasn't horrible, but it was probably about the worst Mike Judge movie I've ever seen. It just seemed to latch onto the one thing and beat it into the ground until the end of the movie. Not to mention, it's kind of depressing when you think about how outrageous, yet possible, it seems.

      Worth a watch if you see it on cable, but not worth a netflix slot.

      That said, I was lucky enough to get a couple cans of Brawndo last week and they're pretty genius looking. I haven't tasted them yet, but I plan to taste one and preserve the other probably. :)

    11. Re:Idiocracy by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

      You should watch "Idiocracy" immediately followed by "Shut up and sing". It's really scary. Some of the people demonstrating against the Dixie Chicks clearly escaped from the movie. The blend is perfect.

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    12. Re:Idiocracy by kramulous · · Score: 1

      Just browse at -1 here to see what it refers to.
      Damn, that was faggy ... i mean funny.
      goto unsophistication
      --
      .
    13. Re:Idiocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly why we breeding licenses for humans.

      Let me guess ... a quine?

    14. Re:Idiocracy by ildon · · Score: 1

      I only saw it because it happened to be on HBO. I really had no preconceived notions of the movie other than it was created by Mike Judge and that some people on slashdot seemed to like it. It was clever in some parts, funny in some parts, but overall it was really bland and mediocre. Office Space was genius, Beavis and Butthead was funny at the time but doesn't really have staying power, and King of the Hill has some moments of genius/hilarity but is generally very bland and uninteresting. So basically what I'm saying is that after watching it without much preconception, I think it's overrated.

      Of course I think Firefly and the new Battlestar Galactica both suck, so it's not like I'll find many people around here who agrees with me.

    15. Re:Idiocracy by FredFredrickson · · Score: 1

      I couldn't help but notice the commercial looks vaguely familiar...

      Power Thirst

      --
      Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
    16. Re:Idiocracy by Darundal · · Score: 1

      Something funny about this whole thing...

  4. imdb link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    Idiocracy on IMDB, for those too lazy to have set up an imdb keyword search in Firefox.

    1. Re:imdb link by c_forq · · Score: 1

      Completely offtopic but this seems a good place to ask: is there a way to do something like that in Safari? Safari has converted me over with the dictionary support and the find functionality, but I dearly miss my imdb, urban dictionary, and dictionary.com keyword searches.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    2. Re:imdb link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely offtopic but this seems a good place to ask: is there a way to do something like that in Safari? Safari has converted me over with the dictionary support and the find functionality, but I dearly miss my imdb, urban dictionary, and dictionary.com keyword searches. Add them to the search box. While that's for Firefox, most of them will work with Safari.
    3. Re:imdb link by Rebelgecko · · Score: 1

      Inquisitor allows you to use what used to be the Google search box with your own search engines, in addition to some other handy things.

      --
      CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    4. Re:imdb link by palegray.net · · Score: 1

      How about those too lazy to simply type "imdb.com" in the address bar? Is there a separate prize for them?

    5. Re:imdb link by Yer+Mom · · Score: 1

      Saft will let you create search shortcuts that work in the same way as the 'keyword' field in a Firefox bookmark. Costs $12, though.

      If you just want to use the Search box, Inquisitor will do it for free(as was already posted).

      --
      Never mind Spamassassin. When's Spammerassassin coming out?
  5. Re:It is the smartest stupid movie I've seen. by mh1997 · · Score: 1

    I've read a lot of stupid blogs, but this one is not only stupid, but boring. That will teach me to read TFA.

  6. What next? by xobes · · Score: 3, Funny

    Soylent Green?

    --
    - AZ
    1. Re:What next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Marketing decided to drop the "lent" - didn't appeal to the demo, dropped "Green" from the name, too, but kept the green packaging. Launched as "Soy".

      Kills the sex drive and gives men bewbies, but the proles will gobble up anything we cram into attractive packaging.

  7. The medical center scene... by binaryspiral · · Score: 2

    That movie was an interesting look on today's society. The evolution of Fuddruckers was hilarious. Mike Judge's future was really thought out, let's hope aliens that happen by at that time just wipe us out and put us out of our misery.

    The medical center scene reminds me of a joke...

    Q. What's the difference between an oral probe and a rectal probe?

    A. The taste.

    1. Re:The medical center scene... by langelgjm · · Score: 1

      My favorite scene was when they come over the hill, and there's the Costco, and it just stretches on and on and on... and has its own shuttle system.

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    2. Re:The medical center scene... by StarvingSE · · Score: 1

      I loved it everytime someone said "It's got electrolytes!" I ran cross-country and track in high school, and my coach always reminded us to drink plenty of gatorade after practice to restore electrolytes. This was many years before the movie too...

      --
      I got nothin'
    3. Re:The medical center scene... by CrazyDuke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I keep watching that Trevor (IQ: 138) & Carol (IQ: 141) versus Clevon (IQ: 84) scene at the begining over and over. It's so true, it's scary.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
    4. Re:The medical center scene... by PresidentEnder · · Score: 1

      My sig used to be "It's got what plants crave." Same thing about coach harping on electrolytes and hydration, 'cept I was in wrestling.

      --
      I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
    5. Re:The medical center scene... by binaryspiral · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Growing up in a small rural area, I knew people just like Clevon. And they were regarded as the alpha males because they were good at sports. Some got a free ride to state college for their physical skills. Unfortunately they didn't complete the first year of college because they treated it like high school...

      Yes, it's scary.

    6. Re:The medical center scene... by bladesjester · · Score: 1

      He is right about needing to replenish electrolytes after activity like that. Among other things, severely low electrolyte levels can cause you to die because the electrical impulses that make your organs work can't be transmitted. It's the reason people can die in those stupid water drinking contests that some places love to do as promotional gimmicks.

      I actually carry electrolyte tabs in the med kit I pack with me for training and hiking. It's not generally a life-threatening issue unless you let it get to insanely low concentrations, but it does help you recover a heck of a lot faster.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
    7. Re:The medical center scene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      They are regarded as alpha males because they don't shrink from the world into an over-intellectualized fantasy where having a great brain enclosed in a sack of human pudding is the pinnacle of achievement. After all, you didn't work for your intelligence. Why should you be special?

    8. Re:The medical center scene... by gorbachev · · Score: 1

      While I agree the movie was pretty damn funny, I don't think the future as depicted in the movie was "really thought out". It had just one premise: everyone's dumber than your shoe. There was nothing else to it.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
    9. Re:The medical center scene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you clearly didn't work for your intelligence.

    10. Re:The medical center scene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because after the world stops subsidizing your productive career as ball kicker and you move into the car-selling, doughy couch-quarterback stage of your life, we're advancing the quality of life of the species. Even at your pinnacle the best thing you can ever lay claim to for running around a patch of grass is that other people were dumb-enough to give someone money to watch you do it.

      Of course this doesn't apply to the computer nerds that think churning out redundant software in Ruby makes them smarter than everyone else, but they are a bubble of delusional people that will disappear after computers have been used by a wide-enough cross-section of the population for long-enough that no one remembers only socially inept people did it for a while. They're still less useless human refuge than people that peaked in secondary school, though.

      The reason jackoffs are considered "alpha males" is that their testosterone lets them bully their way through life, and that was valuable before agriculture spawned civilization. Now it's probably the principle reason for most of the crime (overwhelmingly committed by useless, aggressive males) and other maladies of life. At least they can throw balls around fields, though. Am I right or what?

    11. Re:The medical center scene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sheer size of it doesn't hit you until you realize the character said the (nearest) shuttle stop was "about an hours walk this way".

    12. Re:The medical center scene... by Hucko · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're right. I'm sick of our society pouring insane amounts of energy and money into non-productive endeavors such as sports. It is ludicrous!

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    13. Re:The medical center scene... by coaxial · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm gonna fuck all y'all! WOOOOO!!!!! :)

    14. Re:The medical center scene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Intelligence is our defining trait. It's the reason we matter. There's no shortage of animals who are stronger, faster, more vicious, or faster breeders. Sure, lots of random sports fucks spent just as much time as I did getting better, the difference is while it's unlikely I'll contribute anything to our civilization, they never can because what they do is utterly useless. If we could somehow exchange a hundred Barry Bonds for one more Stephen Hawking, we'd be crazy not to.

    15. Re:The medical center scene... by MonkWB · · Score: 1

      I've contemplated attempting to cancel out this theory by spreading my seed as far as can go. Alas, I read slashdot.

    16. Re:The medical center scene... by Hangly+Man · · Score: 1

      I'm gonna f*ck all y'all!

    17. Re:The medical center scene... by aneeshm · · Score: 1

      What we are talking of here are two closely related problems.

      The first is the perception of what constitutes an "alpha male" in common culture. Today, a person who doesn't give a crap about anything important, has a callous attitude towards all values, does not care for the values of the past (irrespective of their merit) and delights in their violation, and acts extremely impulsively without thought for the future is called an "alpha male". It just so happens that that overlaps to a very large extent with the sporting subculture's perception in wider society. Now, given this stereotype, and the fact that fitting into it requires no intellectual capacity whatsoever, it is but a natural consequence that those lacking such capacity, but having the physical strength (or whatever other attribute) necessary to join this club, will feel tempted to join. The sad part is that the culture covers up the negative side of this - it is portrayed in only positive terms. Because of this imbalance of perception, a lot of people's lives are unnecessarily ruined when they cannot make it in what is essentially a winner-take-all contest, and because they have not made any backup plans (because the idea that the consequences of failure may be so severe is not portrayed in the culture at all).

      The second is the culture's lack of recognition of the proper place of sport, specially professional, made-for-mass-consumption, ultra-competitive sport, in human society and human life. What we have lost sight of is that these things only exist for our - or society's - amusement. Professional sportsmen exist, and can exist, because we as a society have decided that they amuse us sufficiently to warrant the expense we bear on their account. If we decided that sports were no longer amusing to us, and stopped watching, then the supply of money would dry up, and sport would return to being a community affair instead of being a nationwide obsession. It is necessary for all to acknowledge that the proper place of sport and sportsmen is as our amusement - the amusement of the people who do productive work - and that their existence depends on our munificence. Once this realisation dawns, and the proper perspective is regained, the skewed image we have of the alpha male will fade away on its own.

    18. Re:The medical center scene... by binaryspiral · · Score: 1

      If we could somehow exchange a hundred Barry Bonds for one more Stephen Hawking, we'd be crazy not to.

      With or without the asterisk?

    19. Re:The medical center scene... by wilec · · Score: 1

      "Growing up in a small rural area, I knew people just like Clevon. And they were regarded as the alpha males because they were good at sports. Some got a free ride to state college for their physical skills. Unfortunately they didn't complete the first year of college because they treated it like high school..."

      Then they came back home and got a job in law enforcement. The few that managed to finish some level of extended education became detectives, the rest became patrol boys with guns. Sad but true at least around here most the cops are ex-jocks, and yes it is scary.

      Wabi Sabi
      Matthew

  8. Where's "Ow, my balls!"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should be a much better show than most of what runs on Fox these days..

    1. Re:Where's "Ow, my balls!"? by AdmNaismith · · Score: 1

      Not Fox, but VH-1 or Spike, to be sure. I'd rather watch 'Ow, My Balls' n G4 than 'Cheaters', what the hell is 'Cheaters' doing on G4?

    2. Re:Where's "Ow, my balls!"? by Boycott+BMG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ABC already has a show like that. It's called America's Funniest Home Videos.

  9. Hilarious movie. by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Informative

    The intro of the movie can be found here: http://www.glumbert.com/media/idiocracy It'll give you a good sense of the tone and style of humor of the movie.

    It really is a must-see.

    1. Re:Hilarious movie. by ChromeAeonium · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One thing I'd like to point out about the intro is that it's just that: an intro to a movie. Nothing more. As a Trevor type who descended from a Clevon type, I find it sad that so many people are so ignorant of genetics/sociology (and full of themselves, like Wonder Gamete here) to believe that the 'idiots' are going to overpopulate and subsequently take over the world unless the 'smart' people do something about it. Lamarckian evolution was proved false long ago; just because a group of people isn't educated and therefore doesn't make use of their intelligence does not mean that their children will be stupid. They're just more likely to go uneducated and continue the cycle. What I'm saying is, it's nothing a little education couldn't cure, and even if nothing is done about it, intelligent people will never die out, they'll just rise up from 'unintelligent' sources.
      /soapbox.

    2. Re:Hilarious movie. by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      You're not realizing something here - this is what the geeks want to be true. It's like the ultimate "I told you so" and they can't wait to scream it from their graves.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    3. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really believe intelligence has nothing to do with genetics? So with "a little education", a cow could be just as smart as Steven Hawking, right?

      If a pseudoscientific post like that gets "+4 Insightful" it looks like we're already well on the way to "Idiocracy".

    4. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I am sure it will be trivial to recover from a very small population of educated contributors and a large population of uneducated people on welfare, especially since college is becoming cheaper and cheaper every year. Sounds like an economic powerhouse!

    5. Re:Hilarious movie. by ultramk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have to both agree and disagree. While education is certainly the largest facet of an individual's "intelligence," it isn't everything. It is not unreasonable to assume that at least part of an individual's intellectual potential is inherited.

      We have all known people who were given every opportunity, every advantage in life, and still ended up stupid as a post. Hell, we breed dogs for various traits--personality and intelligence being two of them--why should we assume that we're immune to the same thing?

      --
      You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
    6. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      intelligent people will never die out, they'll just rise up from 'unintelligent' sources.

      And be disrespected by those sources, as always.

    7. Re:Hilarious movie. by boyko.at.netqos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, I'd love to see an evolutionary biologist's detailed take on why this isn't so.

      --
      I used to work for NetQoS. I no longer do, but want to keep the excellent karma attached to this account.
    8. Re:Hilarious movie. by moco · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I had the same reaction originally. But then, just imagine for a moment that the genetic origin of stupidity is substituted for a social/cultural origin. A society/culture that consistently rewards dumb actions while frowns uppon smart ones. The movie's point is still valid, isn't it? In that sense, the genetics part is just a vehicle for the movie to present a "how we got there" in a funny way.

      --
      moi
    9. Re:Hilarious movie. by ucblockhead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Definitely. I sincerely doubt Judge actually believes the plot point. It's merely a convenient way for him to make fun of what's stupid in *this* society.

      The language is the best part of the movie. I love the pseudo-"cops" jargon from all the police, and the doctor's speech is one of the funniest things on film.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    10. Re:Hilarious movie. by a_nonamiss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I believe I have a reasonably strong understanding of genetics, and I'd like to disagree with your premise. Yes, there is definitely an education component involved, and it's important to acknowledge that, however, intelligence is highly genetic. That doesn't mean you have to have smart parents to be smart, but it does mean that your level of intelligence is highly affected by what genetic ingredients you have in you. Remember 9th grade biology when you studied Mendel's pea plants? It's very possible from two tall plants (dominant) to product a short one. (recessive.) However, both tall plants must posses the recessive short gene. I think the point of the demonstration in the movie is that over long periods of time, that Trevor gene could eventually become less and less prominent, perhaps one day disappearing completely.

      Now, I'm not necessarily advocating that we start sterilizing the stupid or anything, but it's incorrect to say that anyone, with the proper education, can become a Trevor. Personally, I believe that we are on a track towards a divergence in our evolution. (if we don't kill ourselves first) I'm talking hundreds or thousands of generations in the future, not anytime soon.

      --
      -Arthur
      Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
    11. Re:Hilarious movie. by bluemonq · · Score: 1

      This is sort of random, but what are the odds that 'idiots' are less likely to use contraceptives? If it's true, then it *would* follow that 'idiots' are more likely to have offspring, wouldn't it? No Lamarck necessary.

    12. Re:Hilarious movie. by wall0159 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Because people's brains are much more plastic (adaptable) than dogs'. People are born in a more underdeveloped state (eg. puppies walk within a short time of being born - babies take months) and our brains' development are much more environmentally influenced.

      Anyway, yes, some people are inherently smarter than others. It doesn't mean that their entire germ line is also smarter - there are many cases of smart parents having a stupid child - even one given every advantage.

    13. Re:Hilarious movie. by Grym · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Lamarckian evolution was proved false long ago; just because a group of people isn't educated and therefore doesn't make use of their intelligence does not mean that their children will be stupid. They're just more likely to go uneducated and continue the cycle. What I'm saying is, it's nothing a little education couldn't cure, and even if nothing is done about it, intelligent people will never die out, they'll just rise up from 'unintelligent' sources.

      Nobody is suggesting LaMarckian evolution. I think the point is that, in modern society, intelligence as a phenotypic trait is, on average, being actively selected against. And furthermore, though it is not simple Mendelian inheritance to be sure, there is good evidence (via twin studies, etc.) that there is a strong genetic component to this trait we term "intelligence." Thus, it is very intuitive to put the two trends together and predict that the average genepool of such societies will, over time (and successive generations), exhibit a decrease in the overall number of genes conferring intelligence (i.e. evolution). This is not an unscientific idea--just an unpopular, politically incorrect, and (to be fair) elitist one.

      That being said, the one thing people never take into account is the effect of migration and geneflow on human evolution. There's more going on in the world than just Football and Jerry Springer. In many countries, intelligence and academic success are coveted and (e.g. through arranged marriages and/or, sadly, lack of medical care or food for the uneducated/poor) very much do lead to an increase in reproductive success. So, before you decide to take matters into your own hands and save the world by becoming a baby-daddy, take comfort in the fact that the evolutionary trends of 300 million Americans would likely be buffered by the counter-trends of, for instance, billions Indians and Chinese.

      -Grym

    14. Re:Hilarious movie. by ZombieRoboNinja · · Score: 1

      "Intelligence," as measured by an (ideal) IQ test, has nothing to do with education. That's why an IQ test is different from the SAT. "IQ" is supposed to represent how well you can reason, remember, make connections, and so on, not what body of knowledge you've already learned.

      Since (the theory goes) intelligence helps people succeed in life, those born extra-intelligent will tend to rise above the income level they're born into... and the higher your income level, the fewer kids (on average) you have. Meanwhile, the least intelligent people born into the "upper class" will tend to wash out of school or business and end up in mediocre jobs at a lower income level, where they're statistically likely to have more children. Thus, over a long period of time, the population as a whole will tend to get less intelligent (not merely less educated).

      Granted, most of the "stupidity" we see in society probably has a lot more to do with education than raw intelligence. But you can't really argue that intelligence DOES vary within the general population, and that it IS important. No matter what prep school Forrest Gump may have gone to, he wouldn't exactly make a great quantum physicist.

    15. Re:Hilarious movie. by jguthrie · · Score: 1
      I read a book recently that posits, among other things, that intelligence in humans basically fills the same role in humans that a peacock's tail fills in peafowl. Since the question of why human intelligence evolved is a major puzzle, or so I am given to understand, this simple explanation has a definite appeal. Unfortunately, it makes "Idiocracy" somewhat less than likely.


      For my own part, I question the whole premise. Will a person who is smart always breed less than a person who is stupid, given similar circumstances? What evidence, other than, "I know a bunch of people who are like me, and therefore smart, and none of us wants any kids" and "I know that stupid people are always breeding" does anyone have about this?

    16. Re:Hilarious movie. by Pendersempai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is factually inaccurate. Whether or not we like it, IQ is between 40 and 80% heritable.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Heritability

    17. Re:Hilarious movie. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I think you're completely wrong. Oh, wait, both my parents have brown eyes and my sister's are blue.

    18. Re:Hilarious movie. by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      Culture can change dramatically in a very short time, though.

      Just look at the last 20 - 30 years. Gradually the 70's stereotypical "jock vs. nerd" cliche is only prominent in certain rural areas. Since the rise of the Internet, mass media and pop culture has started to put the nerd up on the pedestal. Especially in the last 5 years. Look at TV shows such as "Beauty and the Geek", "Chuck", "The Big Bang Theory" etc. Being a geek is becoming sexy and mainstream. And that's only one recent example.

      It only takes one offspring to decide "I don't want to live like my parents" to change things and raise his/her kid's differently. My mother was very well educated and intelligent, but she was also a lazy hedonist and I grew up very poor. She gave me and my brother the impression that education is useless because she spent over 10 years and tens of thousands of dollars on acquiring various University degrees but she never applied them and was unemployed more often than employed. Now she's pushing 50 and working in a call center that's closing with no idea what she's going to do and absolutely nothing saved for retirement. I've chosen a completely different path for my life and my children. I work my ass off every single day running my own business, trying to pay off my mortgage so I can own my home and being in debt is my worst nightmare. My kids have new clothes and fresh food to eat before we pay for luxuries such as cable television etc.

      Not every child is a direct clone of his/her parents and there will always be people who don't fit in with current culture or their parents ideals and move to change it for themselves and their families.

    19. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like Morlocks and Eloi?

    20. Re:Hilarious movie. by Bemopolis · · Score: 0, Troll

      We have all known people who were given every opportunity, every advantage in life, and still ended up stupid as a post.
      And half of American voters re-elected him.
      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
    21. Re:Hilarious movie. by fredklein · · Score: 1

      They're just more likely to go uneducated and continue the cycle.

      That's the point.

      What I'm saying is, it's nothing a little education couldn't cure

      And who's going to educate the uneducated? The uneducated? Ever hear the phrase "the blind leading the blind"??

      intelligent people will never die out, they'll just rise up from 'unintelligent' sources.


      And they'll find themselves the only educated person in a sea of morons.

    22. Re:Hilarious movie. by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>Lamarckian evolution was proved false long ago; just because a group of people isn't educated and therefore doesn't make use of their intelligence does not mean that their children will be stupid.

      Intelligence does have a genetically inheritable component to it, but it is just a component. Obviously the quality of education and a person's own drive to learn are important as well.

    23. Re:Hilarious movie. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Oh for the love of god, genetics is not black and white. If you don't understand THAT then please shut up on any topic involving it because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Even middle school kids know about recessive genes.

      Studies, you know those things scientists use to learn about the world instead of guessing based on what they think it is like, indicate a strong genetic component to intelligence. So no, two intelligent people won't always have an intelligent kid but they're a whole lot more likely to have one than tow stupid people.

    24. Re:Hilarious movie. by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      Well... the Hasidic Jewish community has a higher mean IQ than the rest of the population of Europe because during the middle ages, up until the late 19th/ early 20th century they were kept from marrying into the rest of the population and were only allowed to hold down jobs that required a lot of thought such as a money changer, etc. If you were dumb, you could not support a family, let alone survive.

      When you remove the survival aspect of the equation however, you are right.

    25. Re:Hilarious movie. by iacvlvs · · Score: 1

      A society/culture that consistently rewards dumb actions and frowns upon smart ones isn't a social/cultural substitution substitution for the genetic origin of stupidity. It creates a socio-cultural environment where stupidity is advantageous, and where evolutionary forces will thus select for stupidity, ceteris paribus.

      --
      GENERATION 25: If you haven't yet, copy this into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. (Social experiment)
    26. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lamarckian evolution was proved false long ago


      Was proven, retard.
    27. Re:Hilarious movie. by Josh+Booth · · Score: 1

      I have a feeling that while there is certainly a genetic component that directly corresponds to intelligence, there are probably a bunch of genes that affect intelligence in a way that is difficult to predict. So, imagine if you had a gene that tells you to start learning language, and you get the one that makes you learn your first words three months late. How does that affect your intelligence? I would think that overall it would be a wash since maybe it would make you an introvert. Or, if those three extra months were spent learning the subtle differences between the sounds you hear, you could become a great singer or actor due to your advanced knowledge of sound. Some of the most intelligent people out there are also the most unstable or borderline psychotic. Perhaps the only thing that made them not completely psychotic is one gene that kept their minds sane enough to live almost normally.

      But hey, I don't have a "reasonably strong understanding of genetics". And besides, if I remember correctly, the problem in Idiocracy wasn't genetic but due to the 1984-esque totalitarian media telling the public bad information through advertising in a consumption based society gone mad.

    28. Re:Hilarious movie. by Paxtez · · Score: 1

      The intro never explicitly states that genetically the people are getting less intelligent and they do mention natural selection. Natural selection talks a lot about 'favorable traits' being passed along and often are traits that facilitate the reproduction of the organism. In modern western society, where people normally don't stave to death or get eaten by bears and reproduction is more of a side-effect of having sex. It could be argued that the number one factor would be sexual desire by the opposite sex. What if the traits society found desirable for mating were, high metabolism and rapid muscle growth, and intelligence was anti-desirable? For every Trevor-type that came from a Clevon-Type, there could be 50 Clevon Jrs.

    29. Re:Hilarious movie. by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That's just like having a senile wrester that was a reject from a corrupt government reappointed to run the nations defence. The stupid get rewarded now if they belong to the right tribe - we really should be aiming for a democratic republic instead of some sort of monarchy with a King that appoints only his close freinds to positions of responsibility.

    30. Re:Hilarious movie. by Mr2cents · · Score: 2, Funny

      Movies aren't 100% realistic? Man, you're soo smart pointing that out to me! Now I understand why I got those strange looks when I tried to book a vacation to middle earth!

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    31. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're just more likely to go uneducated and continue the cycle. What I'm saying is, it's nothing a little education couldn't cure, and even if nothing is done about it, intelligent people will never die out, they'll just rise up from 'unintelligent' sources

      And if educated persons continue having one child, and uneducated couples have four, and anti-education fundies have twelve, what's going to happen to the "more likely to go uneducated cycle?" The portion statistically likely to lack education will get bigger and bigger, and the portion likely to be educated stays the same or (more likely) dwindles.

      Intelligent people won't die out? Give the definitions of the words you're using, that statement is utterly meaningless, and the sentiment is full of wishful thinking. Yeah, we'll always know how to use language and fashion crude tools, that's great. The IQ scores will always have a standard distribution, but what makes you think the standard for the mean score won't be FAR LOWER than it is today? Or do you think the range in scores is going to get absurdly diffuse? No, sadly, society will likely get dumber as a whole, after the education system gets dumbed so far down that even the "raised by 141's" have to fight impossible odds to end up proficient.

    32. Re:Hilarious movie. by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Not every child is a direct clone of his/her parents I know exactly zero people who are direct clones of their parents. Everyone I know has a significantly different niche in life than their parents or their siblings. Every. Single. Person.

      At best, there is some overlap of relatively minor traditions: military service, initial appreciating of education, and so on. But to a greater or lesser degree, every human child looks at their parents, sees something they don't like, and says "I won't do that." And then they do something else, entirely, and their children repeat the cycle.

    33. Re:Hilarious movie. by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1

      Well, "Trevor" - if that is your real IQ - you will find as time progresses, your parents get smarter. Or your IQ and theirs approach over time, if you prefer that wording.

      --
      .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
    34. Re:Hilarious movie. by Silvrmane · · Score: 1

      Both of your parents have one dominant gene for brown eyes, and one recessive gene for eye color that is not brown. Probably blue.

    35. Re:Hilarious movie. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I guess you missed it. I was pointing out a somewhat more common example of recessive genes than the parent's big plant - little plant example.

      So I was agreeing with the parent, even though I said I wasn't, which is why I contradicted my first sentence (a situation emphasized for the careless reader with the phrase "oh wait") with evidence in my second.

    36. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Studies, you know those things scientists use to learn about the world instead of guessing based on what they think it is like, indicate a strong genetic component to intelligence.

        If by "scientists" you mean crackpots like Rushton and Jensen, and by "studies" you mean "elaborately concocted pseudo-studies funded by the friendly eugenecists of the Pioneer Fund" then yeah. If you mean regular scientists who haven't been harping on "TEH BLACKS ARE MORE STUPIDER, I CAN PROOVE IT WITH NUMBARS" like Rushton, then, NO.
        Note that Rushton started his bullshit crusade scant years after the success of the civil rights movement, when the black/white IQ gap was huge, stating that science "proved" that it was an inherent, unchangeable, genetic evaluation. Now, 40 years later, he's stuck trying to ignore or explain away the fact that the IQ gap is only ONE THIRD OF THE PREVIOUS SIZE but hey, his work got published in "The Bell Curve" which got a lot of journalistic idiots to call it "interesting", so I guess that counts as plausible peer review, huh?
        (Oh yeah, that whole thing of Rushton's where he claims black people have larger penises and that this is inversely correlated to brain size is just damn creepy.)

    37. Re:Hilarious movie. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      No, I mean actual studies that are published in papers not whatever crap you enjoy reading because it has small words that you can comprehend. Here are some from my psychology 101 book (I'd write out the full name, journal and so on but you aren't worth that much of my time so you just get this):
      -Plomin & Petrill, 1997
      -Grigorenko, 2000
      -Neisser et al, 1996
      -Broman et al, 1975

      Also about your note on the difference between races the remaining gap to some indicates an unbridgeable genetic gap:
      -Hernnstein & Murray, 1994

      Interestingly enough a number of people, unlike you, are sane enough to try to explain why such a gap doesn't really matter:
      -Loehlin, 2000
      -Suzuki & Valencia, 1997
      -Gould, 1981
      -Zuckerman, 1990
      -Nisbett, 1998

    38. Re:Hilarious movie. by wall0159 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, making a comment belligerant does not make it more correct. If you believe that anything as multi-faceted as "intelligence" (people can't even agree what the word _means_) is governed by single recessive genes, you need to do some thinking.

      It makes sense that there's a genetic component to intelligence. Is that the whole story? Seems unlikely to me.

      I don't know the studies to which you refer, but there's a lot of crock studies out there (James Watson recently claimed that Europeans are genetically smarter than Africans - a dubious and unfounded claim). There's a lot we don't know about the brain - anyone trying to make black and white claims is pulling the wool over your eyes.

      Your post could be summarised by saying "what about recessive genes" - not exactly contributing a lot to the discussion, are you?

    39. Re:Hilarious movie. by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, making a comment belligerant does not make it more correct. No but it does make it more amusing for me to write.

      If you believe that anything as multi-faceted as "intelligence" (people can't even agree what the word _means_) is governed by single recessive genes, you need to do some thinking. No my point was that genetics has interesting properties in terms of traits that children inherit, these properties were known for a long time and even children learn of them in school.

      It makes sense that there's a genetic component to intelligence. Is that the whole story? Seems unlikely to me. Of course it's not the whole story, studies put genetics at 50% influence at best. That's for pure intelligence and not for success in life which is oddly not that influenced by intelligence.

      I don't know the studies to which you refer, but there's a lot of crock studies out there (James Watson recently claimed that Europeans are genetically smarter than Africans - a dubious and unfounded claim). A number of studies show an IQ gap between racial groups, the gap has shrunk in recent decades but asfaik still exists. This makes it decently plausible that there is a genetic difference in intelligence although it is difficult to be sure (especially of exactly how large it is). Granted this gap is quite pointless to consider for anything as it is small compared to the differences between individuals.

      Also Asians kick everyone else's backside anyway if I remember so Europeans are also inferior.

      Your post could be summarised by saying "what about recessive genes" - not exactly contributing a lot to the discussion, are you? Someone said that because intelligence isn't 100% genetic so it must be 0% genetic, I replied why he's an idiot.
    40. Re:Hilarious movie. by plutoniah · · Score: 1

      Intelligence is definitely heritable. Look no further than yourself. Are you smarter than a gorilla? Um, I sure hope so, and that is because back in the day (millions of years ago) the smart gorillas figured out how to make better tools, hunt better, work in groups, etc. which all meant they could live longer and have more progeny - i.e. intelligence was an evolutionary advantage. Carry this out and you get homo sapiens. Now, just as the movie says, the opposite is true: in our society intelligence is actually an evolutionary disadvantage. Will humans evolve back down to apes? Probably not, but there will probably be a general decrease in overall intelligence until intelligence again becomes an advantage... like when realizing that water is the best thing to make crops grow leads you to live longer, etc.

    41. Re:Hilarious movie. by Yoozer · · Score: 1

      No matter what prep school Forrest Gump may have gone to, he wouldn't exactly make a great quantum physicist.
      Life is like a box of chocolates. Or cookies. But you won't know before you've opened it. You can tell which people have picked one, but you don't know how long it'll take for the box to go empty, or you know that the box is empty, but not who picked them.

      I don't know, works pretty well for the basic principles.
    42. Re:Hilarious movie. by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 1

      Personally, I believe that we are on a track towards a divergence in our evolution.

      Not without some kind of reproductive isolation. At most, we might get a ring species, but physical and social mobility is high enough now that I... strongly doubt it. Hell, the much greater reproductive isolation experienced by humanity during the ~100,000 years of the Stone Age wasn't enough to generate separate species! How could it possibly happen now?

      --
      PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    43. Re:Hilarious movie. by pureevilmatt · · Score: 1

      could just mean that your mom likes parties. cock parties.

    44. Re:Hilarious movie. by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      The beauty of Darwinian evolution is that it is observational and statistical. Saying "it's too complex to predict" is really a cop-out. Yes, it is near-impossible to predict how specific traits (or even a general sense of) intelligence depending on which gene gets "passed on". If we were to start a Eugenics program that tried to selectively breed "smart" people, it probably wouldn't work out very well simply because of the lack of ability to even define intellect let alone measure it.

      But we're not trying to "predict" what specific gene is the "smart" gene. The observation made in the movie simply described how certain types of behavior and mentality (things which gains one popularity and the ability to procreate repeatedly) was being passed on. These types of behavior and mentality was associated with "stupid" people. Whatever genetic variations might exist, the "bell curve" of behavioral characteristics will be moved and shifted in time, generation after generation. The type of behavior associated with "stupid" will procreate. Not all of this behavior is genetic, no, but the inclination to behave in such way is partly influenced by genes. Whatever part genetics have, those genes will be passed on and will become dominant among the species, regardless of other influences.

      In other words, saying that "smart" people can be uneducated and therefore be perceived as stupid doesn't account for the fact that, over long periods of time, people with the "stupid" inclination will still be better at being "stupid" (assuming that it helps them procreate) than those with "smart" inclinations.

      As to the point of the movie. It wasn't a 1984-esque society at all. It was, in fact, a truly democratic society. The truly scary part is what the masses wanted (voted for). There wasn't a mastermind controlling them. Everyone has spiraled to a point of collective stupidity. Even the head of the corporation that made Brawndo truly thought that it was what plants crave.

    45. Re:Hilarious movie. by insanecarbonbasedlif · · Score: 1

      We have all known people who were given every opportunity, every advantage in life, and still ended up stupid as a post. Hell, we breed dogs for various traits--personality and intelligence being two of them--why should we assume that we're immune to the same thing? Because we're arrogant fo... wait. Didn't I see a movie about thi.....
      --
      Just because I doubt myself does not mean I find your position compelling.
    46. Re:Hilarious movie. by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1

      Lamarckian evolution was proved false long ago; just because a group of people isn't educated and therefore doesn't make use of their intelligence does not mean that their children will be stupid.

      You're right to a point, however there is a genetic component to intelligence (intelligence is not learnt, although education does affect it). Back in the old days, intelligence was spread throughout the classes, and the classes all reproduced more-or-less at the same rate, and so intelligence (and the lack thereof) was pretty evenly distributed.

      Our modern meritocracy has done a pretty good job of elevating the intelligent but low-class (not a great job in absolute terms, but a better job than any other civilisation until this point). On its own, that would mean that the upper classes would get more intelligent (as they are seeded by intelligent former lower-class folks) and the lower classes less intelligent (as the intelligent ones move up, and perhaps some upper class ones fall down).

      Here's the terrible problem: the intelligent upper classes aren't reproducing much, and the less-intelligent lower classes are. The relative reproduction rates vastly favor the stupid. So while the average IQ is 100 today, it may be 99 in a century, 95 in two centuries, 85 in three and still less in four.

      What I'm saying is, it's nothing a little education couldn't cure, and even if nothing is done about it, intelligent people will never die out, they'll just rise up from 'unintelligent' sources.

      Repeat after me: there is a genetic component to intelligence. Yes, there are mutations to consider. Yes, over millennia stupid populations can become more intelligent. But intelligence is to a great extent hereditary, and for the first time in human history we're selecting for stupidity.

    47. Re:Hilarious movie. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      I have to both agree and disagree. While education is certainly the largest facet of an individual's "intelligence," it isn't everything. It is not unreasonable to assume that at least part of an individual's intellectual potential is inherited.
      The problem there, is you're assuming that these intelligent people who refuse to breed are genetically intelligent, rather than just being products of a priviledged, educated background, and that the rednecks breeding like rabbits are genetically unintelligent, rather than just products of their trailor-park backgrounds.

      Who knows, maybe if you took a redneck kid at birth and sent him to private school in a middle-class neighbourhood, he might end up more intelligent than someone who refuses to breed, killing off his genetic line, because of 'the economy'.

      It seems the whole film is based upon a somewhat flawed premise.
    48. Re:Hilarious movie. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Being a geek is becoming sexy and mainstream.
      I can assure you, it isn't. Maybe when I see people staying up till 5am to watch a chess match on PPV, and people paying £1000 for a season ticket to a computer game team, then I'll admit that being a nerd is socially encouraged.
    49. Re:Hilarious movie. by svyyn · · Score: 1

      Your conclusions are incorrect from your assertions. You assert that intelligence is heritable. You also assert that reproduction rates are inversely proportional to intelligence. (I don't care to argue the truth of these).

      However, you conclude "a decrease in the overall number of genes conferring intelligence". The correct conclusion is "a decrease in the ratio of genes conferring intelligence to the total number of genes". Which is to say that it is completely possible to end up with more intelligent people further down the line than we have today, while having an even larger number of unintelligent people.

      The reproductive trend is irrelevant until we hit a limiting factor (food, space, oxygen, etc). If we hit a limiting factor, your conclusion assumes that both groups will be affected in identical proportions. However, it seems much more reasonable to assume that survivability will be biased toward the intelligent due to their ability to plan and store, to say nothing of them being previously successful and thus controlling resources.

    50. Re:Hilarious movie. by ardle · · Score: 1

      Thanks - looks really interesting! Here's another book I'm looking forward to reading.

    51. Re:Hilarious movie. by gcatullus · · Score: 1

      While you may not be advocating the sterilization of the stupid (or at least those who can't read latin) you do indeed seem to be proposing that they walk in front of siege weapons.

    52. Re:Hilarious movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also Asians kick everyone else's backside anyway if I remember so Europeans are also inferior.

        Only in recent years. A couple decades back, Asians were scoring just above the level that blacks scored. IQ tests are measuring something, but whatever it is, it's ridiculously malleable and affected by education.

    53. Re:Hilarious movie. by Grym · · Score: 1

      You assert that intelligence is heritable.

      Intelligence is heritable. Seeing as how intelligence and thought are a product of the physical structures of our brains which are encoded for by our genes, it is undeniable that intelligence is heritable. Level of intelligence, however, is probably what you mean, and on that, there is good evidence to indicate that it too has a genetic basis. The best studies to this effect involve the strong correlation between the IQs of twins separated at birth.

      You also assert that reproduction rates are inversely proportional to intelligence.

      What? Where did I say that? Reproduction rates are probably, for sociological reasons, inversely proportional to SES and education, but where did I say anything about that in my post? I suggest you brush up on your reading comprehension skills because, I did not and am not making the ridiculous claim that you are suggesting I did.

      However, you conclude "a decrease in the overall number of genes conferring intelligence". The correct conclusion is "a decrease in the ratio of genes conferring intelligence to the total number of genes". Which is to say that it is completely possible to end up with more intelligent people further down the line than we have today, while having an even larger number of unintelligent people.

      Usually when one references trends in genepool of a species it is implicit that proportions are being discussed, because to speak in terms of absolute numbers would be nonsensical for the reasons you state.

      The reproductive trend is irrelevant until we hit a limiting factor (food, space, oxygen, etc). If we hit a limiting factor, your conclusion assumes that both groups will be affected in identical proportions. However, it seems much more reasonable to assume that survivability will be biased toward the intelligent due to their ability to plan and store, to say nothing of them being previously successful and thus controlling resources.

      What in the hell are you talking about? Until you can explain how this babble relate to my post, I'm not going to comment on it.

      -Grym

  10. News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or Ad Placement for a Geeky Progressive Demographic?

  11. Re:It is the smartest stupid movie I've seen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've read a lot of stupid blogs, but this one is not only stupid, but boring. That will teach me to read TFA. Learn it and never forget it.

    So to sum it up. Don't click on articles that:
    1. Poorly written
    2. Commentary instead of the actual story
    3. Ads disguised as content.
    4. Click to continue x 100

    Click on:
    1. ?????
  12. Don't Fox do their own DNS? by OriginalArlen · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    $ whois brawndo.com

    [...]
       Domain Name: BRAWNDO.COM
       Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
       Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
       Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
       Name Server: NS5.WEBCONTROLCENTER.COM
       Name Server: NS6.WEBCONTROLCENTER.COM
    [...]
       Updated Date: 05-dec-2007
       Creation Date: 11-jan-2007
       Expiration Date: 11-jan-2008

    Registrant:
       Domains by Proxy, Inc.
       DomainsByProxy.com
       15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
       Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
       United States

       Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
       Domain Name: BRAWNDO.COM
          Created on: 11-Jan-07
          Expires on: 11-Jan-08
          Last Updated on: 05-Dec-07

       Administrative Contact:
          Private, Registration  BRAWNDO.COM@domainsbyproxy.com
          Domains by Proxy, Inc.
          DomainsByProxy.com
          15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
          Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
          United States
          (480) 624-2599      Fax -- (480) 624-2599

       Technical Contact:
          Private, Registration  BRAWNDO.COM@domainsbyproxy.com
          Domains by Proxy, Inc.
          DomainsByProxy.com
          15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
          Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
          United States
          (480) 624-2599      Fax -- (480) 624-2599

       Domain servers in listed order:
          NS5.WEBCONTROLCENTER.COM
          NS6.WEBCONTROLCENTER.COM

    --

    Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
    1. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by spleen_blender · · Score: 1

      That probably IS a subsidiary of News Corp...

    2. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by Larry+Lightbulb · · Score: 1

      A lot of TV and film production companies will hire someone to do the catering, so why not hire someone to register & create websites which will be mentioned?

    3. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by motokochan · · Score: 1

      It really depends.

      The thing to look at is that the website probably isn't run by News Corporation, but by the company making the drink (assuming this isn't a hoax - however it seems official). Redux Beverages LLC's domain, drinkredux.com, is also registered through GoDaddy and has the same DNS provider.

      In general, companies usually use outside services unless their business is Internet stuff.

      Also, did anyone notice the "Omni Consumer Products" logo at the bottom left of the Brawndo site? It looks a lot like the OCP logo from the Robocop movies.

    4. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      Also, did anyone notice the "Omni Consumer Products" logo at the bottom left of the Brawndo site? It looks a lot like the OCP logo from the Robocop movies.

      I'm surprised I had to scroll this far down to find someone else who noticed the same thing.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    5. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by madsenj37 · · Score: 1

      It is funny that your title lacks proper grammar in a thread about a movie about intelligence, but you are obviously smarter than the average person when it comes to computer usage. Fox is considered a single entity. Your title/subject should read "Does not Fox do its own DNS?" or "Doesn't Fox do its own DNS?". My point is not to make fun of you, just to point out to others that even though you can be born intelligent and taught proper lessons, not everyone will embrace what they have learned. Different things matter to people in a varying degree. Different strokes for different folks.

      --
      Choosing the lesser of two evils is a choice for evil.
    6. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by OriginalArlen · · Score: 1

      You may be right from the grammar nazi PoV, but I have to tell you that in English usage defines syntax, and the "Don't Fox..." construct is the standard colloquial usage, around here at any rate.

      --

      Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
    7. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by madsenj37 · · Score: 1

      Again, I was simply pointing out why I found your comment funny. I, too, make grammar mistakes, whether or not they are standard vernacular.

      --
      Choosing the lesser of two evils is a choice for evil.
    8. Re:Don't Fox do their own DNS? by OriginalArlen · · Score: 1

      well, duh! to me then! :)

      --

      Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
  13. Well shit. by Internet+Ronin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Now I'm scared.

    I mean, talk about missing the point Fox. I mean, seriously, the movie is about rampant commercialism destroying society because people are gradually becoming too stupid to resist more insistent and clever marketing tactics, and now they're rolling out Brawndo?

    I mean, WTF, I hope no one that saw Idiocracy goes and buys this, because it's contributing money to the very thing the movie was preaching against. Now we've only got to wait until the U.S. government endures a financial crisis (whoops) and then Fox can attempt to buoy the FCC and FDA and buy them out, and we're looking at the degradation of the world. Of society.

    I always wondered if the other countries in the world had devolved as much as America had in the movie, maybe it's time to consider a change of scenery.

    1. Re:Well shit. by spleen_blender · · Score: 1

      Sort of like all of The Matrix paraphernalia? It is like bits of wisdom can escape from a sea of shit, but only for a short time before it is again swallowed by the umber oppressor. I guess it prevents truly insightful films from gaining enough of a foothold in society to exist outside of more than just a single generation's enjoyment.

      Rather devious a plan that is, if indeed it is premeditated.

    2. Re:Well shit. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ahhh, but therein lies the problem, lack of proper education, and yet we keep paying teachers more, even though all they do is teach obedience in schools, and listening to authority, but they don't teach proper survival skills, neither in the wild nor in the concrete jungles that we call "modern society."

      That leads me to believe that perhaps the problem isn't having watchdogs to "protect us from rampant commercialism" but perhaps we should have the ability to judge for ourselves what we NEED and what we WANT and how best to achieve it... but that would involve freedom, liberty and less control by others over our lives.

      Not likely to happen anytime soon if the majority has its say.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    3. Re:Well shit. by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      China would not have because of their one child policy. Probably not Japan either since they don't have much land.

    4. Re:Well shit. by El+Yanqui · · Score: 5, Funny

      It was about rampant commercialism? I thought it was about a guy getting kicked in the balls a lot. And an ass movie.

      This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

      --
      Well, thanks to the Internet, I'm now bored with sex.
    5. Re:Well shit. by NMerriam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I mean, talk about missing the point Fox. I mean, seriously, the movie is about rampant commercialism destroying society because people are gradually becoming too stupid to resist more insistent and clever marketing tactics, and now they're rolling out Brawndo?

      I had the same reaction years ago when The Running Man had been popular, and some TV executive saw this post-apocalyptic movie about jingoistic, themed-warrior reality TV combat and thought "gosh, that IS a great idea!". American Gladiators was on for what, 5 or 6 years? At least they didn't actually kill the contestants.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    6. Re:Well shit. by domatic · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to buy it but I am going to laugh my ass off every time I see a beer-gutted redneck swilling it.

    7. Re:Well shit. by maxume · · Score: 2, Interesting

      American Gladiators will be back on the air this January(or some derivative of it anyway).

      "Professional" wresting is exactly jingoistic, themed-warrior reality TV, and the amount of steroids they use seems to be killing at least some of the contestants.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    8. Re:Well shit. by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Now we've only got to wait until the U.S. government endures a financial crisis (whoops) and then Fox can attempt to buoy the FCC and FDA and buy them out There is a basic, fundamental difference between government and business. The US Government isn't a corporation where you could buy all its devalued stock and then "own" it. The only thing NewsCorp could conceivably do would be to bribe elected officials through campaign contributions to get favorable treatment. Sadly, it's morons like you that illustrate exactly how close we actually are to an Idiocracy.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    9. Re:Well shit. by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      I rarely do ad hominem attacks, but here goes:

      If you think teachers are either well paid, or have any freedom over what they teach in the classroom, you are a misinformed douche.

    10. Re:Well shit. by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      The people that told Mike to take a hike with the movie are the same people who cancelled Firefly, Dark Angel, etc.. etc... They are completely different people from those making decisions about Brawndo.

    11. Re:Well shit. by evilviper · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hope no one that saw Idiocracy goes and buys this, because it's contributing money to the very thing the movie was preaching against.

      As opposed to buying the movie itself... which contributes money to the very thing the movie was preaching against?

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    12. Re:Well shit. by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ahhh, but therein lies the problem, lack of proper education, and yet we keep paying teachers more...

      Wait... are you actually suggesting that teachers are over-paid? In most places that I've been or even heard about, teachers barely make a livable wage. If anything, it's a problem that it's hard to attract and keep good teachers because they're paid poorly and mistreated by principals (and other school bureaucrats) and parents (who refuse to believe that their little darling has ever been anything but perfect). And part of the reason kids never get a chance to learn anything but "obedience" is because class sizes are way too big (sometimes as much as 35 kids to a teacher). The teacher doesn't have time to do anything except try to keep the classroom under control.

      If we paid teachers decently, if parents got involved in their kids educations, and if we had 15-20 kids per class, you'd see a huge difference in our education system from that alone.

      perhaps we should have the ability to judge for ourselves what we NEED and what we WANT and how best to achieve it

      In case you don't understand, the problem some people have with "commercialism" (consumerism) is the fact that it's inherently filled with grand efforts to prevent people from using their own judgment. We're constantly being inundated with attempts to brainwash us. I know, it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but read up sometime on advertising/marketing/PR theory, and you'll see that it's pretty scary stuff. They all aim at making false unconscious connections between positive feelings and the product/person/company that they're trying to sell. Advertisers have even spent a lot of time studying cults and fascist regimes in order to mimic their methods.

      Really, it's even public knowledge, if you care to study it. So in order to educate people properly and allow them to exercise good judgment, we may have to take some steps to reduce the influence of these brainwashing techniques.

    13. Re:Well shit. by GreenHead · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's time to take your tin foil hats off folks. This is product is made by Redux Beverages, aka the maker of the energy drink Cocaine. This isn't the first time the company has tried to push a product with a famous name. It's the same strategy the company used with Cocaine. Go back to bed folks, there's nothing new here to see.

      Company's website
      http://www.drinkredux.com/

      Press release
      http://drinkredux.com/downloads/Brawndo_Press_Release.pdf

    14. Re:Well shit. by drcagn · · Score: 1

      They do work another job and that is the problem!

      There are two kinds of teachers: those who love their subject and teaching it enough and enjoy the theory more than the application and are willing to take the shaft of being underpaid for their passion, and those who couldn't make it in the real world so they teach instead.

      The first kind are the good teachers. They inject as much good knowledge into their teaching as possible, going above and beyond the silly curriculum requirements that the establishment puts on them. They do view their students as apprentices and work with them to be the best possible--they want their students to learn. I have learned a lot from these types of people.

      The second kind are the bad teachers. They know enough to get by, so they simply repeat what the required text says, make sure that the students know how to work problems like those that are in the book, and they don't care if students simply regurgitate what's being said to them instead of truly grasping the concept.

      You obviously don't understand the importance of good teachers in society. Yes, they can just "get another job"--but why on earth would you WANT THEM TO? The best-minded people should be passing on what they know, not leaving that to the idiots. There shouldn't be a demand for teachers; a demand for teachers means lowering the bar so that demand can be filled. Instead, the pay for teachers should be so high that everyone wants to teach and only the best get through.

      Don't complain that the teaching field is filled with idiots and then suggest we should lower the pay for teachers--that's WHY there are idiots in teaching.

      --
      Scorta futuere amo!
    15. Re:Well shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > They could work another job.
      >
      > Read that again... THEY COULD WORK ANOTHER JOB!

      I did read it again. Your statement didn't become any more grammatical the second time.

    16. Re:Well shit. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      They could work another job.

      On top of the 40-60 hours they work already? Don't you think education is worth enough to pay a decent wage for the hours worked? Or did you mean that they could quit teaching if they don't like the pay?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    17. Re:Well shit. by lactose99 · · Score: 1

      So long as you don't start feeding your plants Brawndo, I don't think you have anything to worry about.

      Idiocracy is one of my favorite movies, and I just bought a case. I'm just waiting for someone to come out with those Rayon shirts, brought to you by Carl's Jr.

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    18. Re:Well shit. by Internet+Ronin · · Score: 1

      I don't even know how to respond to this post.

      Thanks for judging me based on a single Slashdot post. Well, since I'm a moron ruining the nation, perhaps you can leave some helpful hints about how to adjust my lifestyle to be more in-line with what you think it should be.

      I mean, I surely wasn't just mentioning the chain of events in the movie that cemented "Brawndo" as a centralized element of the downfall of society, but I was ACTUALLY confused that the U.S. Government was going to be sold off like a publicly traded company. Whew. I'm glad you cleared that up for me.

      I expect you'll do your part in helping "fix" me, so I can't wait to read your life improvement suggestions. Dick.

    19. Re:Well shit. by letxa2000 · · Score: 1

      ... the movie is about rampant commercialism destroying society

      I saw the movie by accident one afternoon when I happened to be channel-surfing (which doesn't happen often, really). It was stupid the whole way through but yet I didn't change the channel.

      But what exactly is the problem with commercialism? How does it really destroy society? Government-mandated use of specific products, sure. But that's not commercialism, that's government-mandated purchasing. What is wrong with commercialism? It's what drives the economy which allows us to have a society and a culture. Those things don't happen by themselves and if no-one is buying anything--including things they don't strictly need--things would be a lot darker than the future portrayed by the movie.

    20. Re:Well shit. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Regarding the PR system, I've studied it.

      I've also begun applying the Jeff Cooper awareness system to it. If you spend life in condition YELLOW (not harmful and not really stressful, but merely active awareness of your surroundings) you begin to spot this kind of stuff, and even get to find it funny. I travel with friends whom I'm teaching that system of awareness to, and I'm noticing the change as they begin to apply it. All of a sudden they're harder to trick and to fool into things, harder to bait, why? Because they are aware of it. Animals have mastered this intrinsically but humans have it weeded out of themselves by the official schooling organs of the government that does their thinking for them in any particular region to "keep them safe". Generally it takes a massive failure to prove the government ISN'T in their best interest. However, short that, it takes active self training and teaching to become aware of this brainwashing you speak of.

      Yes. I even go to movies and enjoy the cola commercials. How do I resist? I take a piss and drink a cup of espresso (home made) before leaving the house. Then I enjoy watching the commercials and try to spot the subliminal ads and what they're meant for.

      You'd be amazed how far you go training your self control by resisting those commercials. And you can, but you have to actively feed your subconscious YOUR point of view, not what the system teaches. That sort of resistance is hard at first and takes a LOT of willpower. Later, over the years you can turn it on and off like a switch.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    21. Re:Well shit. by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 1

      ---They could work another job.

      Very true. When I was in high school, there was a argument between the school board and the teacher contracts. In our Senior economics class, we asked why the teachers union wouldn't strike. Our teacher gave some lame reason to the effect "We care for the students even if we aren't paid". Uh-huh, sure. What it really comes down to is that they WILL be paid, and are guaranteed a headcount.

      However, your argument of 'if they actually KNOW the subject'... they do not. Most teachers are graduates of a 4 year teaching degree, and not of that specific subject. Tell me, how much would a babysitter who reads lesson plans cost? That's what we really have.

      In my opinion, I had about 2 good teachers. One was a biology teacher. He taught 2-4 classes. His 'side' job was farmer.. I think he had something on the lines of 10k acres. The other was a math teacher who wrote books in his spare time. Teaching was the one of the few guaranteed sources of income to take on book writing.

      --
    22. Re:Well shit. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      I wasn't complaining, I was restating the obvious.

      As for teachers being in demand, they aren't, good teachers are always in demand, because the best ones are those we meet in real life, not in school, but somehow those who spend money that isn't their own (all tax fed institutions) proclaim they know what's best for everyone, and they don't, but they got all the guns in most societies and in those where they don't, authority is seen as coming straight from God (Israel, USA, etc.)

      Best lessons are learned out there in the field, or at home, but rarely in school, because school tends to only teach one to sit down, shut up, and do what they're told, which is a lesson that can just as easily be learned from your typical household.

      Like I said, I had 3 or 4 GOOD teachers, perhaps a few more, a half dozen okay ones (I liked them as people, but they weren't all that great as teachers, but then neither was the subject matter) and then a whole bunch that made me sick to my stomach. However, had I skipped out on school, my parents would've probably gone to prison and I would've gone to a home for the delinquent. DESPITE the fact that anything my physics and calculus teachers couldn't explain, my father could explain and even provide real life scenarios. Despite the fact that I read more on my own each year than the rest of my classmates did in their entire schooling careers. Despite the fact that I had more working experience by the time I was 18 than most of my classmates. That all didn't matter. What mattered was my "attendance" and "good behavior". My parents were taxed for what THEY could've taught me FOR FAR LESS and in a MUCH better environment (safer too.)

      Sometimes I ponder that I got where I am DESPITE my schooling, not "because" of it.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    23. Re:Well shit. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Wow, you people really do think in the box. Why the fsck would they have to take TWO jobs instead of dropping one?? There is such a thing as PART TIME teaching (you can do it, but you have to have the courage to NEGOTIATE your contract and be worth hiring as a teacher in the first place, if you are, then you can name your terms and be willing to walk out and make a big noise about it if they aren't met.)

      Or they could do what my comp sci professor did. Teach 20 hours a week for tenure and spend the rest of the time at her big bucks job. Her job wasn't her life, she did it for the money, and I respect her for that. She impressed upon me something my father often forgot. Don't let work be your life. Let your life be your life, work is what you do in order to pay for your life. You don't live at work, and you NEVER take it home. She made about 300.00/USD per hour at her contractor position, yet she impressed upon all of us who studied with her, regardless of how much you make, if you take your work home, it will destroy your life and no amount of cash or toys will make life as enjoyable as life can be. Leave work at work. Keep the pager for emergency situations only, get a different cellphone for personal use. Don't take anything short of true emergency work calls during vacation or retreat. Surround yourself with competent people who, when left behind at the office can actually answer the phone and be competent enough to handle issues so that you can vacation or retreat without worrying.

      Of course the vast majority will take their work home thinking it will vanish if they don't micro manage, and that is the same thing that occurs with money. The more you meddle with it, the less returns it brings when compared to time vested in. I'll hammer that subject to death if I keep talking about it, so rather than do so, I'll suggest this. Get out of the box, live your life, work to pay for living life the way you want to, don't live life so you can work. Serfs do that.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    24. Re:Well shit. by dangitman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I take a piss and drink a cup of espresso (home made)

      You grow your own coffee beans?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    25. Re:Well shit. by dangitman · · Score: 1

      As for teachers being in demand, they aren't, good teachers are always in demand, because the best ones are those we meet in real life, not in school, but somehow those who spend money that isn't their own (all tax fed institutions) proclaim they know what's best for everyone, and they don't, but they got all the guns in most societies

      In most societies, the teachers have all the guns and spend other people's money? Wow, that's one seriously weak grasp of reality you have right there.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    26. Re:Well shit. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      No the teacher's dont, those guaranteeing that they exist and have a job do. Try skipping on school if you're young enough and see if "society" lets you. Those with guns and badges claim authority but put the responsibility on YOU who pay them. Interesting how that works. Same with teachers. Their job is guaranteed, they're merely feeding at the trough. Those that are actually good at least produce something, but they are RARELY primarily teachers by vocation. They usually have a real job elsewhere. Tax feeders usually don't produce as much as they consume... I think they used to be called "net resource sinks" when I was in school... they call them "underpaid" now.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    27. Re:Well shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DaedalusHKX is from the stock of idiots that view tyranny as coming from government rather than power differentials. They are the sort with severe delusions of grandeur that think the only force they cannot thwart is from the state. The state has guns, tanks, and instruments of destruction and whatnot. So to DaedalusHKX anything stemming from the government is the moral equivalent to a mafia enterprise, and thus teachers are like the thugs employed in a gang.

      The funny thing, really, is that gangs are structurally more like high-risk enterprises than government services. Well no, I guess the really funny thing is how readily classical liberals would put another boot on their neck, just as long as it doesn't call itself a government. Winner-take-all systems produce the structure you least want to live in, yet it's basically the system they both run from and toward at the same time.

    28. Re:Well shit. by dubl-u · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, but therein lies the problem, lack of proper education, and yet we keep paying teachers more, even though all they do is teach obedience in schools, and listening to authority.

      First, as others have told you, teachers are far from overpaid given the work.

      More importantly, you contradict yourself. Every teacher I know would love to give a more personal, independence-focused education to their students. But they have to teach obedience because that's the only way for anybody to learn anything with current student-teacher ratios.

      People already know how to educate for independence. It's just that it costs a lot more. You want it? Go lead a charge for a tax increase that would get us 3-4x the number of teachers we have today.

      And it'll be easier if you start showing teachers some respect. I know one daughter of Korean immigrants who was forbidden to become a teacher because they thought Americans didn't appreciate educators.

    29. Re:Well shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Public school teachers are overpaid compared to the quality of the product. It doesn't much matter how you evaluate the product, either... test however you want and the scores in this country aren't particularly good.

      Forget the propaganda they like to spew about teaching for the tests, unfair testings and what not, because at some point asking a student to add 5 and 11, even under stressful situations and what not, needs to be something that they can do.

      As to their actual pay rate, the latest figures I could find were:
      FY04 52,253
      FY05 50,252
      FY06 55,270

      These were the figures for my home town, a small one in Massachusetts. The town is by no means rich. (As a guess, we probably had a few high paid teachers retire between 04 and 05, which moved the average down. Yearly raises made up for it the next year, or they hired a new highly paid teacher.)

      $55,000 / year is very reasonable salary for the area. It's well beyond the 'scraping by' and 'livable wage' level. It's also considerably above average.

      Now, many people might argue that the teachers have an important job and therefore should earn more on that basis. The problem is, just about anyone can make that argument... teachers and their unions just get away with because of the "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" mentality. If someone's job wasn't important they wouldn't have the job at all, would they? So without that, we have the argument that we ought to get the best, because the product - our children's education - is important to us. Here's the thing... we don't get the best. We get whoever qualifies... and that bar is set very low. Set the bar low, more people apply. More people apply, wages go down. Simply as that, really.

      To be a teacher most places, you need:
      A) Any college degree. (BA/BS - 4yrs)
      B) A teaching certificate / degree. (= 2 yrs)
      C) A pass on a criminal background check (if your state does one) .. and that's it.

      Lots of people pass A and C. B does cut down on the # of qualifications, but not so much so that it keeps wages high.

      Compare with what it takes to become a physician:
      A) Undergrad degree (4yrs)
      B) Med school (4yrs)
      C) Internship & Residency (3+ yrs)
      D) Fellowship (optional)

      Big difference, big pay difference

    30. Re:Well shit. by anti-human+1 · · Score: 1

      No, he owns a kiln and a pottery wheel, duh.

    31. Re:Well shit. by Pfhorrest · · Score: 1

      but that would involve freedom, liberty and less control by others over our lives.

      Not likely to happen anytime soon if the majority has its say. More importantly, that would involve taking responsibility for our own lives, and that's precisely why the majority will most likely always be against freedom and independence. Everybody wants a big strong mommy and daddy to protect and care for them; but nobody realizes that "mommy and daddy" are no more grown-up than the rest of us...
      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    32. Re:Well shit. by Unordained · · Score: 1

      ... and when they did so, the FDA didn't much approve of their over-the-top marketing (for Cocaine.) I wonder if they can get them riled up twice in a row?

      http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/b6312d.htm

    33. Re:Well shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check the trademark registration for Brawndo. There's more to this than you're thinking.

    34. Re:Well shit. by anakin876 · · Score: 1

      Who decides what the teachers get to teach? The federal government mandates it via funding (no child left behind act) the state government does something similar - and then the teacher is left with the option of teaching what they are told to teach, or getting fired when their kids can't answer the questions on the test that the feds or the state sent down. Don't blame the curriculum on the teachers - they have some say on what goes on, but the lion's share is someone else telling them what to do.

    35. Re:Well shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wait... are you actually suggesting that teachers are over-paid? In most places that I've been or even heard about, teachers barely make a livable wage.

      Nearly every single human being on the planet thinks their job sucks and they don't make enough money, but let's look at the facts. High school teachers make, on average, $47,602. Straight from the horse's mouth. And I know that this same page claims they need more money. It's a union, that's what they do.

      Now let's put that number in perspective. The median personal income for all people in the US over 25 is $32,140. The median for people with only a bachelor's degree is $43,143.*

      So teachers not only make more than the average for people with a bachelor's degree (which is what most HS teachers have), they get that for a job that comes with full government benefits, gives approximately three months of vacation each year, and in which the average workday is approximately 8-3.

      I know there are aspects of their jobs that suck, but pardon me if I'm not exactly drowning in pity for the poor teachers.


      * Wiki Page with all the statistics used above and links to original stats from US Census Bureau.

    36. Re:Well shit. by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I did not intend to post anonymously. Parent post was made by me.

    37. Re:Well shit. by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "Professional" wresting is exactly jingoistic, themed-warrior reality TV, and the amount of steroids they use seems to be killing at least some of the contestants.

      I read that 'pro' wrestling is actually a big fake.

      That the fans are really paid actors.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    38. Re:Well shit. by Dirtside · · Score: 2, Funny

      This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

      Carl's Jr.: Fuck you, I'm eating!
      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    39. Re:Well shit. by wafwot · · Score: 1

      So your teacher emphasized making a lot of money and, essentially, not caring enough about your job for it to concern you in your every day life? Did she ever suggest maybe getting a job that contributes to the betterment of society? A job that provides some moral satisfaction? We're not talking about greedy people here, we're talking about teachers. (Well, we were talking about Brawndo at some point ...) They could get other jobs, but they enjoy the satisfaction of actually educating our youth. They know that someone has to do the teaching, especially when so many people just want to make money and "live life." It doesn't sound like you had that great of a teacher. Essentially she was half-assing her teaching duties to make better money at another job? What kind of message does that give, and why even bother with the teaching? Is the paycheck from the other job really all that important? I think you'll find that someone in her position actually doesn't get promoted or receive tenure in academia -- no outside reviewer or department head/dean would ever recommend someone for tenure who only teaches half time. Tenure is reserved for only the most dedicated of educators, educators who feel that teaching is their life, not money hungry part-timers. If she did receive tenure, I'd think twice about sending my own children there. (I'm assuming you're referring to a college professor.) You're probably at a point where you can't change your life much, so you'll never have the opportunity to stand in front of a classroom and know what it feels like. If you're still young enough, though, I really think you should give it a try -- you'll either find that it's too much for you to handle (as it is for most new teachers -- I almost didn't make it) or that you love it and that all of the "living life" you were doing before was just biding time. I've had the high paying job, and I've taught for crap money. You know what? I'll take the crap money any day. I'll be content to say at the end of my life that I've made a difference in someone's life, not just made and spent money.

    40. Re:Well shit. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      High school teachers make, on average, $47,602... The median for people with only a bachelor's degree is $43,143.

      Ok. So that's the average (probably mean?) salary for teachers, and the median salary for people with bachelor's degrees. What's the mean yearly income for people with bachelors degrees? I don't really know, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were higher.

      But let's not quibble over that, because I have no numbers of my own to argue with, and anyway you could argue that the median is a better indicator of what's a good "average" salary. Still, I would say that high school teachers should probably have a master's degree. If indeed "most" high school teachers only have a master's degree, that would be one indicator that highly educated people are not being drawn toward teaching high school. So what's the average income of people with master's degrees?

    41. Re:Well shit. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      If indeed "most" high school teachers only have a master's degree, that would be one indicator...

      I meant to write, "If indeed 'most' high school teachers only have a bachelor's degree, that would be one indicator..."

    42. Re:Well shit. by heteromonomer · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. I don't have any mod points left. You're right on dude.

    43. Re:Well shit. by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      Sorry for mixing measurements, for some reason I didn't even think of that. My general point was that they're often portrayed as being paid poorly when generally they're paid as well as their education dictates since in most places it's a very easy job to get.

      Median income for a master's degree is $52,390. I found this on google, which says that in 1993-94 55% of high school teachers had master's degrees. That's the best I could come up with, but it seems I was off quite a bit. I was thinking maybe 30-40% of HS teachers have master's degrees.

      I've seen studies (sorry can't remember the source) however that show student achievement has basically no correlation to the level of education of the teacher. That seems logical to me as everything you teach in high school (even advanced courses) is well below what is taught at a university, so having even more education wouldn't necessarily help.

      What I think would work to improve teaching quality would be a general increase in pay (to attract people with better options) along with some sort of performance-based incentive system and the ability to more easily fire underachieving teachers. The problem of course is the difficulty in isolating the effectiveness of the teacher from the surrounding environmental variables. Also, most ways of judging teacher effectiveness use standardized tests, and that just results in teachers teaching to improve student test scores.

      Then there are the teacher's unions, which I think are awful. There's no way in hell they would stomach anything other than tiny revisions to the tenure system. And high school administrations/school boards are some of the most inept organizations around. The small school I grew up in was run like a dictatorship, it was ridiculous. Tenure has some (massive) drawbacks, but it does often save good teachers from idiot administrators.

      At this point, though, I'm pretty sure nearly any change would be a good one. Our secondary school system is a joke.

    44. Re:Well shit. by DJLuc1d · · Score: 1

      I mean, seriously, the movie is about rampant commercialism destroying society because people are gradually becoming too stupid to resist more insistent and clever marketing tactics I'm sorry, I must have missed the clever marketing tactics in that movie. It's about people becoming so stupid that base marketing tactics work (without the need to be clever). .... Wow, I just realized what I was saying as I typed it .... Man, that sends a shudder down my spine.
    45. Re:Well shit. by dangitman · · Score: 1

      No the teacher's dont, those guaranteeing that they exist and have a job do.

      So, why didn't you write that, instead of the barely comprehensible text you did?

      Same with teachers. Their job is guaranteed, they're merely feeding at the trough.

      WTF? Since when were teachers' jobs guaranteed? Having a thankless job with average-to-low wages is "feeding at the trough"? Seriously, WTF?

      They usually have a real job elsewhere.

      Teaching isn't a real job? Why not?

      Tax feeders usually don't produce as much as they consume...

      So what does that have to do with teachers, who produce more than they consume?

      Judging by your poor abilities with the written word, I think you might be bitter that teachers didn't just implant knowledge into your brain directly. Learning requires active involvement from the student. You can't blame a teacher just becaase you weren't motivated to learn.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    46. Re:Well shit. by Henry+Pate · · Score: 1

      The show ran from September 16, 1989 to May 11, 1996 (according to wikipedia)and NBC is bringing it back on January 6th. If you've never seen this video from american gladiators you're missing out, they had some stupid gladiators.

      --
      Si Hoc Legere Scis Nimium Eruditionis Habes
    47. Re:Well shit. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Despite your presumptions, that lady received her tenure a year after I left her advanced comp sci course. She was probably the most knowledgeable comp sci professor I've had... and not only did I get comp sci classes with her, but she used to throw advanced math concepts in for free (so to speak) by giving us advanced math problems and theoretical math to think about solving with our newly learned skills.

      She was a damn good teacher, she just wasn't stupid enough to let HER WORK, rule her LIFE... two different terms, which are strongly encouraged to not be differentiated in the socialist systems of the world. They want production units, not men and women. Men and women desire lives of their own and live them, production units live to work, and once their useful life is over, they are discarded in warehousing storage (retirement homes?) where they end their lives waiting for death. Sort of explains a lot about the western world... doesn't it?

      I learned this while researching philosophy, surprisingly, so ask yourself this question. Who am I? What am I?

      If you answer by saying you are your job... you are a production unit. You have no other purpose, when your job is up, you are done for. If the first thing you answer with is either "I am me." or "I don't know." there might be some hope for you actually being more than just a robot after all.

      Just a thought. Intelligent responses would be much appreciated, but just as with the Brawndo, I doubt I'll receive many.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    48. Re:Well shit. by Internet+Ronin · · Score: 1

      The problem lies not with the word, but with the phrase. Is commercialism bad? Not in an of itself, no. Rampant commercialism however, as depicted in the movie, makes us all total consumers, with no genuine understanding of what we're doing or why, just a need to buy more shit. Sure, basic economics is good, but it's like booze, and sex and drugs. Those things in moderation are EXCELLENT, but when they begin to consume your life, at the expense of the things that make a well-rounded human being (or well-rounded society) it starts to be a huge problem.

    49. Re:Well shit. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      What I think would work to improve teaching quality would be a general increase in pay

      Well that was my point-- not necessarily that current teachers are underpaid for their current skill set, but that if you want better teachers you'll probably have to pay better. I've been told for most of my life that I'd be a good teacher, but I'd like to be able to afford to buy my own house, live in a decent area, and generally live comfortably. In the current economic landscape, that's not possible on a teacher's salary.

      Incentives are theoretically good, but you have to be very good about how it's practiced. For example, if you pay teachers more for their students getting better grades, then you'll probably get a lot of grade inflation, and kids being passed along that shouldn't be. If you make it based on standardized test scores, then teachers will simply teach to that test (as you mentioned).

      I don't really know how to fix the problems with education, but I think these three things would certainly help: attract better teachers, decrease the average class size, and get parents more involved. The first two of those things inherently mean spending more money on teachers' salaries (pay them better, hire more of them).

    50. Re:Well shit. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Also worth noting, I believe that in some states, a masters degree is required for teaching high school. Undergrad degrees will only allow you to teach elementary or middle school. Admittedly, I'm not sure about that.

      That seems logical to me as everything you teach in high school (even advanced courses) is well below what is taught at a university, so having even more education wouldn't necessarily help.

      I don't think that this is necessarily a good argument. For example, pick a random college graduate. Now ask yourself, is that person qualified to teach AP calculus? Probably not. Now the truth is that most subjects (literature, history, philosophy, psychology, etc.) are just as complex as calculus, but they're just easier to bullshit. I don't think most college graduates are qualified to teach them to high school kids.

      For one thing, in order to teach, it's not enough to have a vague recollection of the subject matter. First, you should know the subject matter backwards and forwards, sufficiently that you could answer relatively obscure questions should they come up. Second, you need to know something about teaching, which is itself a skill.

      And that's not even taking into account that our university system is also embarrassing, and I wouldn't trust most college graduates these days to screw in a lightbulb.

    51. Re:Well shit. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      What's really scary is that (from what I understand) Brave New World was somewhat ridiculed upon its release for being unrealistic. People thought Huxley was crazy for thinking that society could move in the direction he was predicting. Now, look around at the world today. Huxley's vision doesn't seem all that "out there".

    52. Re:Well shit. by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      As has been stated before, the 8-3 workday and 3 months vacation is bullshit.

    53. Re:Well shit. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, part time high school teacher sounds like something to aspire to. Pay attention, we aren't talking about college.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    54. Re:Well shit. by rengav · · Score: 1

      And part of the reason kids never get a chance to learn anything but "obedience" is because class sizes are way too big (sometimes as much as 35 kids to a teacher).

      Try 50+ per class in Los Angeles Unified School District. 35 per class is more the average these days in most urban/suburban districts.

    55. Re:Well shit. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      What stops them from offering private lessons to those willing to go that route? There's a shortage of private tutors and homeschool teachers. Its better paid work and runs far better chances of turning out good kids. There are plenty of parents without the time but with PLENTY of cash who would love that sort of service being offered where you live... why not do it? Mix in age groups too. I was in Calculus in high school 2 years early and would've been in it 4 years or 5 years earlier had they not had "too little demand" when I wanted to go through the course. I had to take schedule fillers and be bored, and I can guarantee there are LOTS of other kids who get hammered into submission. I got away because I was hard to hammer down, but many eventually buck no more and yield to the whip master. Why not offer them an environment that helps them grow, and what better than a teacher that is paid and hired by the parents, based on that teacher's merits... and have them teach in the safest location possible. AT HOME! Socializing can be done at the mall, without forcing it to be done through age segregated classes. The whole concept screams regimented squads of puppets and has been commented on it before.

      If you think that full time teaching is great, you should put together a curriculum for the home student, and sell it. If it works and the kids come out well trained in the subject matter and can apply it, not just regurgitate it... or if you offer the service in person and not in paper, and your students ACE the tests AND can apply what they learn, then you've just done a great thing for those whose lives you touched. You can do little more than that anyways. Usually, when working IN the system as it is designed, you get done a lot less.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    56. Re:Well shit. by letxa2000 · · Score: 1

      I just tend to dismiss that as a cynical point of view. Many products on the market fail despite "rampant commercialism" and "consumerism." People buy things they want because they want them, not because they're obsessed with having everything. While the movie was funny from a cynical point of view, I don't find any meaningful commentary in the movie as to how we're supposed to be enlightened by the movie.

      Rather than funny cynicism with the idea of enlightening society to make reasonable changes, it just seems to be a funny exercise in taking things to an illogical extreme. Funny, but not very helpful, nor very damning of "commercialism."

    57. Re:Well shit. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Its better paid work and runs far better chances of turning out good kids. There are plenty of parents without the time but with PLENTY of cash who would love that sort of service being offered where you live... why not do it?

      As for me, I'm a developer - make more money and have less job insecurity doing my current job. I would argue that people with lots of cash and no time haven't that good a chance turning out good kids - it's spending time with your kids and demanding achievement that makes the kids good.

      Socializing can be done at the mall, without forcing it to be done through age segregated classes.

      Forced socialization with random people is nasty but helpful. To me that's half the point of HS these days.

      If you think that full time teaching is great, you should put together a curriculum for the home student, and sell it.

      Why does this have to be home schooling? Teaching kids is important - we should pay the teachers enough that they don't need a second job. Oh, and let them keep discipline - when a kid goes to the office, he should dread it.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  14. Economics of this stupid decision by xant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think what happened here is what happens to a lot of cult movies these days. Producers (Fox) expected it to tank, so did not spend money promoting it. Instead of tanking, it garnered a big cult following. Fox now wants to cash in on that big cult profit center by promoting the DVD. Hence, Brawndo as a tie-in to the movie, basically a promotion for the DVD since it's now too late to promote it at the box office. And this exactly is the sort of movie that makes more money on DVD even in the best case scenario.

    Still, I can't help thinking that all of the Fox channels and Fox News in particular would be well-served by the world as depicted in Idiocracy, a world which the fictional Brawndo helped build. Maybe they think it'll happen in reality, too.

    Coming soon: "Ow! My Balls!" on your local Fox affiliate.

    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
    1. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, FOX does like to put their logo in the bottom right corner of the screen (over the subtitles too)... I've been thinking that compared to the TV that raised me, these new ones have a lot of extra real estate for an ad border like what web pages have. Advertisements make a lot of money and I like money.

    2. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Leftist+Troll · · Score: 1

      Now if only the Fox executives would get the same idea about Torgo's Executive Powder...

    3. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Mex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not american but from the episodes I saw of "America's funniest home videos", was't it pretty much "Ow! My Balls!" ?

      Alternately, you could just dial a random video in Youtube...

    4. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      > Coming soon: "Ow! My Balls!" on your local Fox affiliate.

      Hit up YouTube and look for a TV show called "Maximum Exposure", or "Max-X". It's as close to "Ow! My Balls!" as I've ever seen. It's basically America's Funniest Home Videos combined with fire/flood/disaster/riot/sporting event footage, and a commentator from Idiocracy. "Now watch this dude. He's walking along the seawall with his buddies, and he doesn't see the wave behind him. But heyy-- the wave sees him! Boom! And he's sucked out to sea! Now he's in a pickle. What are his buddies gonna do to save him? Oh, they're gonna jump in after him. With friends like these... but fortunately, one of his buddies was smart enough to stay on shore and call for help... The cops show up and haul everyone in. We'll be back with more bone-crushing, shirt-soaking mayhem after these messages! (Hey! They're our sponsors! Buy their stuff!)"

      "Whacked-out sports" is probably done by the same company, but somehow it's not the same laughing at skateboarders and dirt bikers... even though there's more testicular crunching in the sports show, what puts Max-X over the top is that they apply the same attitude to everything from self-darwinning stuntmen to riots, fires, and real disasters.

    5. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah but those shows are very popular in europe too, particularly here in the czech republic. seems like everyone likes the "oh my bawls" moments, not just americans...

    6. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by proverbialcow · · Score: 1

      I think the true irony lies in the whoredom of Redux Beverages that caused them to first call an energy drink 'Cocaine' and now to license a fictional drink name from Fox. It's that kind of marketing 'genius' that will put ads on every available surface like in 'Idiocracy,' and really, only caters to those who saw it and missed the point.

      --
      The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion
    7. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      True. Why do some people think that the randomized pain of others is funny?

    8. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Faylone · · Score: 1
    9. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I LOVE Maximum Exposure-- nothing makes me laugh quite like "extreme sports" morons and their wannabe imitators fucking themselves up while doing stupid, dangerous shit (usually without proper/any safety equipment).

      Watching Maximum Exposure is like screening tapes from people auditioning for a Darwin Award.

    10. Re:Economics of this stupid decision by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Isn't that supposed to be someone you know and (preferably) dislike, rather than an individual selected at random?

  15. We are talking Fox here by edwardpickman · · Score: 1

    They aren't the brightest over at Fox they probably didn't realize it was meant as a joke.

  16. Hey slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your shits all fucked up, and you talk like a fag.

    1. Re:Hey slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mods completely missed this one.

    2. Re:Hey slashdot by brxndxn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ROFL.. that's from the movie, stupid mods.

      --
      --- We need more Ron Paul!
  17. what the future holds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well call me beef supreme, boneraid can't be far off!

  18. I'm more scared by your post by technoextreme · · Score: 1

    I mean, WTF, I hope no one that saw Idiocracy goes and buys this, because it's contributing money to the very thing the movie was preaching against. Now we've only got to wait until the U.S. government endures a financial crisis (whoops) and then Fox can attempt to buoy the FCC and FDA and buy them out, and we're looking at the degradation of the world. Of society.
    If you honestly think that will happen you are really deranged. Im not entirely sure about the FCC but the FDA is full of people Im sure would revolt.
    --
    Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
  19. For a few seconds there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought I read the last sentence of the blurb as "Whoever did production design on that thing deserves a car."

  20. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  21. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why not just sterilize all the dumb people?

    No one has found a genetic link to intelligence yet, 'Idiocracy' is just a movie.

    You can breed for other characteristics though, we all know blond haired blue eyed people are the master race.

  22. I'd just like some water please by charlievarrick · · Score: 5, Funny

    like from the toilet

    1. Re:I'd just like some water please by tabby · · Score: 1

      hmmm, perhaps the dogs do have something going on there ?

      --
      I've experiments to run, there is research to be done on the people who are still alive.
  23. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by QuickFox · · Score: 1

    Locate your nearest sperm bank, and donate as much as you can. The world needs people with above average IQ's to breed. Uh... Ummm... kay. But, er, uh, r u sure? But if u say so... Kay, so, um, how do I do this?
    --
    Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
  24. This explains Fox News quite well. by sethstorm · · Score: 0

    Sounds like Bill O'Reilly and his co-hosts have been drinking too much of this already.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  25. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just sterilize all the dumb people?

    Yeah, it would be easy... we just need a chemical that causes sterility when ingested.

    Mix into the food sold from the concession stands at NASCAR races, and bake it into the communion hosts that go to Evangelical churches, and we're halfway there.

  26. I'm so shallow by bitflip · · Score: 1

    I thought Idoicracy was a great movie, truly inspired.

    I must admit, though, that I'd watch "Ow! My Balls".

    *hangs head in shame*

    1. Re:I'm so shallow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gotta agree.
      'Ow my balls' would give some class to the FOX schedule.

    2. Re:I'm so shallow by jamstar7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm thinking it wouldn't last more than 6 or 7 episodes. WAY too intellectual for most of FOX's audience.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  27. This is good news. by TurboStar · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sweet. Now I have something to drink after working up a thirst watching the 'batin' channel.

    1. Re:This is good news. by tickbox · · Score: 1

      oooo...ya....cut me a piece

  28. It's happened before... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    Firefly.

    Difference is, I don't think there's much Fox can do now, other than commission a second season, and they'll never do that, right?

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  29. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by domatic · · Score: 1

    I'll do it only if the night deposit box is "ergonomically designed".

  30. Re: Umber Oppressor? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1


    What's an umber oppressor? Is that like the brown screen of Ubuntu that tells me I'm bricked when I forgot my password?

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  31. You're wrong, Taco by pathological+liar · · Score: 0, Troll

    Idiocracy is a terrible movie -- it's like Fox had a grade 8 social studies class try to write social and political satire. The only redeeming quality is the intro; after that the quality drops like a rock.

    For future reference, crotch injury and fart jokes are pretty much the antithesis of a 'smart' movie.

    1. Re:You're wrong, Taco by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      That's the point genius.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    2. Re:You're wrong, Taco by pathological+liar · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure you understand. At no point past the first 15 minutes or so is the movie insightful, amusing, or in any way redeeming.

      Even the first 15 minutes isn't particularly insightful, but at least it's funny.

    3. Re:You're wrong, Taco by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The crotch injury and fart jokes served to define the state of the society at that point. They weren't really meant to be laughed at in and of themselves.

      Much like Beavis and Butthead, the actual targets of the humor just laugh at the stupidity, without realizing that THEY are being made fun of...

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    4. Re:You're wrong, Taco by amrust · · Score: 1

      From a fiscal point of view, the point should have been to make a FUNNY satire on the human race. Not a MEH one. Maybe if they did that, someone would have actually seen it.

      --
      VOTE!
    5. Re:You're wrong, Taco by coolGuyZak · · Score: 0, Troll

      Which points out, IMHO, the only redeeming quality of the movie: People who quote it identify themselves as idiots.

    6. Re:You're wrong, Taco by SocialEngineer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't believe that all these people REALLY go for this movie.

      There are so many asinine holes in the logic regarding the near sub-human intelligence that it just plain isn't interesting. Who the hell fixes the cars? How do they DRIVE the cars? They have enough trouble with menial tasks that it makes no sense that the society in the movie actually survives.

      That, and the inane love story reminds me of Adam Sandler movies.

      I'm with you. The movie is worthless as commentary. Give me A Clockwork Orange, or Soylent Green any day.

      --
      "Better to be vulgar than non-existent" -Bev Henson
    7. Re:You're wrong, Taco by coolGuyZak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe I wasn't being specific enough, or the mods are unfamiliar with the movie. The 'quotable' portions of the movie are composed of incredibly stupid statements (for instance, the "it's got what plants crave" quote FTS). The people who quote this part of the movie are, in effect, committing one of many atrocities that the movie rails against--repeating something they heard, just because it sounds funny.

      The rest of my post, e.g. "the only redeeming quality" remark, was a statement of opinion (IMHO: in my humble opinion). Presented in a somewhat abusive manner? Yes, but certainly not a troll.

    8. Re:You're wrong, Taco by BTWR · · Score: 1

      Looking for scientific accuracy in Idiocracy? You just answered Mike Judge's question...

    9. Re:You're wrong, Taco by Hangly+Man · · Score: 1

      I always assumed there was a cabal of engineers living underneath the surface of the planet that made all the machines go, kind of like the Moorlochs and the Eloi.

    10. Re:You're wrong, Taco by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Who the hell fixes the cars? How do they DRIVE the cars? They have enough trouble with menial tasks that it makes no sense that the society in the movie actually survives.

      Indirectly, you're making a statement about a society based on technology that they don't understand. I just found out that Industrial Arts classes have been phased out of local area high schools over the last few years, when I started asking around about using a brake on the sly to bend a couple pieces of aluminum.

      Think about it a minute. Could you spot weld a panel on the car you're driving? I know to many people that haven't a clue on how to change the oil in their cars. More and more of the manufacturing is being set up to be done by machines, with only a select few being aware of the technical details of what is involved. Most of the people are button pushers. The technical guys are circuit board swappers. As more is automated, technical knowledge is condensed. Carried to the absurd extreme, eventually everything is fully automated and technical knowledge disappears.

      At that point, society will, like the jet without fuel, coast to an unavoidable crash.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  32. guitar army by pohl · · Score: 1

    Does anybody else out there remember the music video with Rob Malda and 5 or 6 other guys playing guitar accompaniment to something -- I forget what it was...perhaps Richard Stallman's classic tune "Come on people, Share the software"?

    Well, that's the first thing that came to my mind in the Rehabilitation Night scenes that showed the Guitar Army.

    On a different note, who did the voice of the monster-truck arena announcer? I swear it's the voice of Strongbad, but I can't find any credit.

    --

    The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...

    1. Re:guitar army by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheech.

    2. Re:guitar army by __aawdrj2992 · · Score: 1

      The credits don't say, but I think it's Danny Trejo. He's done voices on King of the Hill.

    3. Re:guitar army by bobobobo · · Score: 1

      The voice was done by Mike Judge. It's more or less an impersonation of Danny Trejo's voice. Just watch King of the Hill, Mike Judge does the voice of Dale Gribble's right-hand-man Octavio.

  33. What makes you think... by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    I mean, talk about missing the point Fox. I mean, seriously, the movie is about rampant commercialism destroying society because people are gradually becoming too stupid to resist more insistent and clever marketing tactics, and now they're rolling out Brawndo?

    What makes you think that they actually missed the point?

    This is Fox, we're talking about -- not exactly the banner for corporate America respecting the intelligence of their customers. (e.g. "When Animals Attack," "The O'Reilly Factor," "Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?," etc.)

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  34. the film industry is known for immitating a win by bombastinator · · Score: 1

    If one may recall they did a similar thig for the simpson's movie with "duff beer" and a few other drinks. The stuff sold out in days. Even after the movie left the theater people were still reselling it at a markup. I don't think brawny will have quite that much success, but I suspect it will still make money, and that is the point after all. Besides, as proved by the fact that you are even reading this, it does work very well as a marketing tool.

    1. Re:the film industry is known for immitating a win by Superpants · · Score: 1

      Well, you're bound to make money off $40 for a case of 24 cans.

  35. Re: Umber Oppressor? by spleen_blender · · Score: 1

    lol, I think that the general terms "BIG CORPORATIONS!!!" gets overused, so excuse my attempt to introduce unique terms.

  36. It's okay by lordmoose · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've seen Idiocracy 2 or 3 times and I think it's okay, but it's not some great social mirror. I have a nagging feeling that Darwinism doesn't want humanity to be intelligent, it just wants us to survive. Also since the movie assumes that we are getting less intelligent, past generations must have been MORE intelligent that what we are today. I don't believe that (though we'll never really know).

    1. Re:It's okay by OneoFamillion · · Score: 1
      Yep, I agree. Idiocracy was mildly entertaining, but its content and message could WELL have been delivered in 30 minutes.

      It might actually very well be that this is the turning - or at least stagnation - point for human intelligence, if we define it as a capacity for rational abstract thought. The ability of the human brain might broaden to new capabilities though, and old capabilities might be artificially enhanced.

      This might come as a disappointment to Slashdotters, but life is NOT about survival of the SMARTEST... It is about survival of the FITTEST. This means that any individual who obeys his/her natural instinct to procreate, and manages to stay fertile and alive long enough to do so, is the "winner" in this small game of life. Well, assuming that the offspring stays alive - but this will be covered in a moment.

      The thing is, in the current state of Western civilization, very little effort is required to stay alive. Thus, most everyone (YES, even a Slashdotter) has a realistic opportunity to procreate as much as they wish. In fact, all that is required is obeying the natural instinct! (Might be more socially appropriate to buy her a drink first though ;)

      Now, smartness - as in "the ability to think" - often leads to seeing problems and potential danger scenarios that more stupid individuals just ignore, or aren't even aware of. But today, actually VERY few of these problems is what one would call a "showstopper", a real threat to the survival of an individual or a child. Thus, smartness that manifests itself in excessive think-before-you-act can actually be HARMFUL in our dumbed down environment, where even a low intelligence is good enough for survival! Enough lone pondering without external feedback can also potentially lead to depression, and more serious disorders of the mind.

      The current "anti-intellectual" trend could of course change in a situation where a high intelligence was required in order to survive, or by the introduction of biotech etc. Still, many typical survival scenarios, such as surviving a natural catastrophe, would probably also require physical strength and resistance to bacteria, something that is not traditionally associated with the "geek" archetype. Surviving a personal conflict or tragedy will also be aided by external feedback and supportive friends. If your best friend is the camslut that might drop you a line on a good day, you will be pretty much on your own.

      I guess my bottom line is: Intelligent people - go occasionally OUTSIDE, and have fun! You are NOT worse than other people, just a little different. Also, the best way to make humanity smarter is by spreading your intelligence in every way your big brain can possibly think of. Just remember that your view of the world is not the only one. Hey, even science is based on human debate.

      Now I'm not saying Slashdotters should knock up every girl they meet - just that from an evolutionary perspective, many of us are not only losing the game, we are not even IN the game. Remember, an unhealthy obsession with Star Trek today can prevent your offspring from discovering the equivalent of a warp drive tomorrow ;)

    2. Re:It's okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, even though educated people do tend to have fewer children than average, the premise of the movie is false. IQ test scores have continued to rise steadily over the past century. People are really becoming smarted and more educated, on average.

      Keep in mind that many casual cross generational comparisons are completely invalid. Often times people may compare, say, suburban schools of the 1950s to inner city schools of today. Or merely ignore high historic drop out rates of those eras (see for example: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0779196.html). Going back even farther, a common mistake people make in comparing the modern era to, say, the 19th century or earlier is that people tend to compare the AVERAGE of today to the ELITES of the past (e.g. the landed nobility or the gentry, which were the sorts of characters who tended to have books written about them most often at the time, thus the common error in using them as a point of comparison to the modern era, but were a comparatively tiny fraction of the populace).

      The movie was quite entertaining regardless. Though it's fascinating how resistant people are to the idea that the world may actually be becoming a better place over time.

    3. Re:It's okay by imgod2u · · Score: 1

      Well, people ~200 years ago managed to form a government and write this rad document called the Constitution of the United States. Having read and studied it quite a bit, I'd say all successive legislation have been declining in quality.

      Of course, one could argue that our legislation doesn't necessarily mirror the general population's intellectual abilities.

      With the recent Bill to allow unwarranted wiretapping, require WiFi points to log *everything* and recognize "illegal" behavior, etc. I'd say our current legislative body is a far cry from those who debated state vs federal powers.

  37. Don't blame the teachers by poet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Blame the establishment.

    Teachers work 12-16 hours a day... yet a "class" day is only 6 hours (after you subtract breaks, locker time, lunch etc..).

    Where is that other 6-10 hours going? Consider that...

    Frankly I don't think we pay teachers nearly enough. I think it is ridiculous that they guy that "taught" Computer Science will likely make a third of what a computer scientist makes.

    --
    Get your PostgreSQL here: http://www.commandprompt.com/
    1. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Threni · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      > Teachers work 12-16 hours a day... yet a "class" day is only 6 hours (after you subtract breaks, locker time, lunch etc..).
      > Where is that other 6-10 hours going? Consider that...

      They're going on purely in your head. If you think that any teachers work from 7am until 11pm more than once in their entire career you must be deranged.

    2. Re:Don't blame the teachers by C0rinthian · · Score: 1

      My middle and high school band directors pulled 11-12 hour days constantly. 6-5 or 6-6 usually.

    3. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Belial6 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey, don't forget that they work that 7am to 11pm 368 days a year. And if you say I'm wrong, your a bad person!

    4. Re:Don't blame the teachers by RicoX9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you think that any teachers work from 7am until 11pm more than once in their entire career you must be deranged.

      I was married to a HS teacher for 17 yrs. Most teachers DO work 12 hr days. In the week or 2 leading up to midterms/exams, they turn int 16+ hr days. The last 2 weeks of school it was 20 hr days.

      I hate the bitch for cheating on me and breaking up our marriage, but credit where credit is due - Most teachers are hard working, dedicated people. You have to LOVE the job to put up with the BS. I saw many people come, work a semester, then tell the administration they would not be returning for the next semester. They also spend a significant amount of their breaks readying for the next term or year.

      You are the one deranged. They don't print enough money to get me to work as hard and put up with as much crap as they do.

    5. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Thaelon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Frankly I don't think we pay teachers nearly enough. I think it is ridiculous that they guy that "taught" Computer Science will likely make a third of what a computer scientist makes.
      Because, those who can't, teach.
      --

      Question everything

    6. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Threni · · Score: 1

      So she woke up at 5:30/6:00, worked from 7 until 11pm without a lunch break, then got home and went to bed around 1am, for 4.5 hours sleep. I'm not buying that. Are you including the time she was pooching the head of department?

    7. Re:Don't blame the teachers by JimboFBX · · Score: 1

      Teachers also have all summer off and get to retire earlier than a lot of other professions. Free health care and other benefits make a difference in the long run. My Aunt and Uncle retired at 55, and have taken vacations to expensive exotic locations twice a year. While they were working they took month-long vacations every year. Both teachers.

      I suppose it might depend on which state you teach in.

    8. Re:Don't blame the teachers by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      His 16-20 might be a bit out, but my father was a teacher. He'd get to the school by 8, stay there until 6, then do two or three hours of marking or test/assignment/lesson making in the evening. Saturday he'd take off (usually, unless there were report cards or something) and he'd spend Sunday marking and test/assignment/lesson making, or preparing labs at the school.

      If you weren't counting that's ten hours at the school (lunch "break" was supervision in the computer room) and a couple more at night for a total of 12 hours during the week, plus another eight or ten on the weekend.

      Some of the guys who coached put in even more.

    9. Re:Don't blame the teachers by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      It depends on how much effort the teacher puts into it. You have to figure the time they need to grade homework, tests, essays, etc. I'd say anything with essay questions takes a while to grade, especially reports and papers. And depending on the time of year (midterms, finals, etc) that work increases a lot because they need to have the grades in ASAP. My final exams were always ridiculously close to the end of the year.

      I knew HS teachers that would come in for 7:00 AM and stay until 5:00 PM to so they could be there for students that needed extra help. Sure, if no students came they'd use the time to work on their grading or tweak their lectures for the upcoming days, but they'd also make sure to stay just in case they were needed. And this was just during the "normal" portion of the year, forget about exams and thesis papers

      Teaching is a lot more stressful than people assume, and they have to put a lot of hours in. Sure, there are lame teachers out there that barely do the minimum required for the students and their lack of effort tends to hurt the education of their students. But don't assume that it's "un-possible" that a teacher have to work insane hours, particularly during busy periods.

    10. Re:Don't blame the teachers by berberine · · Score: 1

      While you may think teachers have all summer off, most of the ones I work with spend that time participating in conferences to keep up to date and attending workshops in order to retain their licenses.

      I don't know of a single teacher who has free health care or other "benefits" that make teaching better in the long run. In our school district, health insurance is $409 for single, $1200 for family, per month. That certainly isn't free health care in my book.

      These teachers are also at work before 7am and leave around 6pm every day. I admit, there is an occasional Friday where they just can't take it and leave at 4pm on Friday, but you know what? They're spending Sunday afternoons back in school to do what they didn't do on Friday. Sometimes, they are there on Sundays, even if they stayed on Fridays. They also spend numerous weeknights and weekends coaching and/or helping out at sporting events, such as working concessions, being ticket takers, etc. This is all volunteer work, however, so they are giving up their free time for their students.

      I invite you to spend a week in a teacher's shoes and decide if you want to spend 30 years in a profession where you are constantly told that your job is super easy, get berated by parents and students, and have to put up with administrative bullshit that is beyond your control. Teachers who stay in the profession do so because they love what they do and they genuinely enjoy being able to educate another human being.

    11. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Seumas · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yes, but on the other hand, they get at least three months of vacation every year, massive retirement benifits (in PDX some have retired with 105% of their working income, thanks to the PERS system) and if none of that floats your boat, there is always plenty of child molesting to do on the order of about 500 to 1000 cases per year.

      Really, I don't care to hear teachers cry about their suckie jobs, long hours and crap pay. I bust my ass more hours than any teacher ever will, but nobody calls me a "hero" or suggest that I should be revered in some way. I don't get a cushy pension at the end. I don't get to keep my job based on nothing more than the fact that I've been here for a long time.

      My opinion is that if you've gone into teaching at any point in the last 30+ years with anything but an expectation to make an average salary or less and work with thankless brats, then you are as deluded as people who continue to smoke with full knowledge of the negative results of it. At that point, they're no different than the starving artist who knows that you can't really make a living on art alone (unless they're the lucky tenth of a percent), but they somehow think they deserve more, everyone owes them more and that they're some how on a higher moral plain than the rest, because of their "career" choice.

    12. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Raideen · · Score: 1

      Really, I don't care to hear teachers cry about their suckie jobs, long hours and crap pay. I bust my ass more hours than any teacher ever will, but nobody calls me a "hero" or suggest that I should be revered in some way. I don't get a cushy pension at the end. I don't get to keep my job based on nothing more than the fact that I've been here for a long time.

      You obviously have some serious bias against teachers. While I haven't seen any teachers here bitching about how hard they work (just non-teachers who've had relationships with teachers stating that most teachers do work harder than they're given credit for), apparently we get to hear your bitching about how hard you work. Boo hoo. Cry us a river. If you don't like your job, find a new one. I seriously doubt that you work more hours than my brother (a teacher). Perhaps in one job--it's possible. However when you include both jobs (he was working three at one point) plus the graduate level courses he's taking and raising a family, your hours would probably be a cut back for him. I've never once heard him complain about teaching or how hard he works in general. I don't think that I could ever work that hard for as long as he has (not only in sheer hours but in all efforts as well). I also doubt that he's the hardest working teacher on Earth so don't give us this crap that you put in more hours than any teacher ever will. Also, don't bring up child molesting like it's the favorite past time of all teachers or like it's a job perk. It just makes you look irrational.

    13. Re:Don't blame the teachers by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      Teachers work 12-16 hours a day... yet a "class" day is only 6 hours (after you subtract breaks, locker time, lunch etc..).

      Where is that other 6-10 hours going? Consider that...
      Obviously the 6-10 hours is far too much time away from education, since you were brought up on that system and seem to think a day contains 22 hours :)
      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    14. Re:Don't blame the teachers by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      Teachers sure do whinge a lot about being paid so little. Why don't they just get another job if they don't like teaching?
      Probably laziness; the unwillingness to step out of their comfort zone and retrain, as well as doe-eyed student teachers full of ambition and big ideas. Doesn't depress you that the education system may well be held up by laziness and naivety?
      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    15. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're fucking kidding. My high-school programming teacher couldn't have coded a working app if his life depended on it. All he knew was why you shouldn't use GOTO. They say those who can't, teach. I don't apply that generally, but many of my teachers over the years seemed rather hung up on the rules and theory of what they were teaching and would have no idea how to apply it in the real world. Teachers who can teach without their textbooks and answer keys are sadly a rarity. Most "teachers" these days simply read the textbook and parrot it to the class so they can collect their paycheck and go home and bemoan the downfall of society.

    16. Re:Don't blame the teachers by netsavior · · Score: 1

      I think it is ridiculous that they guy that "taught" Computer Science will likely make a third of what a computer scientist makes.

      And be honest, in your career as a developer, did you learn more from the 4 years you spent in college on a BS:CS or in the 6 months at your first development job with a mentor?

      The answer, of course, for me was that I leanred more in my first month of doing bug fixes than I did in 4 years at a decent college.

    17. Re:Don't blame the teachers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because she was gone for twelve hours a day doesn't mean she was teaching the whole time.

      Sucker.

    18. Re:Don't blame the teachers by JimboFBX · · Score: 1

      When my dad was a borough assemblyman he recieved healthcare for his whole family that covered EVERYTHING. It was pretty rediculious - I got acutane (the name brand) for free, which is usually $120 per bottle and has a generic equivalent. Everything was very cheap. Teachers get the same government healthcare.

      But I supposed it depends greatly on which state you teach in. Its just like looking for a job, you can pick the one where you live, but if you want the best pay and benefits you have to be willing to move. Supposedly Alaska is up there with having the highest pay and best benefits.

      $1200 per family isn't even government subsidized healthcare. I'm sure you could go in for surgery and the hospital would put you on a payment plan that costs less per month. Thats pretty rediculious, I certainly can't afford that and I'm supposed to be making more per year as an engineer (level 1, but still)...

  38. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus.
     
    Get over yourself.

  39. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO website by sohp · · Score: 1

    If you look carefully, the website has the OCP logo at the bottom left, next to the Fox logo. Something is fishy.

  40. Yikes! by trashpickinman · · Score: 1

    That movie was so horrible I actually felt like I lost some IQ points watching. It was like some extended multi-car pile up on the freeway. You know the kind; cars fused together, limbs lost on the road like a lost puppy, pools of bloods dripping out of car doors, you just have to look at the carnage, but you know a mile down the road just want to pull over onto the side of the road to vomit, because you didn't really like what you saw. It was the same thing with the movie, repetitive diaglogue, go nowhere plots, and actors who didn't really seem to act. I couldn't stop watching it, I just had to see the ending, but I still wanted to puke at the end. Don't get me wrong, I love watching 'King of the Hill' and 'Office Space', but this definitely wasn't Judges' best work.

    1. Re:Yikes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that means you're one of the stupid people the movie makes fun of, it went right over your head

    2. Re:Yikes! by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 0

      "limbs lost on the road like a lost puppy"
      Your complaining about his writing?

      --
      -
  41. President Camacho. by Steauengeglase · · Score: 4, Funny

    After the Bush administration, this guy is totally electable.

  42. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO website by coolGuyZak · · Score: 1

    It could be Fox's idea of cross-marketing for a new, as-yet-unannounced RoboCop movie.

    Another thing worth noting, the site mentions a lack of high fructose corn syrup.

  43. Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1, Insightful

    And not a computer scientist? Nobody's forcing him to stay in that job. If he was good enough to teach, he could have gone and also done the "computer scientist" job, but he / she didn't. Why not? Its called RISK AVERSION... otherwise known as fear of uncertainty. Having to provide goods rather than just preach a doctrine is different. I got ahead in business and left no dead bodies behind. I even like to believe that some of my former underlings did better for themselves than I and my family did. I'm happy for them, and I begrudge them nothing for being more successful. Why? Because I'm sane. I got my piece of land, and I'll get more some day later, but I got enough for the time being and I'm happy to share it with those I love.

    I wasn't risk averse, and it was a hard fought road, but a damn fun one. Teachers are risk averse, their jobs are ALWAYS safe since the state has criminalized not patronizing their services. They don't really teach anything that good (short of shop and driver's ed) even their "sex education" is poorly taught. I learned more from my first girlfriend than I ever did from 4 semesters worth of Health and Sex Ed. There is no substitute for experience and the adventurous spirit, but those lacking it will always demonize those having it, and will seek means of force to prevent and indoctrinate the adventurers. Call it the "tyranny of good intentions."

    Frankly I only had 3 or 4 teachers whom I'd consider worth paying for what they taught. And in retrospect, I recall that one of them did it almost pro-bono for a college, she was actually a COMPUTER SCIENTIST, and taught only so she could get credentials to put on her resume. She made her money designing targetting systems for missiles. Interesting? I doubt it. Yet another individual I came to respect because she didn't suck on the government tit. She actually PRODUCED, and I came out of her class with more knowledge than at most of the bigger colleges. Course I took her classes while I was mostly still in high school and out of Advanced Placement (Honors) classes to take, but that's aside from the main point. She was a capitalist, held that OSS is a good idea for those who not only consume it but also contribute to it, but that people should also be able to procure the things they want with the things they know how to do.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    1. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      "She made her money designing targetting systems for missiles. Interesting? I doubt it."

      Don't doubt it, that's probably one of the most interesting problems there is. Imagine writing software that controls incredibly complex systems and must do so reliably in a hostile environment.

      Amen to everything else you said :-)

      Teachers are actually overpaid, because there is a teacher surplus right now. Pay really isn't the problem, its the systemic removal of any freedom a teacher once had in the classroom. Public schools push a political agenda, they hardly teach at all.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    2. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      And not a computer scientist? Nobody's forcing him to stay in that job. If he was good enough to teach, he could have gone and also done the "computer scientist" job, but he / she didn't. Why not? Its called RISK AVERSION... otherwise known as fear of uncertainty. Having to provide goods rather than just preach a doctrine is different. You're painting teachers with a very wide brush and you really couldn't be more wrong.

      In highschool, one of the guys I knew was "that guy." You know the one who bugged the teacher over an A because he wanted an A+, who studied like crazy, editor of the newspaper, the one who ruined the curve, etc etc etc. Both his parents were Judges, he got accepted to an Ivy League university and he was on his way to a top flight law school & a 6 figure paycheck after graduation.

      A few years later, I met him at a party and he had decided that what he really wants to do is teach English. IIRC, He's teaching at a private highschool now. He gave up a guaranteed $200k per year to do what he enjoyed.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're a crazy douche that's a legend in his own mind, but that's just my impression from the commentary you've provided us here on Slashdot. Blah blah government tit, criminalized, blah blah.

      Go beat off to Anthem and spare us your boring worldview.

    4. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Coryoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And not a computer scientist? Nobody's forcing him to stay in that job. If he was good enough to teach, he could have gone and also done the "computer scientist" job, but he / she didn't. Why not? Its called RISK AVERSION... otherwise known as fear of uncertainty. Having to provide goods rather than just preach a doctrine is different. Right, and by paying teachers not even close to the same sort of salary a competent individual in the field can make, we ensure that the only people who go into teaching are the risk averse and the least competent. The reality is that teachers do have to provide the goods, where the goods are educated students who have developed a good grasp of the material. You can argue (as you do in the rest of your post) that teachers don't do this, and I might well agree with you. But then if you're in the market and the people you hire consistently fail to deliver the goods, what do you do? Ideally you start hiring better people who, though they might cost more, can actually deliver. By saying "teachers do a poor job, so we shouldn't pay them much" you just ensure that the only people who will go into teaching are exactly the risk averse people who are poor teachers -- the position holds limited appeal for anyone else. I'm sorry you didn't have any good teachers. Your experience, does not, however, mean that good teachers don't exist. It simply means that no-one capable of being a good teacher was willing to accept the pay and work conditions of teaching in the sort of high schools you went to...
    5. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the entire fucking point, dipshit.

      People don't have good incentives to be teachers, therefore, the teachers are not really the top of the bunch exactly. This is not a good thing.

    6. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by KnowledgeKeeper · · Score: 1

      There are lots of great teachers. Perhaps even the teachers you thought of being bad are good teachers but in a bad environment. Not necessarily disobedient and troublesome environment too, but an environment consisting of large student body that doesn't write homeworks, doesn't brush up on work already done just a week ago and which because of it can't follow the curriculum. What's worse, such environment destroys people on the right end of gauss curve because they start to slack off since they are not being pushed to meet their potential - they just rot in such classes.

      Every class that has more than 15 people in it is a bad student-teacher environment. Teachers can not only handle, but even make great things with fifteen people. Classes of thirty or more are too much for a single educator - quality work is impossible unless you've got hand picked active people.

      Teachers produce young minds (and some like the idea, that is why they are doing it and it's true for some that "who knows does, but who doesn't teaches"), but they are just one small part of the system. They are the interface of the education system, so to speak. On some interfaces you get mismatched impedance and you can't get maximum power output ( yes, there are bad teachers, too :) ), but other things on both sides should be taken into consideration when talking about information transfer.

      Also, the society has made the wrong consensus on what desirable qualities in people are. Possessions can be taken away but the knowledge stays and people have to understand this very early on. This should be one of the first lessons parents teach their children, but it's not - proof that all of this starts at home so Idiocracy isn't off on this one (genetics is obviously only part of the equation).

      One more thing should be taken into account - what is the motivation for a young mind to learn when people in his/hers environment who do have to tolerate name calling on the daily basis (we all know this is a best-case scenario)? What's worse, such negative attention is engraved in a lot of people because they need to feel they are better than some "geek" or "nerd" but are not willing to put any effort into it so we get a community of name-callers or a wide spectrum of bullies.

      And what about teachers' salaries? Should they go up or down? I believe they should be dealt with on a per-teacher basis. But, overall, they are too low. Teachers (at least in my country) have an university degree and it's troublesome that they get the same wage as janitors in privately owned companies while working with about 3000 children during their employment at schools five days a week.

      --
      It is always better to be a first grade version of yourself than a second grade version of someone else.
    7. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      EXACTLY my point. He's not in it for the money. He got to the top, or close to, has the resources and is doing it because he wants to.

      Big difference from those folks who do it because they have to make rent and are under pressure to do so. You supremely made my point :) Teaching to him is not a vocation, its more a hobby, a passion, something he does to enjoy the day or make a difference or just plain feel good about himself. He's not doing it for the money and doesn't need the money (if he made 200k/year and was the son of two judges, he would've been among those I consider "peers", not by wealth but by the knowledge of WHAT TO DO WITH IT... aka, not waste it but use it wisely.) Hopefully he was one of those, and he passes that knowledge unto his students as well. He'll help change lives if he does that.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    8. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      What about those that want their kids OUT of the system, that want property to NOT be taxable because the system does NOT represent them, what about those that would prefer to no longer be restricted in the natural right to DEFEND themselves when attacked or robbed, what about those people? Why should they be lumped in with those who cannot think or act for themselves and require that someone consistently rob someone else to pump into those who choose to remain helpless, and neither educate themselves nor learn about the environment within which they find themselves immersed?

      Raising teacher salaries is like raising cop salaries. Crime decreases when bad guys get killed, not put in jail on the dime of the innocents who've neither committed a real crime nor when judges draw fat paychecks enforcing taboos and social prohibitions.

      The whole world has turned into a tyrannically run shithole, and there is almost no place to run to that isn't already run by some tin pot dictator or a group thereof. This will lead to a bloody row sooner or later, as the pressure cooker reaches too high a pressure. Until now, America was where people ran to get free... but now, even this place is losing its luster, as more and more collectivists have moved here, and whatever ideals were maintained have been voted out.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    9. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Brietech · · Score: 1

      People like you are free to go live in a Libertarian Utopia like Somalia, where you'll promptly be robbed and killed, with no one to defend you =)

      --
      I'm perfect in every way, except for my humility.
    10. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      EXACTLY my point. He's not in it for the money.

      Why's he working at a private school then, eh? The other problem is that we have a lot more kids than we have talented educators willing to work for peanuts because "they have the calling."

    11. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Libertarians are too much a gaggle of pussies to even move to Hong Kong, so I'm guessing Somalia is right out. No, no, they have to be given their turn at ruining our countries for some reason or other.

    12. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Private schools tend to have a bit less government bureaucracy enforced. The money is better, but so are the chances of being fired for lack of quality education. People tend to vote with their feet and wallets at private schools. Not so with public schools. Hard to go to a nearby school if it is too far away. If he's in it for the money, good for him, if he's providing value to those kids and parents, he's still doing a better job, and nobody's putting a gun to the kids parents threatening them with "pay for this or go to prison (or die, as was the situation with Waco Texas)"... joyful stuff man. Thanks.

      I.E. a private school is STILL a private jurisdiction, i.e. private property, and government still has to ask permission to come in, unless they have some specialty warrant. Not so with a school where they can heap on the abuse as they feel fit (remember those schools where SWAT conducted "compliance" and "submission" tests with little 12 year olds?)

      Yep, I sure want my kids somewhere they can be threatened by steroid abusing thugs at gun point... yep... in any other situation, what SWAT did would be called "hostage taking" or "brandishing deadly arms" or "threatening lethal violence" or any number of other FELONIOUS activities. However, since those parents put their kids in that jurisdiction (despite being forced to do so by law), it was considered "consent" and the SWAT boys offered a mere apology and got the barest of slaps on the wrist.

      God Bless America, eh? What's left of her.

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    13. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please. Get off your high horse "risk taker." Going into business to get rich may be the most mindless and risk averse activity on the planet. There is nothing safer and more trivial in life than hoarding wealth.

    14. Re:Who's forcing him to be a computer teacher... by Zymergy · · Score: 1

      You are both right...
      To add another factor to both of your points: "Teaching" is often a *Union* Job. (In my state and many others) and this fact DOES NOT = Better Teachers.

      There is a terrible (and hopefully universally untrue) phrase: "Those Who Can't Do, Teach."
      The "Risk Aversion" tendencies and failure (for current public school teaching jobs) to reward superior teachers with substantial capital increases (proportionate to their teaching abilities and students' performance), typically leaves most of the remaining 'great teachers' in our public schools only the idealistic-types. Often these 'idealistic' teachers can afford the minimal pay due to having money from their spouse's income or personal family monies, or they are content merely living with the ~30k starting pay teachers make (in my state). (NOTE: we still have the national/local teachers' unions ...and the dues are automatically deducted from teachers' paychecks every month..)
      Between my State's numerous political 'educational' mandates and the guarantee of a state job with retirement 'in 20' (that is, if you only 'meet' the paltry and generic union-approved guidelines), my state is certainly hurting for great teachers.
      My state lost its teachers to the unions (NEA, et al) in the 60's due to having the LOWEST teacher pay of any state (and about all I have seen or heard in the news about the unions was how my state's teachers' pay went from the 49th (or 50th) lowest-teacher-pay in the US to the 47th lowest-teacher-pay in the US (and this 47th 'average' number Does Include counselors' pay and principals' pay (as some of them teach/coach also, etc..)).
      The 'Good' new teachers in my state put in however many years worth of "OJT" (at terribly low pay) are required to 'meet' their minimum state contracts (and the state agrees to pay much of their college education degree student-loans). After this initial contract period is over, most teachers promptly jump the state ship and move to a certain (very large) neighboring state that has a +$10,000 higher base pay (for entry-level teachers) and an even higher base pay jump for experienced teachers (typically the move to this other very-large state for an experienced teacher gains them +$15,000).
      I am not anti-union, per se, but as far as teachers pay in my state goes, going from the 50th to the 47th LOWEST teacher pay in the US in just over 40 years is NOT what I call a rousing success!
      Still, I did have 4-5 *truly great* teachers in my all-public school education (pre-college) and they were all idealistic and inspiring.

      And... in other News: My state now has the 30th HIGHEST teen pregnancy rate in the US! Down from a mere 10 years ago we were only ranked the 3rd HIGHEST! Hooray Us!
      (Interestingly, U.S. teen pregnancy and teen birth rates are the second-highest among 46 countries in the developed world.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolescent_sexuality_in_the_United_States
      Mike Judge may just be on to something, ...at least in this country. -Z

  44. Agreed. by jberryman · · Score: 0

    I got through half of it and turned that crap off. About as smart as your average YouTube comments thread IMO.

  45. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO advertisement by joewkelly · · Score: 1
    The video advertisement for the energy drink -
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tbxq0IDqD04

    If the drink makes more money than the movie, then we will not have to wait 500 years to say that we live in an idiocracy. Indeed, I believe that all elements of an idiocracy were on display at the recent ``Historic'' CNN/YouTube Republican Debate sponsored by ``Clean'' Coal. My commentary on the historic debate:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2Osmnp_nbQ

  46. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  47. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  48. This explains Fox News quite well. by edgedmurasame · · Score: 1

    Sounds like Bill O'Reilly and his co-hosts have been drinking too much of this already.

    Moderation -1 100% Overrated As well as whomever wanted to mod this down as well.
    --
    "Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
  49. Watch that movie again! by StefanJ · · Score: 5, Informative

    Soylent Green came out in 1973.

    The lead character's room mate, "Sol," was played by Edward G. Robinson. The author of the book on which the movie was based, Harry Harrison, was on set during the filming. (Among other things, he suggested that a character visiting a butcher bring her own plastic bag with her.) Robinson, best known for his tough-guy gangster roles, asked Harrison what the hell his character was about. Harrison told him, (paraphrasing) "You're me, as a dying old man. You remember the world before everything went to shit."

    One of the things Sol rants about to Charton Heston? The greenhouse effect.

    Also, the big ugly secret of the movie -- Soylent Green is People -- is just a sympton. Soylent Green is supposed to be made of krill and plankton. Heston's character finds a secret research study commissioned by the Soylent Corporation revealing that humanity has managed to kill off the ocean ecosystem.

    1. Re:Watch that movie again! by houghi · · Score: 1

      It's people. Source code is made out of people! They're making our
      source out of people. Next thing they'll be breeding us like cattle
      for code. You've gotta tell them. You've gotta tell them!

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Watch that movie again! by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's only takes their blood, sweat, tears, heart and soul though so they don't die, they just turn into heartless soulless cold blooded corporate executives.

    3. Re:Watch that movie again! by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Or... you know... just watch the movie. It's got nudity. And an ancient early 70s Space War arcade machine. Both in the same scene. That oughta pull in the Slashdot crowd.

  50. Just wait... by MsGeek · · Score: 2, Funny

    If the Producers continue to drag out the Writer's Guild strike, you might just get your wish. After American Idol finishes its run, of course.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
  51. Re:Fuck you, I''m eating. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > But with Idiocracy, Judge -- who wrote and directed -- takes a surgical scalpel to
    > a far more fundamental aspect of modern American society: our propensity, nay, glad
    > willingness to dumb everything way the hell down until there's nothing but dumb
    > left ... and then to celebrate the dumb.

    So...kinda like the Gnome desktop environment?

  52. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by Rick17JJ · · Score: 1

    Last August, there was a Slashdot discussion about a study showing that smarter teens have less sex. The study also showed that pattern persisting through adulthood. That was eerily similar to the basic premise of the Idiocracy movie, in which the less intelligent people have more children. In the movie, two subjects of a long-duration suspended animation experiment wake up in the future and are amazed to discover how dumb everyone has become.

    In that study, the average teenagers actually lost their virginity sooner than either students with very low IQs or students with high IQs. So perhaps evolution is actually currently favoring averageness over either being too dumb or too intelligent.

    The movie also gave an example of a "typical" highly intelligent couple who waited until after they went to college and established their careers and had financial security before they decided that they could afford to have children. Unfortunately by then, she was older and her fertility had declined and they never got to have kids. That actually does happen to many couples. People like them, are the evolutionary losers.

    The movie also gave an the example of of a "typical" less intelligent family. That family is having trouble paying it's bills and has junk in the front yard and their loud obnoxious children are running around. The crude loudmouthed couple is shown arguing about the fact that she forgot to take her birth control pill again and is now pregnant again.

    Lets also not forget the stereotype of computer geeks and science geeks not being able to get laid. Actually, it is probably just that anyone with a life and a girlfriend, would have better ways to spend their time than on their computer.

    Smarter Teens Have Less Sex

  53. Overreacting much? by enjo13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I actually think the whole thing is quite awesome. It's a fun way to commemorate a movie I enjoyed quite a bit. This isn't a sign of the imminent fall of civilization, it's a silly movie tie-in drink.

    Christ, get some perspective.

    --
    Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
  54. First 15 minutes - didn't work for me by billstewart · · Score: 1

    A friend of mine showed me the first 15 minutes or so, and then we got interrupted by somebody else dropping by. It really really didn't work for me. Some parts were funny, but it mainly reminded me of what I *didn't* like about Beavis and Butthead rather than what I did like about them. It did have electrolytes, though...

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  55. This was actually addressed in the film.... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

    Cars could be repaired in much the same way as medical diagnoses were made in the clinic, by "expert systems" which were designed and programmed by previous generations. The film also talked about the stock market being run the same way, completely automated by computers.

    Yes, it leaves the question of how the computer systems were maintained, but most films of this nature have some inconsistencies.

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    1. Re:This was actually addressed in the film.... by dargaud · · Score: 1

      You can actually see some robots in the background doing various tasks. Like the vacuum cleaner robot in disrepair in the hospital. There's probably been enough robots making robots till then, but from that broken one and the state of the streets and the buildings you can tell that the whole system is about to collapse soon.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
  56. The Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Lamarckian evolution was proved false long ago; just because a group of people isn't educated and therefore doesn't make use of their intelligence does not mean that their children will be stupid.

    Individuals differ in intelligence. Intelligence is (partly) heritable. These points follow logically from a basic understanding of Darwinian evolution (not to mention being supported by reams of empirical evidence). Read this, to start (the focus here is on population differences, but heritable individual differences in IQ are even more strongly supported).

  57. Brawndo and Idiocracy by Amos · · Score: 1

    As far as the movie goes, I think those who find it downscale have missed the picture, Lamarckian dynamics notwithstanding. As far as Brawndo goes it is effing brilliant as a market wedge in a highly competitive market. Redux has someone completely brill in their top marketing group. The drink itself? Terrific -- tastes all right and actually does boost the energy in a slow, stable, cheery sort of way. Beats Red Bull hollow. Their Bizarro Idiocracy-inspired ad. Their Myspace page. A

    1. Re:Brawndo and Idiocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Energy drinks" don't "boost energy." They're caffeinated sugar water with part of a multivitamin in them. If anything the insulin production in response to drinking them probably is a drag on "energy levels." Especially if you drink caffeine every day--meaning that you have developed a tolerance to it, so it provides little to no effects as a stimulant--you aren't competing with a cup of coffee.

      All of this "cheery" and "hollow" nonsense makes you sound like an audiophile discussing the effects of wooden knobs on the sound of a stereo.

    2. Re:Brawndo and Idiocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, for one, Brawndo has twice as much caffeine as a cup of brewed coffee, and #2, it uses dextrose, not high fructose corn syrup.

    3. Re:Brawndo and Idiocracy by Valdrax · · Score: 1

      The drink itself? Terrific -- tastes all right and actually does boost the energy in a slow, stable, cheery sort of way. Beats Red Bull hollow.

      Dude... If a drink with 200 mg of caffeine, several other stimulants, and gobs of sugar gives a "boost in energy" that is "slow" and "stable," you have some serious built-up tolerances to some unhealthy stuff.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  58. give Fox some credit by SlappyBastard · · Score: 1

    They finally realized that Idiocracy is a property worth mining.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
  59. Anyone noticed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The picture Rita draws in the ending of the movie has a resemblance to George Bush.

    Added it to wikipedia some time ago, but now theyve taken out the whole social commentary section of that entry.

  60. Much like Beavis and Butthead by argent · · Score: 1

    So you're saying the people who like his stuff are the ones being made fun of?

  61. The ad is convienently located on youtube. by Frank+Grimes · · Score: 1

    The ad is convienently located on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tbxq0IDqD04

    --
    CfkRAp1041vYQVbFY1aIwA== RV/hBCLKKcSTP5UFK3kqsg==
  62. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO website by sohp · · Score: 1

    Oh stop, that makes it WORSE!

  63. Scientific American writeup on Brawndo by User+956 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Scientific American weblog has the best writeup on Brawndo that I was able to find.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  64. Harness the power of shockolate and rawberry! by IHSW · · Score: 1

    Powerthirst!

    Electrolytes, turbolights, powerlights, more lights than your body has room for!

    Snake eyes!

  65. I didn't? by FatSean · · Score: 1

    So all those summer days reading books and programming my C64 weren't improving my intelligence?

    --
    Blar.
  66. Is that for real ? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Informative

    It looks like an hoax to me.
    First, is it too ironic to be moronic
    Second, I have already seen spoof ads like that on youtube that seems to be made by the same guy.
    Third, the video is hosted on youtube
    Fourth, the website works fine on Firefox in Linux. That's not something Fox would actually be able to do.

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    1. Re:Is that for real ? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Oh, and it is registered on godaddy.com as pointed in another post

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    2. Re:Is that for real ? by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh, and the video is from this user : http://www.youtube.com/user/pcloadletter42

      He doesn't put his name, his age is 27, he is from the United States and is the user number 15512 to prove that Slashdot doesn't do any kind of source checking.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    3. Re:Is that for real ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And don't forget the brawndo trademark registration:

      Omni Consumer Products LLC LTD LIAB CO DELAWARE

    4. Re:Is that for real ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hoax. Omnicorp (nice name from Robocop!) homepage doesn't work as it should. A fine spot for Idiocracy, overall, and Danny Leigh should check facts much better before posting stuff like that in his blog.

  67. Brawndo... by kitsunewarlock · · Score: 1

    Didn't the anti-water thing actually occur at one point in France to increase domestic wine sales? Mind you, this could be an old wives tale...which is why I'm trying to get it confirmed.

    --
    Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
  68. Powerthirst by brit74 · · Score: 1

    The "commercial" for Brawndo seems to be a big rip-off of the Powerthirst "commericals", except not as well done. Powerthirst: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRuNxHqwazs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0geWjLI5dM

    1. Re:Powerthirst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can it possibly be a "rip off" if it's the SAME GUY DOING BOTH COMMERCIALS

    2. Re:Powerthirst by Propaghandi · · Score: 0

      Maybe my eyes are going-but did I see a logo for Omni Consumer Products (OCP) on the bottom of the page?

      Mike

      --
      "Who's your Diaper Daddy?"
    3. Re:Powerthirst by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      The voiceover for both Powerthirst and Brawndo was done by the same guy. How can you be accused of ripping-off yourself? Next time you're going to accuse someone of a rip-off, please spend more than 25 nanoseconds researching the issue, eh?

    4. Re:Powerthirst by brit74 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, okay. You're right. And speaking of researching things, did you happen to check if if someone else posted the same comment before you did?

    5. Re:Powerthirst by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      No, but it's below my comment threshold. But I think mostly you're upset that someone with a moderation bonus pointed out your stupid posting, instead of an anonymous coward who'll be filtered out. Poor baby.

  69. Go away, I'm 'batin! by jaypeg · · Score: 1

    Besides, all you talk too faggy. I can't understand ya.

  70. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  71. Killing the contestants by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    At least they didn't actually kill the contestants.

    wait, kill the contesants would have been a bad thing?

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  72. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  73. OCP is real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, Omni Consumer Products is a real company. Their website is linked from the bottom of the webstore.

    1. Re:OCP is real by attributed+insanity · · Score: 1

      OCP is a real company and I'm a 23-foot-tall ostrich*. that sitehas absolutely no content other than the home page which talks about Brawndo. Someone else said it: there's something fishy about all this...

      * I'll find a costume if I absolutely *have* to.

    2. Re:OCP is real by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OCP is a real company and I'm a 23-foot-tall ostrich*. that sitehas absolutely no content other than the home page which talks about Brawndo. Someone else said it: there's something fishy about all this...

      Well, if you don't believe the website, you could always believe the US trademark office.

  74. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by mrjb · · Score: 1

    Why not just sterilize all the dumb people? Why, that's a great idea. I think you should write a book about it. I got the perfect title for it too- "Mein Kampf".

    --
    Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
  75. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A smart person would have realized that this does nothing to fix the social and economic factors driving the successful among us to have less kids than the unsuccessful and would realize that said any fertilized eggs would need a place to grow. It's not like the Clevons of the world are recklessly having unprotected visits to the fertility clinic with multiple women.

    But hey, thanks for donating your genetic material to the gene pool. I'm sure it will help.

  76. American Gladiators by oboreruhito · · Score: 1

    American Gladiators was on for what, 5 or 6 years?

    You don't watch TV, eh? NBC's been running commercials on the remake for weeks.

    NBC's casting page:

    American Gladiators
    AMERICAN GLADIATORS IS BACK!

    The NO-HOLDS-BARRED hit competition series returns to prime-time television, with hosts Hulk Hogan and Laila Ali!

    NBC is relaunching the classic competition series "American Gladiators" and is currently auditioning CONTENDERS and GLADIATORS for our upcoming premiere season.

    We are looking for weekend warrior types that are BIG, bad, and athletic. If you think you have the heart, skills, and desire to COMPETE then we want to see you at THE GLADIATOR ARENA!
  77. My duty. by Zero_Independent · · Score: 1, Funny

    I agree completely with the idea that stupid people are over populating. That is why I have resolved to have as many babies as possible with hot geeky girls to even it out. PM if you're interested in saving the human race.

  78. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO website by jcnnghm · · Score: 1

    The promo video on that website is very similar to a spoof video on youtube about a fake energy drink called Power Thirst. At the very least, it was definitely inspired by it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=SrPIRYhdnqs. Turbopuns indeed.

    --
    You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
  79. I gotta ask... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... did you really create that account for the sole purpose to encourage people to boycott Sony-BMG, rather than just Sony?

    1. Re:I gotta ask... by Boycott+BMG · · Score: 1

      Yeah I did. I realized that all of this negative opinion was being directed at the wrong company, so I decided to try and correct people's opinions. Dunno if I'm having any effect or not.

  80. Idiocracy Test by solprovider · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Idiocracy" is a personality/intelligence test. People have one of these reactions:
    1. Think the movie was hilarious. Did not get the message. The first group does not understand the movie is about them, the truly stupid people.
    2. Think the movie was hilarious because they got the message. The second group is wannabe evil overlords.
    3. Did not understand the movie and found only occasional humor. The third group is normal. They need a higher class of humor but did not understand the message. Please explain the message to these people.
    4. Understood the movie. Found some humor, but mostly sad. This group includes all of my friends.

    My parents had two children. The welfare family across the street had eight children. Almost no adults I respect have more than two children. Having two children only retains most of your genes for one generation. If you respect yourself and your spouse, you must have at least three children.

    --
    I spend my life entertaining my brain.
    1. Re:Idiocracy Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      In other words, you and your friends are smarter than everyone else? You could have saved a lot of pixels and just written "I'M SMARTER THAN EVERYONE!"

    2. Re:Idiocracy Test by Azuma+Hazuki · · Score: 1

      That was one of the most depressing things I have ever watched in my life. I didn't laugh once, because I can see it happening. I did smile/sigh/"oh holy fuck" a few times, but only because *I can see something like this happening to the world,* and when it does, it'll be much, much worse.

      --
      ~Eien no Inori wo Sasagete~ Searching for my Hatsumi...
    3. Re:Idiocracy Test by rrkap · · Score: 2, Funny

      How smart can you be if you're living across the street from section 8 housing?

      --
      I like my beverages with warning labels!
    4. Re:Idiocracy Test by Dripdry · · Score: 1

      What is most disturbing to me is that everyone these days seems to be saying just this. "Oh, we're the smart group of people." Me and MY friends would never act this way." Well, SOMEBODY must be acting that way, but everyone seems to agree that it isn't them. Does anyone see a problem here? Could it be that Great American Pasttime, "Passing the Buck"?

      If there is anything we should be scared of, it is this elitist attitude that "Me and my friends are smarter than that."

      --
      -
    5. Re:Idiocracy Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I'm not a wannabe evil overlord. I just happen to enjoy watching civilization destroy itself. If society thinks that fashion sense and sports knowledge are more important than intelligence and creativity, then let them suffer the consequences. Who am I to interfere by reproducing?

    6. Re:Idiocracy Test by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      It's not avoiding responsibility. It's the simple fact that people tend to socialize with others in a similar education level. You aren't likely to meet many uneducated people in college or at your professional job.

      Fertility rates are affected by nothing more powerfully than education. So an educated person is not likely to meet very many people with lots of kids, and an uneducated person is not likely to meet many people who reproduce below the average rate. Unfortunately this reinforces the divide.

      It is a serious problem. I don't see any good coming of below-replacement-rate reproduction among the educated and way-above-replacement-rate among the uneducated.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    7. Re:Idiocracy Test by solprovider · · Score: 1

      Five responses:
      - rrkap asked a joke question. (The area is strange -- superstars live 1/2 mile from slums. The neighborhood borders three towns with neighborhoods varying from upper class to lower class. My street has nice houses with large backyards. Most of the people living on our street were old, but some had sold/rented to poor people. My father chose that house; I live in a different State.)

      - AC claims Category 2. (Score:0 as I write this, but a well-written humorous response.)
      - Azuma Hazuki joins Category 4.
      Many of the posts define the category of the authors. Most posts demonstrating Category 1 traits are modded down. Slashdot is elitist.

      - An AC and Dripdry are upset about my elitist attitude.

      I do not "pass the buck." I do not state, "My friends and I are not smart." Your inability to use proper grammar excuses you from worrying that you and your friends are in the smart group. Do not fear people more intelligent than you. With great intelligence comes great responsibility. Many smart people care for the less fortunate.

      I am prejudiced. I am elitist. I am intelligent. I like being around smart people. I choose smart people as my friends. Smart people understand me. I do not need to filter my vocabulary or ideas to converse with smart people. I prefer discussions not concerning television or the weather. My friends are smart because I choose smart people to be my friends.

      The "education" system tries to neutralize the effects of varying intelligence. Being around people with poor or limited vocabulary affects your speech patterns. Everybody chooses their friends based on their own personality and intelligence. (See LunaticTippy's response.)

      --
      I spend my life entertaining my brain.
  81. Okay, then take it this way. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

    It is like saying that the fellows who ran the Gulags for Stalin (many of them Jews, surprisingly) were NOT guilty of staying within the system because Stalin told them all what to do. Bullshit, and I call it supreme bullshit.

    They can quit and find private sector jobs. I've even met a few who offered home schooling curricula/services. From what I've heard of the ones around here, they're not bad at all, and the kids like it more than they like public school and have a LOT more spare time when the day is done.

    Also, parents have a say in how its done. FAR different than public or even private schools. Course its not government sanctioned, but then again, nothing good ever is.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    1. Re:Okay, then take it this way. by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, and I call it supreme bullshit.

      Well said. He's talking about teaching requirements, and you're talking about Soviet prison camps. Bullshit, indeed.

    2. Re:Okay, then take it this way. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Way to go not actually addressing the important part of my post, but not atypical of slashdot or the usual collectivist crowd. Congrats :)

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    3. Re:Okay, then take it this way. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This might not reach you because you are detached, but there was no important part to your post. You provided some hyperbole and some worthless anecdotes that you fabricated from thin air. I am about to make a bowel movement which will have approximately the same information-content as your post, and will accomplish a thousand-times more than your lifetime contribution to political discourse. Wish me luck.

  82. I agree. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    It was Judge's version of an art film.

    --And garbage on purpose may be art, but when it boils right down to the pan bottom, I'm still consuming garbage. --I felt the same way after watching 'Idiocracy' as I did once after being stuck in the Chicago O'Hare terminal for hours on end watching that gawdawful airport CNN 'news' loop. --And I recognize that this was probably deliberate, but it doesn't change the fact that my body and brain were subjected to 90 minutes of soul-draining sugar-sewage.

    And worse, the film was littered with broken insights. --Are we saying that genetics is the beginning and end of intellect and personal human integrity? Sorry, but I have a problem with that notion. It may make for an amusing animated tree diagram, but it's also a patently false idea.

    But whatever. It was a cute film which was sort of worth watching. Once and never again. Hmm. --I wonder if that, 'Film Enjoyment Is Contagious' thing is in effect here?


    -FL

  83. Questions about "Idiocracy". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like "Idiocracy". It's a good and funny movie. But I have some questions about it.
    If all the people in the future are such idiots, who builds and maintains their motor vehicles? Who processes and makes the fuel? Who makes their machines? Don't these things require some measure of intelligence?

  84. Re: Umber Oppressor? by heinousjay · · Score: 1

    Why not just curb the overuse, instead? It's very rarely appropriate, it's just the fallback line for lazy thinkers who don't want to deal with the real issues underneath.

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  85. sorry, but... by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    Idiocracy sucked ass. Amazingly so. So much that it caused me to lose faith in Rotten Tomatoes, which scored it at 69%.

  86. Re: brains and genes by drwho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It can be shown that native intelligence is heritable to some degree. There's even racial differences in average IQ - with east Asians being the smartest (oh that ought to get me a lot of flack).

    But more importantly, is the idea that intelligence is self-selecting. When the stupid choose to have sex with the stupid, they'll also do stupid things during pregnancy (drink Brawndo, for instance), treat their children stupidly (i.e. without enough the proper stimuli) and the combination of genetic inferiority, developmental inferiority, and a society that glamourizes both will create a society that will ruin itself faster than lead pipes ruined Rome.

    What I find amazing is that people today choose to be stupid, even as adults who are have a reasonably high IQ. There's huge social pressure to act stupidly.

    I could say that humanity is on the cusp of a drastic change, but we've been in a period of drastic change for a while so that sounds a bit stale. But if we can manage to survive the great social upheaval that will accompany a change in energy sources, we will modify the DNA of every living thing. This, coupled with eventual space colonization, is one possible outcome, Idiocracy is another. I don't know which will happen, but things will NOT be as they are now in a century.

  87. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO website by Maxmin · · Score: 1

    A case of Brawndo runs $40 for 24 cans, or about $1.70 per. Isn't that ... pricey?

    Looking at the rest of the site, I get the impression that this is part of the DVD marketing campaign (like somebody else posted.)

    --
    O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
  88. Go Away Slashdot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Batin'

  89. Five words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MENSA member Asia Carrera. Mmmmmmmmm...

  90. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO website by User+956 · · Score: 1

    A case of Brawndo runs $40 for 24 cans, or about $1.70 per. Isn't that ... pricey?

    Not really. Considering a 20oz Coke runs $1.25 around here (or $2 per can for an 8oz Red Bull), and then add in the royalty they're paying to Mike Judge/FOX to use the BRAWNDO name (you did want Mike Judge to get paid, right?), and it makes sense.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  91. Re:The film focused my fears into a productive act by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1

    Why not just sterilize all the dumb people?
    Nobody would ever do that!
    --
    .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
  92. yes by Hangly+Man · · Score: 1

    I showed this to my friends in Beijing (someone did a Chinese fansub of it in like a week.)

    They were like "what, you mean the US isn't just like this now?"

    1. Re:yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda like "A Scanner Darkly" which takes place in a future in which the U.S. has lost the war on drugs. Well, the future is today.

  93. Re: brains and genes by Ardeaem · · Score: 1

    It can be shown that native intelligence is heritable to some degree. There's even racial differences in average IQ - with east Asians being the smartest (oh that ought to get me a lot of flack). As any psychological researcher will tell you, IQ != intelligence. IQ as a method of measuring intelligence is flawed, and the fact that different races score differently on IQ test may say more about the measurement than about what is being measured. Of course, it has only been a little more than a century since people were measuring cranial sizes to come to the same conclusion, so it isn't any surprise that this assertion still comes up.

    I have no doubt that intelligence is heritable. There are variations in intelligence between individuals. However, to claim that entire races are, on average, more or less intelligent than another is just stupid. For that to happen, the races would have had to have 1) drastically different selection pressures and 2) very little gene flow between them. Neither of these things occurred, as far as anyone can tell. Claims of different intelligences across races continue to be racist BS, even if a few of its well-meaning proponents don't realize it.
  94. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO advertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ok we get it ur gay and fat

  95. Proposed Tag..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 1

    Someone should tag this:

    owmyballs!

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
  96. Re: brains and genes by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

    Maybe it could be both, that'd be an awesome pseudo-sequel. Idiocracy... in space!

    If you question how a society with such a low IQ can achieve space colonization, or how a space setting would improve the movie, you're too smart. Shove some crayons up your nose until you no longer question the premise.

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
  97. Jeff Cooper? by Travoltus · · Score: 1

    I already resist commercials pretty much naturally, and am very hard to sell ANYTHING to. Who is this Jeff Cooper? I have a feeling this thing he teaches can tell me why I'm so super skeptical and yet also raise up my game.

    --
    --- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
    1. Re:Jeff Cooper? by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      Who is this Jeff Cooper?


      I have no idea, but it sounds like he's someone who sells things to people who want to learn to avoid being sold things.

      Genius.
    2. Re:Jeff Cooper? by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

      Cooper was the founder of the American Pistol Institute (now known as Gunsite School) and one of those really nasty fellows you just didn't mess with. Also spent a lot of time writing freelance (Guns & Ammo magazine) and has a slew of his own books out in the rare book shops. (Gargantuan Gunsite Gossip 1 & 2 are selling for upwards of 120 bucks in mint condition on amazon, unless you manage to dig up a copy at a gunshow for less, but they're remarkably rare.)

      That being said, Cooper coined the color coded awareness system for armed individuals seeking to detect or engage threats rather than be detected and engaged by them I've found it just as useful for those not armed seeking to avoid or detect possible conflict or fraud before it detects them. I actually have a funny feeling George Bush's people actually ripped off Cooper on their "threat level" coloring scheme.

      White - Completely unaware, tunnel vision, the kind of individual that could be armed to the gills, trained in martial arts and still taken by surprise by the first determined aggressor. Typical drunken college kid, helpless socialist type or soccer mom going to her minivan. Also typical of people who get defrauded by Nigerian bank scams or raped in parking lots. Typically a human or domesticated animal behavior. Wild or feral animals tend to generally be in a passive condition Yellow. This is known as the "trouble finds YOU" or "taken by surprise" mindset. Some also call this the "sleeping at the wheel" syndrome.

      Yellow - Passive awareness. You consistently assess your environs and are aware of your surroundings. You can tell who is a threat and who isn't, but at the moment nothing has piqued your interest. Typical behavior for someone who has either been assaulted before and gotten over it, or someone who has trained his or her awareness. This is a stress free condition just like White. Casual scans of your surroundings are shown in movies as a sign of paranoia, but they actually are a good thing to do, even if all it helps you is see that drunk driver that lost control and is swerving towards your car. I've seen and observed people during traffic who are COMPLETELY unaware of their surroundings. Having driven truck for a year or two, condition Yellow is actually a remarkably common thing among truckers, though they often just call it "being aware of your surroundings." This is known as the "trouble can never surprise you" mindset.

      Orange - Directed awareness. A highly likely threat has emerged, and you have detected it and are now actively assessing it, preparing your response. You haven't engaged it, but are ready to do so. A big guy in a dark parking lot is approaching you, he hasn't reached into his jacket yet, but he's suspicious enough as it is. As he hasn't attacked you yet, you are alert but not yet engaging a verified threat. You feel uneasy and have reason to suspect aggression.

      Red - The threat is verified. Possible assailant has drawn a weapon, or another vehicle swerves your way in traffic. At this point, if you are armed, your hand has achieved a positive grip with your weapon and you are drawing it from its retaining harness/holster, and you are waiting for either your conscious decision or the unconscious reflex you have trained to break the mental sear and neutralize the threat. This is when your mental trigger is cocked, regardless of whether the threat is a mugger with a knife or a gun drawn, or some headlights approaching your car from the side at very high speed. You are being directly targeted or threatened with injury, at this point you are ready to respond to the aggressor directly. Most people who get mugged or robbed get taken completely by surprise and reach Yellow/Orange after the assault or fraud is already under way.

      The military thought this progressive system of evaluation/awareness a good idea, took it on, and even added their own awareness level beyond Red. They call it:

      Black - Actively engaged in combat. Directl

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  98. And now pirate bay has a ton more downloaders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hehehe every time a movie gets a lot of press on /., the number of seeds/leechers on the torrents for it go WAY up.  Piratebay reported only 23 or so, until I actually connected, and it was like 120.

  99. It's not supposed to be hilarious by Weaselmancer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's supposed to be sarcastic. It's social commentary.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  100. Me too by Weaselmancer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The "he talks faggy" bit gave me a chuckle. I actually had to learn how to talk to people in my rural home town and not use language that confused them. The scary part is that I used to do it unconsciously. I'd go to college and communicate normally, then come home and "adjust" for the locals. First time I noticed what I was doing it gave me the serious creeps.

    And I can still do it if I wish, and I haven't lived there in a dozen years. One minute I can be talking about Heisenberg, the next moment I can sound like I work at a gas station. Clevon would be ok with me. He'd probably give me a Budweiser and invite me to a BBQ.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  101. A confession by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

    I've always secretly hoped that all the high amplitude low frequency bass coming from overpowered car stereos these days matches some critical frequency in the testicles and causes male sterility. It could only help the gene pool.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  102. Re: brains and genes by drwho · · Score: 1

    I'll admit that an IQ test is not completely deterministic of actual intelligence. But it's the best we've got.

    TO address you enumerated points: 1) yes there have been different selection pressures. Exactly how important an individual pressure is in determining overall intelligence is not clear. 2) What do you mean by 'very little gene flow'? Because until recent times there wasn't really much gene flow into certain races (Japanese, Australian aborigine) but a fair amount in others (European, South Asian). You may think that it is racist BS, but the topic is still a hot one with much research going on. I suggest you read the wikipedia article on "Racial Intelligence" for a broad summary of the field.

    Personally, I'd like to believe that my race is the most intelligent. But science seems to be showing that it is not. I can deal with those results, because I believe in the value of scientific weighing of the various attributes of different animals, including man.

    I'd like to point out that while I scored rather highly on IQ tests as a child, they really don't have much bearing some thirty years later. It's quite difficult to measure intelligence as opposed to learning at the higher end of the scale, in adults.

  103. Re: brains and genes by Zymergy · · Score: 1

    Already been done: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094012/

    Dark Helmet: Careful you idiot! I said across her nose, not up it!
    Laser Gunner: Sorry sir! I'm doing my best!
    Dark Helmet: Who made that man a gunner?
    Major Asshole: I did sir. He's my cousin.
    Dark Helmet: Who is he?
    Colonel Sandurz: He's an asshole sir.
    Dark Helmet: I know that! What's his name?
    Colonel Sandurz: That is his name sir. Asshole, Major Asshole!
    Dark Helmet: And his cousin?
    Colonel Sandurz: He's an asshole too sir. Gunner's mate First Class Philip Asshole!
    Dark Helmet: How many asholes do we have on this ship, anyway?
    [Entire bridge crew stands up and raises a hand]
    Entire Bridge Crew: Yo!
    Dark Helmet: I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes!
    [Dark Helmet pulls his face shield down]
    Dark Helmet: Keep firing, assholes!

  104. Mike Judge is a genius by catdevnull · · Score: 1

    I love his projects--they're not big budget or based on any reality but, rather, they mock reality. Except for Bevis and Butthead--those guys were in my high school home room.

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
  105. Idiocracy by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

    Doesn't exist IRL and won't exist ever.
    Smart people always have advantage,and bigger pool of knowledge then average idiots.Education and culture cannot choke off really "smart" people.Smart people are smarter then the system.

  106. Not hilarious, but sad by LKM · · Score: 1

    I was sorely disappointed with the movie however. For me the laugh potential of a fat redneck say "he talks faggy" is one, sadly the line was repeated roughly every ten minutes. The social commentary is fine, we can all see the Costco with a thousand aisles, but from all the hype it got from people I know about being hilarious I just didn't see it.

    I don't know, when playing Halo 3, people talk about how faggy each other is every ten seconds, too. I didn't find the movie hilarious, I found it depressing, because it depicts exactly the society we already live in.

    I still think everyone should see it, even if it's not hilarious, but sad.

    1. Re:Not hilarious, but sad by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      You need to look at the comments on one of those video sites.

      Try post something resembling intelligence. Go on, do it.... see what responses you get.

      I garantee that "your a fag" will be among them.

      --
      No sig today...
  107. Uh... that wasn't Rob Malda by porkrind · · Score: 1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSkCny-HtTw

    That was the VA Research / Linux / Software^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HOSDN / OSTG / SourceForge house band. And that's me, the lead singer :)

    Other band members: Pat McGovern (lead guitar), Scott McNeil (bongos), Brian Biles (other bongos), Brad Grantham (bass), Rob Flemming (other guitar).

    -John Mark

  108. Or... by jandersen · · Score: 1

    Whoever did production design on that thing deserves an Oscar.

    Or a wedgie.

  109. Been answered... by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1
    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  110. Oops, left off a piece. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

    (Similar to this, it boggles the mind how many people have NO fire extinguishers in the house, or they let them expire, run low charges, etc.) Too much of society is conditioned to believe that "someone else will handle it"... and in a country like the USA, where individualism and self sufficiency were founding virtues (they really are virtues, ask any Katrina survivor, both those who prepared and those who didn't) it amazes one to see so many people who not only call such virtues "bad traits" but who actively partake of unpreparedness and actively encourage others to be as unprepared as possible. Then, when the trouble starts, they are the first to blame others for not having come to their aid. Institutionalized help rarely works the way it is meant to, but most people still expect their rulers to come to their aid, and consistently, throughout history, the rulers have shown exactly how nature works. Each animal takes care of its own. Rulers are no different, but they are intelligent enough to realize that the majority can be fleeced dry by banking on their desire to have someone else do all their thinking, preparing and living. It is only natural that a higher order parasite would then use this vulnerability as its way in.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  111. Carl's Jr... by kaizendojo · · Score: 1

    "Fuck You; I'm Eating!" Ya can't beat that line...

  112. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO website by pragma_x · · Score: 1

    Thanks, that flash ad gave me a chuckle. It has to be by the same guys who did this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRuNxHqwazs (also awesome)

  113. No great mystery by David+Gould · · Score: 1

    You're one of us. So are most of the people you know.

    --
    David Gould
    main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
    1. Re:No great mystery by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      You're one of us. So are most of the people you know. Gooble Gobble! We accept you! One of us!
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    2. Re:No great mystery by David+Gould · · Score: 1

      This guy's obviously not one of us.

      --
      David Gould
      main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
    3. Re:No great mystery by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      *sigh* It's a famous quotation. The movie is public domain; you can see it for free on YouTube.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    4. Re:No great mystery by David+Gould · · Score: 1

      Oh. Okay, maybe you are one of us after all. It's hard to tell sometimes (admittedly, your sig was another hint). My bad.

      --
      David Gould
      main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
  114. Linking to racist scientific research? by vistic · · Score: 1

    From your link: "[Watson] is 'inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa' because 'all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really', and I know that this 'hot potato' is going to be difficult to address."

    So basically, it's easy to read that as him saying that "black people are stupid".

    "Hot potato" is an understatement. The notion of racial superiority/inferiority has proven disastrous for the human race.

    The basic argument is that it's silly to think that separate populations had to evolve the same way mentally and physically. This is true. The issue is 'to what degree?': it needs context. On the time scales of the human race, how much differentiation could have even happened? I've read studies upon studies that cite how you are quite possibly more genetically similar to someone who is black (assuming you are white) than you are to your white neighbor. I.e., skin color is not a good measure of overall genetic differentiation. The migrations of populations is complicated. And when you get down to it, it seems more and more like the very concept of "race" is a myth. A few years ago, either Discover or SciAm even did a whole issue focusing on this topic.

    Another major obstacle to consider is whether or not the scientists trying to prove that black people are of lower intelligence have a personal agenda... prejudice... bias. And what they hope to ultimately accomplish with their research? Second class citizenship for 'inferior' races? Or just the ability to discriminate based on race during employment screenings, as someone of an 'inferior' race may clearly be less eligible for the job?

    It all stinks. And I wouldn't buy into what this guy says just based on the paranoia that there's some cover-up of the truth because of some desire for political correctness. If there were big differences among races in terms of intelligence, they would be well evident by now. As is, it seems to me the most important factor on intelligence is your environment.

    Back on topic to the movie... I think the kids being raised in the idiot families certainly get a dose of that idiot culture from their parents, and that may be a more important factor than genetics. The movie doesn't address this, and it's really just a movie. The topic you touched upon with that link though, is a pretty serious matter.

  115. Agreed by Anonymous+Meoward · · Score: 1

    Sorry about the bust-up, but I agree about teachers' days etc. I have close relations in the field, and I have no idea why they put up with what they do, for so little. And they work in a pretty decent school district (Wake County, NC), not some festering shithole in the middle of nowhere.

    It boils down to really, really loving what you do, I suppose. There sure as hell is no other incentive.

    Teachers might average standard 8-hour days if you take summer vacation into account for an entire year. (You would too if, for example, you put it 16-hour days for 6 months straight, then left the workforce for the next six months.) It wouldn't surprise me if they averaged more.

    --
    --- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
  116. You still haven't answered my original question. by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

    Who is this WE... I'm not part of WE. I don't want my kids NEAR a public school. Why should I be part of WE just to pay for YOUR benefit and see no benefit myself.

    Your side of the equation wants to strip me of a lot of things... not just cash. Why should I contribute willingly to the robbery and fleecing of me, all the while not really receiving any benefits for said fleecing? YOUR kids have accidents with cars and drugs and alcohol, YOUR kids abuse tobacco, YOUR kids live defenseless and prefer to strip others of their defenses rather than learn to deal with the world, so why should ***I*** be forced to provide for those who care not to provide for themselves? I am not against being good to strangers, I am completely not of the mindset that I should be fleeced by others to do so. That, in any other context is called Robbery... it used to be a felony when "citizens" did it, but now that the government does it for YOUR benefit, its called "social contract" or "the greater good".

    Seriously, teaching kids is important, but school isn't the place to learn those important things. Communists did a better job (even of the obedience training) with a LOT LESS MONEY... so it is NOT the money issue. There is something else at hand, and it isn't the "low pay". Teachers in communist countries were low paid. American teachers are swimming in money by comparison... I made less than some of my teachers when I went trucking a few years ago. And I even had enough money to not touch my savings and side investments and AND save up, AND still have time for my hobbies, without ever touching my savings! And to top it off, I made less than a teacher while I worked that job. (Sure I had side investments, but I didn't touch any of them.) How is this possible, I wonder... if teachers get paid so little, that with less, I could still manage to live off one sole source of cash that paid LESS than what a teacher makes in any school system in the USA or Canada? And I can guarantee that trucking is a lot more stressful and a lot less thankful job than teaching. People try to run you off the road, treat you like shit, and then say you're trash, and in the end, they go shopping at the very store you delivered their goods to. They'd die in a week of starvation if you didn't bring them food and goods, but the scum try to run you off the roads, and you aren't even paid by the government, so its not like they paid for you with forced taxes. They willingly patronize that store or any other. Unlike teachers, whom you pay whether you patronize their services or not. And judging by how many kids cannot even do basic math (such as making change in a store, which should be quick and reflexive to anyone with a 1st or 2nd grade education) one has to wonder why we're paying teachers at all.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  117. Re:You still haven't answered my original question by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 0, Troll

    Who is this WE... I'm not part of WE. I don't want my kids NEAR a public school. Why should I be part of WE just to pay for YOUR benefit and see no benefit myself.

    You benefit from an educated populace. If you want a piece of that for educating your kid, it's a reasonable thing, though.

    Your side of the equation wants to strip me of a lot of things... not just cash. Why should I contribute willingly to the robbery and fleecing of me

    It's called taxation.

    YOUR kids have accidents with cars and drugs and alcohol, YOUR kids abuse tobacco

    And your kids are perfect, right?

    Seriously, teaching kids is important, but school isn't the place to learn those important things

    It's not like you have a better plan. You're just bitter.

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  118. Re:You still haven't answered my original question by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

    You've responded to better than a half dozen of my posts, so I presume you've read quite a few, and you seem to always miss the point. What is it about being one of the masses that automatically makes you miss any proposal but those of further tyranny and serfdom? You've chosen your path, and I've chosen mine. Re-read my posts (again) if you must and try to take note of where I've mentioned alternatives to being a serf in the system. There are ways, and they're not even illegal, though the mass media certainly equates them as such... then again, the mass media equates lots of legal things to being "bad" but since when have reporters been bothered by such a tiny little thing as the truth?

    Bingo. Do your research and respond to my replies either with actual solutions or answers, not simply justifying the crap that already is.

    Yes, I am partly bitter watching pearls being thrown before swine... or is that people willingly feeding themselves into the meat grinders and wondering why it hurts... seriously, only thing I'm still bitter about is that I have to watch you people drag so many others with you before they have a chance to awaken.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  119. Re:You still haven't answered my original question by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

    You've chosen your path, and I've chosen mine.

    This is true, but you can't be an island. We disagree, but enither one of us is going to get everything we want.

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  120. Re:You still haven't answered my original question by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 1

    Again, there is no WE... so I will get what I want, and what I need. You will do whatever you choose to, even if you choose to do what others choose for you. That is your prerogative, as it is for every one out there.

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  121. Re:You still haven't answered my original question by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

    You live in a society, whether you like it or not. There is most definitely a we.

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  122. Re:Link to the official BRAWNDO advertisement by joewkelly · · Score: 1

    > ok we get it ur gay and fat Thank you for this feedback. I have deleted the video. In retrospect, it was not funny. -joewkelly