I agree with another poster for their OS analogy. Brilliant! Still, we can compare the films entirely on their own merits.
Firefly (vis-a-vis, Joss Whedon) has a fanatic following, strong enough to resurrect a TV show into a motion picture. (When has that happened?) That’s how we come to Serenity, which tells a compelling story that refuses to take a back seat to sheer gimmickry or showboating. The characters have depth, the story has depth, even the bloody name of the ship has depth!
Whereas Star Wars (vis-a-vis, Lucasfilm) bowed to Special Interests, abused their superior technological prowess and the story suffered for it. In rating the entire Trilogy, it seems that the number of each episode is equal to their quality. (in a one-to-ten scale, of course) They sold-out depth for “dominating market share” and clearly cashed-in on their own franchise. Find the depth in that.
Were you high when you watched Serenity? Everything from the Firefly series is there, but it's hard to take it all in with the first viewing. In the end, you know what the story was about and you know that the protagonist overcame their challenge. Did you miss the interplay of the characters? Did you miss the rich “western slang” dialogue? Did you miss the bits in Chinese? Did you understand why the Tams were created in the first place? Did you only wake up for the final 10 minutes?
The only thing lacking depth here is the parent post. For best movie, (yes, -ever) it has my vote!
If j00 gunna claim FP, at least know when to use the </sarcasm> tag!
Start with Edgy! There's a bunch of post-install updates, but over broadband they should all be handled within an hour. All included programs will work right out of the gate, though Synaptic seems a bit strange to the uninitiated. (I still don't get the "tag" system, but it's not essential to install programs that you know) The "Add/Remove" feature in the KDE menu seems more functional, however it doesn't seem to go very far outside the Canonical Ubuntu release.
Leave the Beta to the Beta-testers, I say. (emphasis on "tester" --if you don't mind risking your data or system integrity, be my guest)
With any luck, they will have a vastly improved upgrade vector for pre-existing installs. That was the unfortunate event from Dapper to Edgy; however the Kubuntu Edgy LiveCD installation works flawlessly.
You'll find much better KDE integration with Kubuntu (vs. SuSE 10.0)...IMHO, the SuSE environment kept having disassociation issues; the Novell code wasn't aware of what the KDE/Qt/Python code was doing. Software dependencies kept being broken, removing packages was a total crapshoot.
Now in Kubuntu, there's really no problems other than what is already inherent to KDE itself. With KDE getting a face-lift next month, and Feisty ready to push it out the door, it's promising to be an exciting update.
In it's own way, the current Copyright Law and the DMCA are fairly air-tight. The
only real “loophole” is the disposition of lobbyists and lawyers that they are
to be used for ensuring, even reinforcing, the profiteering of media companies.
It can be argued that the litigation/arbitration process is what's flawed about Copyright
Law. Most companies will brow-beat any supposed “violators” with legal-sounding
notices and strong talk of legal action. (JupiterMedia comes to mind) Like a traffic
ticket, most Average Joes will just pay the fine and get on with things.
If there's any “reinforcement” to be made, it would have to be adding
more certain terms to the language of the Law. At least then, each judge has something
to cover his back when he settles on a default decision. As it is, there is a tremendous
amount of pressure upon legal dissertation to determine the exact nature of each trespass.
When it comes down to it, the bottom line with Copyright Law is money. That is, it
was a system to protect content creators (artists, photographers, publishers, editors,
authors, etc.) from those that would fraudulently profit from their work. What's truly
ridiculous is these current lawsuits that have no real claim other than, “They're
giving away the stuff we want to sell!” (read: sales-potential losses, but not
real losses, nor does the profit really go elsewhere)
Take the recent RIAA case where their “losses” were found to be little
more than CD's that wouldn't sell at suggested prices anyway. (i.e., a fact of life
in music; you just don't sell them all. Served!) They tried to use the whole amount
of “losses” as a means to persecute the peer-sharing services and the
like. Once they were found out (less than 2% of what they claimed could actually be
called “losses from peer networks”) they shut-up about it real quick.
So, how do we improve Copyright Law to keep these things from happening? I prefer
Shakespeare's advice, Kill the Lawyers. (metaphorically, of course)
Am I naive to believe that someday, some day, the US will have a congress that's for the people?
You are naïve to think that a Congress For The People is just going to happen on its own. We, the people, must make it so!
Perhaps a game will come out that requires a real body-scan. (C'mon, S/L --be a pioneer for once!)
In the weeks that follow, this tale might be told:
[quoting myself - a hypothetical chat between two gamers...]
There's something following us! They are the Squallum. Gamers that had a scan of their physical bodies made into their own Avatar... a shadow of their former selves.
They love and hate their Avatars as they love and hate themselves. Their need for gaming has drawn them here, and their need for geek-cred has created the desire for “IRL” Avatars.
My heart tells me that these Avatars have some part to play yet, for good or ill...
Now I just thought of what this will bring... pasty nerds coughing-up coin to other, not-so-pasty geeks for their body-scans. Maybe it will pay for your next month at the gym?
Read the eff'n descriptions; though some are obscure, note that a few examples are, in fact, “non-artificial” noise. In particular, the shots from cheap CCD's (cameraphone, smartphone, disposable digi-cams, etc.) yield remarkably improved results. You only get shots like that with <100USD equipment, and you're not going to shell out for >300USD software to fix it, now are you? Something that works... for FREE! Sign me on.
Troll, back to your cave! In the meantime, let the hobbyist photophiles have their triumph when it's truly an achievement... and it is!
You got a problem with it? Then make something better!
Now I can finally set-up an external in Gimp for Unsharp Mask!
Putting your own computer together these days with all the options, choices to make, etc. is getting harder than it was 10 years ago.
Ok, I give you full credit for spotting the trends and putting it in your own words, BUT...
[...] First, an introduction: I speak as someone who's actually been in the books; anyone remember the Micro House Technical Library? That was from my earlier career in Visual Communication.
Nothing reminds you that hardware used to be so tremendously complex more than having literally thousands of documents describing obscure, unmarked and occasionally impossible jumper configurations just to set the correct I/O port. (coveniently packed on to four easy-to-carry CD's </plug>)
Speaking as such, I can tell you with utmost certainty that, using the same amount of effort it took to successfully build and install a single PC in 1997, I could build a server farm with a dozen SAN's and set-up fifty workstations... simultaneously.
Seriously, I could crap-out a better PC today than a reasonably-working P/90 (yes, that's MHz) in the same time ten years ago. The sheer number of pre-built options nowadays is a full order of magnitude over what there was in ol' 97.
Don't even mention fifteen years ago! That's the sort of stuff that the MHTL would cover, and let me tell you, it reads like a horror novel. (or a bible?...depends on your perspective, I guess- but you still get the same ending)
Suffice it to say, PC's are getting easier to build and manage, and so is Linux.
Can anyone truly explain why Microsoft is headed in the opposite direction?
It is nice to see that non-Linux people are continuing to give Linux a try. Most things in the world only get one chance and then its over.
Is a wok parabolic in cross section or is it circular?
A traditional, hand-hammered wok would be more spherical; where the sides come further “up” than “out”. The shape would be closer to a perfect circle than a perfect parabola.
I don't believe that would be a huge hindrance on gaining a signal, except that your focus would now be more of a line, rather than a point in space.
Also of note is that a typical wok would be flat on the bottom (US stove-top variety) making a “dead zone” in the reflective gain. Not really a problem, in fact, it may just improve the design. In a typical parabolic dish, the dead-center area of the dish is already in the shadow of the antenna element. (unless you're talking about offset reflectors, a'la Dish Network or DirecTV) In fact, the flat bottom would be an excellent place to affix the antenna, rather than go with the Tripod or Boom Arm approach.
While it may work well enough as a receiver, it could get you in trouble as a transmitter. The variance in the focus would create a tremendous “cone”... both dissipating the signal and potentially interfering with nearby transponders. (big FCC no-no)
Still, if your application is short-distance Line of Sight or in a very remote area, you might just be able to get away with it.
When you say “need incandescent lighting”, I presume you're speaking of the quality and responsiveness of the light source, not of the need for an excited wire filament inside a vacuum-sealed glass orb. (clearly more efficient as a heat source than a light source... evidenced by the common Lava Lamp®)
I mean really, what's the need about? Is it about a strong-and-steady flow of photons? Is it about a light source that can be analog-controlled to dim and brighten in smooth steps?
I may not be speaking for everyone, but for those of us that are prone to the affliction, enduring the 60-66Hz “hummm” and the barely-perceptible flicker of fluorescent is a condition I will trade-in for just about anything.
I've seen a lot of lighting fads come and go. Fluorescent seems to stay just because it's so ergonomically attractive against vis-a-vis Heat Lamps. CF is about the same, just in a smaller package. Cold-cathode lamps are nifty, but they're about as useful as Xmas Lights, and cost ten times more. (with current Consumer Offerings) My bet is on up-and-coming technologies like bright LED and HID (High Intensity Discharge; the son of the Arc Lamp) lighting.
Just this past year, I've noticed an abundance of LED lighting technologies— not in the news, but in my hand. To me, that means a lot more than “coming soon”.
Butane lighters with a small LED flashlight are now common give-away items, as are just simple promotional pocket-lights. Battery-operated LED Xmas Lighting is now just about everywhere, and in many colors. (most popular, of course, is pure-white) When a technology becomes commonplace, that is when you know its about to come into its own.
Look at cellphones and GPS; both were considered Luxury or High End at first, then the price dropped enough that everyone found a reason to buy one. When everyone on the block has the same technology, the industry is pressured to make it better. As soon as cellphones became common, it was a race to make The Best Cellphone. Though there are clear leaders, that race is still on.
You watch; this will come to the Lighting Industry as well. As the knock-off CF and LED lighting floods the market, the leaders have to come-up with innovations to make their offering (seem) better than the others. (Note the implied reservation) Though I don't doubt their ability to innovate, I do doubt their veracity in purporting innovation.
There's already a remarkable offering of ConsumerLEDLighting. Compact Fluorescents already have their well-earned niche, although I personally have distaste for them. As for high-end needs, such as photography and “spectacle” uses, (WARNING: token Wiki articles) HID is slowly emerging into its own. Your street may soon be lit with HID, rather than sodium vapor. (for example)
If General Electric can make a better light bulb, I say let them. If Australia never makes it legal to use one in your home when it would be just as viable as CF, it's their loss. I think a greater question is, how long is the “better light bulb” supposed to last? (LED “bulbs” are edging towards offering Lifetime Guarantees—and by that, meaning the lifetime of the consumer! W
Here's a little piece I penned recently, hope it lessens your confusion.
Analogies of women as they apply to OS platforms:
The College Freshman
Clearly insecure, entirely self-absorbed, and oblivious to the world-at-large,
this specimen says she will do most anything to please, though when it
comes down to it, her inexperience is obvious and you end-up
either fighting or breaking it off. The on-again-off-again relationship
that ensues is rife with games and torment. Ultimately, you move on to
something more mature. (Win9x)
The Business “Model”
Brains and beauty, she knows how to get things done. She's professional
in all matters, can follow-up on every commitment and is fairly in-touch
with the world. On the flip side, she's almost entirely without humor
and becomes jaded at the thought of playing any games. She doesn't laugh
at your jokes, approaches intimacy like a German Factory Supervisor, and
steadily removes all enjoyment from day-to-day life with the same efficiency
as when organizing her shoes. (Win2000)
The Homemaker
Sweet and approachable, this little cutie aims to please. She's nurturing,
kind and anticipates your needs with uncanny consistency. You are lulled
into a sense of comfort by the constant attention, unaware that she is
fulfilling her own agenda. Unscrupulous elements from her past have corrupted
her true intentions, though she would never show it. Sometimes she's gone
for hours on end, but always returns saying, “I just had to handle a few
things.” She's a bit protective, too. Sometimes she feels more like a
Mother than a Significant Other, and sporadically denies you what you
want, even when you ask nicely. (WinXP)
The Hippie Chick
She's
terribly cute, insanely fashionable and always upbeat. It seems she doesn't
ever wear the same outfit twice, and can always brighten your day with a
song. “Head in the stars and feet on the ground,” is Her Saying,
though you eventually believe that it's only half true. Everything is perfect,
but a bit too perfect. She never really disagrees with you, but she tends
to take your desires too far on occasion. One time, after you said, “You
should get some rest,” she ended-up sleeping half the day and dancing
all night; keeping you awake. You always wonder if there's something better.
(MacOS)
The College Grad
A drop-dead gorgeous, head-turning form makes this one outwardly irresistible.
If you're brave enough to strike-up a conversation, you will only get the
chit-chat at first. After a while, you begin to see that she holds more
knowledge that she lets on. Stylish, versatile and attentive to your needs,
she seems like Mrs. Right for a long while, and after spending a-bankroll-and-a-half
in dating. Her penchant for parties and going-out are merely a facade
for her Networking. It seems she's working on her public image night-and-day.
When it comes to actually having fun, she claims there's not enough time
or that she doesn't know how to play the game. Intimacy is a brief experience
in-between making plans or shopping for expensive accessories. She's everything
you want, and more than you need. (OS X)
The Girl Next Door
Though often outwardly plain, she hides a tremendous beauty within. Her
beauty comes right through the rugged good-looks and belies an inner strength,
which makes her both reliable and kind. She's not always forthcoming about
her problems, but she tends to solve most of them herself. Whatever comes
up, she is happy to discuss it and let you in on her past. Ver
They're smarter than that. They know what sabre-rattling means; that he's
trying to flush-out a Champion for Linux. (read: scapegoat)
Not that there's really anything that MSFT could do to said scapegoat... except
mire it down for years and years into court proceedings, perpetual lawyers
on retainer, and certain bankruptcy. It would serve as a Tour De Force of MSFT's
legal and financial might, and nothing more.
It's a waiting game, and time is not on Ballmer's side.
Sure, maybe the Linux Community is collectively looking at each other, nodding
as if to say, “You first...” but the Habeas Corpus, Discovery Process,
maybe even stockholders will ultimately pull-out the Ten Ton Gorilla everyone
has been wondering; what exactly is The Violation?
In a nutshell, it appears that MSFT may be sore over just one thing; Samba.
In essence, the Linux Samba Client was reverse-engineered by an
individual, who crafted his code through straight trial-and-error on an SMB
terminal, then packaged and released the client under GPL. Notably, the Linux
GPL—by
it's own definition—cannot be in voilation of any upstanding patent laws.
(Nobody's making a dime from it, and GPL is nobody's licensed product, so no “violation”)
As for the argument from MSFT, it's about “losses”. It's the same
agrument as RIAA/MPAA; they're just itchin’ to sue someone over Not Selling
As Much As They Think They Should. (vis-a-vis: not selling as much as they
promised to shareholders!) They aren't ready to write-off a loss, and while
it may be but a minor injury to the MSFT Goliath, they see that there's still
a potential Profit Margin in litigation, along with the potential to frighten Anyone On The Fence about using Linux versus Windoze.
<melodrama> Wither the poor Goliath; standing in the square and pounding his chest. Who
will dare come and challenge him? </melodrama>
(Whoever it is, they had better have Wikkid Skillz or a Cunning
Plan That Cannot Fail...f’rael)
I would agree that the GPL, in a sense, relies on IP and Copyright standards
to exist. In an ironic twist, the GPL relies on those standards to protect itself
from the profiteering that Patent and Copyright systems also protect. Quite a
Coup, if you ask me.
Aside from OSS parallels, I am a stauch supporter of the current U.S. model.
Although TLA makes little (if any) mention of exactly how the various interpretations
of Copyright Law are challenged, let's see who's behind it:
[emphases mine] From TLA:
The International Intellectual Property Alliance,
an association that brings together US lobby groups representing the
movie, music, software, and publisher industries, last week delivered its annual
submission to the US government featuring its views on the inadequacy of
intellectual property protection around the world.
After all, what's holding Vista back the most
right now? That's right; DRM and insistent limitations leveraged by MPAA
and RIAA. (et al)
These organizations (and the like) are putting such “criticisms” out to the
global community, not our Government! What's spooky is that it's beyond
Foreign Policy. The Copyright “pressures” are being applied through trade and
civic channels, not through official legislative or diplomatic channels.
The state of U.S. Copyright Law is really quite simple: (and was simplified
further with DMCA) Content
creators are the owners of copyright. When it comes to clearly original works,
this is a no-brainer. The artist gets to say how his/her work is traded for
profit. Derivative works are often a Grey Area (no matter where in the world
you may be) and may even be lost-in-the-gap if the original creator did not
take steps to protect their legacy.
From there, it becomes a matter of language. If you make
an agreement for others to copy/sell your work, the law is in the language
of the contract. After that, it becomes largely a matter of Contract Law rather
than Copyright Law.
Not to say that (therefore) every case would be simple. Far from it!
In the
case of any given up-and-coming American musical group; the group itself
clearly has ownership of their songs, right? Well, then you have to take into
account the producers, record label, distribution for Broadcast and content-channel
partners. Aside from those, a real Shooting Star group will have to concern
themselves with likeness rights, cover art, poster art, video production, video
direction, creative consultants, personal appearances, concert scheduling,
publicity appearances, and the various managers and agents that it takes to
make a star actually rise. In all of this, there are already nearly a dozen
more Original Content Creators; but how do you keep all that straight?
That's right; with a Contract.
Now back in the day, the RIAA would be much like a guild; where artists
could lean upon them for support in cases where someone else is making a buck
with their work where they shouldn't. With the rise of user-accessible recording
devices (cassette tapes, DAT, CD-R, DVD±R, and now every form of Flash
Memory) the organization quicky went from a defensive group into the profit-seeking
pundits they are today.
In the case of MPAA, their original charter was to keep Motion Picture Production
up to certain standards. In cases where even well-made movies were distributed
outside of the original studio's agreement, it became a Big Brother to the
studios and aided with criminal prosecution. Likewise with the RIAA, the MPAA
has been getting steadily more agressive since the advent of VCR, DVD±R,
DVR and MP4 technologies.
Both of these organizations claim “billions in losses” to their collective
clientele. What's interesting
If you're going to use Half-Life as an example, I don't think the "end choice" is much of a parallel.
I mean, whether you go out the tram ("yes" to G-Man's proposal) or say put ("no") is only a slight difference in the final cutscene. Saying yes only gets you to the credits sooner; saying no gives you “a situation you cannot possibly win” and also goes to credits. It's the same thing, just two different flavors.
I still think it's in there... let's see... [/me rummages about]
Here it is; at the end of the chapter, Apprehension, the final "scene" pits you against a room full of cloaked assasin-like chicks. The only logical way to proceed is through the large loading-dock doors (...opened by a lever on the top platform; a deadly path unless you get the assassins first.)
As you proceed to the last logical doorway, you see a first-aid station on the far wall. The player has made it through some terribly punishing challenges and is likely thinking, "Oh, yes! I get health now!" (I know I did!)
Walking straight towards it, the lights go out, there's some sounds of a struggle, then the chuckling comments of a clever pair of enemy Marines. You're caught...and it's an essential part of the story.
Remembering when I played this the first time, it looked like that was it. Game over, you get pummeled. I kept thinking to myself, "What did I do wrong? How do I avoid this after restoring my last savegame?"
Watching in anticipation of the final credits, I realized that I was still playing! The James-Bond-diabolical-slow-death garbage compactor was a puzzle you had only 30 seconds to solve. It was exhilirating! I felt like I'd been given another chance.
In a nutshell, I loved it. It felt like the game had started anew. Brilliant!
Now the question is, how to apply this experience to other games without looking like a knock-off of Half-Life?
Like the first Xbox360 units that shipped... how many uber-gamers just had to have the "latest and greatest"... then wound-up spraying a Class-C extinguisher on their carpet because the power supply started to burn?
They don't call it "bleeding edge" because it's painless, y'know.
I've used Windows; heavily. I've practically grown-up with Windows. It was familiar to me; it made sense to me; Windows made things work, and the games even made it fun. I trusted it even to the point where I truly believed, "Restarts are just the way the PC works."
Now, I've grown up. I've come to realize that PC's are precision tools; they need maintenance and attention to be effective. The software that operates this precision equipment need not be an obstacle to the potential of that equipment.
The moment I found I was ready for something different was the moment I chose Linux. (Coz' I ain't got no trust fund to buy a Mac and I already have the hardware!)
Light me up as your sacrifice if you truly think it's necessary, but let those that have truly tried an alternative cast the first stone. If you think that Windows is "all that", then you probably believe that the entire world should be forced to speak American English, too.
An earlier post provides an excellent point; I only keep Windows around for the quality games that still run on it. That is, except for the games released to OSS that have been ported... and those run amazingly well. (DXX Rebirth was such an improvement, I played the entire story over again... yet it's still just the original game, only much much smoother.)
If we truly wanted to make a difference, we would be seeking out what "really works", rather than chase after all the shiny, shiny things that are held in front of us. Support the things that work, and the platforms that support them, and it will create a power so irresistible that the world will bend over backwards just to see what's happening.
I don't think 'sock puppet' is a particularly good term to describe what's apparently being described.
On the 'Net, nobody knows you're a sock.
In that light, the term "sock-puppet" works for me!
You want 'astroturfing', I think, or maybe some subspecies of marketing virus.
I suspect you meant "viral marketing", and you'd be correct. The biggest diff' is that viral marketing takes on a "life of its own". What we're talking about here is a deliberate deception on the part of the marketeer; not a necessary part of viral marketing.
I'm going to object to the "astroturfing" remark. Though I acknowledge the parallels in something-fake-that-looks-like-something-real, I believe there are truly situations that deserve AstroTurf in lieu of natural grass. (like the porches of trailer homes)
In life, there is no situation where it's appropriate to fake your own merit or publicity; it's in bad taste the first time, the next, and every time thereafter. The analogy then, would be broken.
If we're going to bring to light a new, "viral" term that is to describe this action, (if not "sock-puppetry") then how about "dummyism" (e.g., lone drivers that strap a mannequin or other anthromoph to the passenger seat in order to take the HOV lane during rush hour) or "clonateering" or "avatar abuse"... something like that?
A new movement dedicated to updating graphics and engine, but retaining the same features—and limitations—as the originals: DXX Rebirth http://www.dxx-rebirth.de/ )
I was able to grab the 3-disc compendium ("Definitive Collection") with original content, contest-winner levels and the D2 "Vertigo" levels all in one set. It's never really been put away. I've wondered if there are any new copies of D3 left? [checks eBay...] yep.
If Blizzard can do for SC what Ensemble did for AoE, and keep an interesting campaign, I'll buy it!
Didn't anyone remember the D3D patch for XvT? That was the first, and IMO most-awesome sim' for SW-themed games.
...though I don't have one to give, since I've been a fan of Flash ever since 1998. Still rocks... still a bit unstable, (design-time) but rocks when it's working well enough.
As for being "ignorant of Windows"... I'm sorry, but you have us mistaken with Mac Users.
Apart from an unruly bunch that were schooled in *nix from the start, (and the Commodore/Amiga camp) the Linux community is largely divorced from Windows; along with the metaphoric implication that we were once married to it.
Many of those who had early exposure to Macs (with the first PowerPC being the obvious exception) were instantly smitten and have remained in the Mac camp ever since.
So, before you brandish your label-gun with "I know squat about Windoze." queued-up, consider that many in the Linux camp are merely Windows refugees; we eventually learned that popularity does not equal quality.
For that matter; with TFA speaking about Flash—typically Win32 platform—it makes sense that most of us interested enough to contribute (CINT) would have experience on that platform.
In any case, I for one welcome our new animated-content-plus-streaming-video overlords.
I have to disagree with the bit about Rush Limbaugh... it's
his American Right to have a show and say what he wants to say. You
might as well say that Jon Stewart, Steven Colbert and Nancy Grace
should be exiled from broadcast news. Their "coverage" of "events" and
"expert analysis" of "facts" is laughable at best. (At least Jon and
Steven do this on purpose.)
Now, calling Rush Limbaugh's show "News" or "fair" or even
"sane" is really bending the meanings of those words... if not breaking
them entirely. THAT is where I believe the concept of "fairness"
enters; for what is to keep Rush, Jon, Nancy and Steve from purporting
their "shows" as fact? (Jon and Steve often make a poignant statement
to this effect... BRILLIANT!)
The only noticeable form of media regulation we've seen in the
last 20 years is the V-chip. The ratings system technology was required
by the FCC after 2000, but the ratings themselves still have no way to
be legally enforced. (kinda like http://www.esrb.org/) A step in the
right direction, but still "let the watcher beware".
Now, think of this: What if every show had
to display tags
at the beginning according to a set of FCC standardized keywords to
reflect it's EXACT content? Maybe even a persistent side-band like the
infrequently-used (T1/T2) caption channels? Now that's what I would
call Regulation!
So many are missing the point... [sigh] A
de-regulated media is just like free-market; everyone is out to get
what they want, flying in the face of what they—or
others—need. Do you remember the sound you heard
back in 1987? Yes, it was the Great Whooshing Sound of the doors to
mainstream media being opened for politicos, capital-gains brats, and
anyone else with a vested interest in What The Public Will Believe. If
there was any trend to the 90's, it was the media itself being bought
'n' sold again and again.
IMHO... a little regulation is a
good thing. I don't condone censorship. Also, I DON'T condone
censorship. [sic]
If you're thinking, "Reg-yoo-lay-shun... BA-AD," then you
should take a moment to think of where we would be as a nation if
nutrition content wasn't REQUIRED on packaged (and also prepared)
foods? We would still be looking at labels that show obfuscated
ingredients (no, not just chemical names, make-believe ingredients) and
only "nutrition" that the manufacturer wants us to see. Scared yet?
Take your
imagination for a spin in that one. And think, today's Nutrition Facts
have been provided to you by the FDA. (Hey! That's a Federal
Agency... but I'm not SUPPOSED to trust THEM!)
We all can thank the Bush(whacker) "Administration" for our
collective distrust. (that goes for Sr, too) The consistent litany of
lies, half-truths, damn lies and "truthiness" have
sure taken their
toll. So, are we to unilaterally disagree all new movements at the
Federal level?
C'mon, give something a chance. If this movement towards
fairness in the media is to succeed, it will need Our Attention to
guide it. If you can't back a big-brother campaign aimed at mass-media,
at least become a supporter of Bringing Facts to Light!
For starters, I can imagine such an "overseeing committee"
that monitors... I don't know I'm comfortable
with "altering" broadcasts. I mean, how much can you do with a 5-second
delay? Will all news be TiVo'ed at the source, only to be "fit for
consumption" later on? <koff>China</koff>
That outlines my first disagreement with the quoted "charter"
of the new fairness bill; altering is probably too strong a word.
Imposing sanctions, monetary penalties and the like for non-compliance
is a good start. Publishing the full charter for public and corporate
consump
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with another poster for their OS analogy. Brilliant! Still, we can compare the films entirely on their own merits.
Firefly (vis-a-vis, Joss Whedon) has a fanatic following, strong enough to resurrect a TV show into a motion picture. (When has that happened?) That’s how we come to Serenity, which tells a compelling story that refuses to take a back seat to sheer gimmickry or showboating. The characters have depth, the story has depth, even the bloody name of the ship has depth!
Whereas Star Wars (vis-a-vis, Lucasfilm) bowed to Special Interests, abused their superior technological prowess and the story suffered for it. In rating the entire Trilogy, it seems that the number of each episode is equal to their quality. (in a one-to-ten scale, of course) They sold-out depth for “dominating market share” and clearly cashed-in on their own franchise. Find the depth in that.
Were you high when you watched Serenity? Everything from the Firefly series is there, but it's hard to take it all in with the first viewing. In the end, you know what the story was about and you know that the protagonist overcame their challenge. Did you miss the interplay of the characters? Did you miss the rich “western slang” dialogue? Did you miss the bits in Chinese? Did you understand why the Tams were created in the first place? Did you only wake up for the final 10 minutes?
The only thing lacking depth here is the parent post. For best movie, (yes, -ever) it has my vote!
If j00 gunna claim FP, at least know when to use the </sarcasm> tag!
And so is your post.
[ba-DUM-pum]
Start with Edgy! There's a bunch of post-install updates, but over broadband they should all be handled within an hour. All included programs will work right out of the gate, though Synaptic seems a bit strange to the uninitiated. (I still don't get the "tag" system, but it's not essential to install programs that you know) The "Add/Remove" feature in the KDE menu seems more functional, however it doesn't seem to go very far outside the Canonical Ubuntu release.
Leave the Beta to the Beta-testers, I say. (emphasis on "tester" --if you don't mind risking your data or system integrity, be my guest)
With any luck, they will have a vastly improved upgrade vector for pre-existing installs. That was the unfortunate event from Dapper to Edgy; however the Kubuntu Edgy LiveCD installation works flawlessly.
You'll find much better KDE integration with Kubuntu (vs. SuSE 10.0) ...IMHO, the SuSE environment kept having disassociation issues; the Novell code wasn't aware of what the KDE/Qt/Python code was doing. Software dependencies kept being broken, removing packages was a total crapshoot.
Now in Kubuntu, there's really no problems other than what is already inherent to KDE itself. With KDE getting a face-lift next month, and Feisty ready to push it out the door, it's promising to be an exciting update.
Best of luck!
In it's own way, the current Copyright Law and the DMCA are fairly air-tight. The only real “loophole” is the disposition of lobbyists and lawyers that they are to be used for ensuring, even reinforcing, the profiteering of media companies.
It can be argued that the litigation/arbitration process is what's flawed about Copyright Law. Most companies will brow-beat any supposed “violators” with legal-sounding notices and strong talk of legal action. (JupiterMedia comes to mind) Like a traffic ticket, most Average Joes will just pay the fine and get on with things.
If there's any “reinforcement” to be made, it would have to be adding more certain terms to the language of the Law. At least then, each judge has something to cover his back when he settles on a default decision. As it is, there is a tremendous amount of pressure upon legal dissertation to determine the exact nature of each trespass.
When it comes down to it, the bottom line with Copyright Law is money. That is, it was a system to protect content creators (artists, photographers, publishers, editors, authors, etc.) from those that would fraudulently profit from their work. What's truly ridiculous is these current lawsuits that have no real claim other than, “They're giving away the stuff we want to sell!” (read: sales-potential losses, but not real losses, nor does the profit really go elsewhere)
Take the recent RIAA case where their “losses” were found to be little more than CD's that wouldn't sell at suggested prices anyway. (i.e., a fact of life in music; you just don't sell them all. Served!) They tried to use the whole amount of “losses” as a means to persecute the peer-sharing services and the like. Once they were found out (less than 2% of what they claimed could actually be called “losses from peer networks”) they shut-up about it real quick.
So, how do we improve Copyright Law to keep these things from happening? I prefer Shakespeare's advice, Kill the Lawyers. (metaphorically, of course)
Am I naive to believe that someday, some day, the US will have a congress that's for the people?You are naïve to think that a Congress For The People is just going to happen on its own. We, the people, must make it so!
Nobody can beat MSFT for churn and bloat.
Nobody.
Perhaps a game will come out that requires a real body-scan. (C'mon, S/L --be a pioneer for once!)
In the weeks that follow, this tale might be told:
[quoting myself - a hypothetical chat between two gamers...]There's something following us! They are the Squallum. Gamers that had a scan of their physical bodies made into their own Avatar... a shadow of their former selves.
They love and hate their Avatars as they love and hate themselves. Their need for gaming has drawn them here, and their need for geek-cred has created the desire for “IRL” Avatars.
My heart tells me that these Avatars have some part to play yet, for good or ill...
Now I just thought of what this will bring... pasty nerds coughing-up coin to other, not-so-pasty geeks for their body-scans. Maybe it will pay for your next month at the gym?
Unless you count the one that mentions how “April never had 31 days”.
I, for one, welcome our new mathematician calendar overlords.
There, I said it. Can we move on to the next post now?
Read the eff'n descriptions; though some are obscure, note that a few examples are, in fact, “non-artificial” noise. In particular, the shots from cheap CCD's (cameraphone, smartphone, disposable digi-cams, etc.) yield remarkably improved results. You only get shots like that with <100USD equipment, and you're not going to shell out for >300USD software to fix it, now are you? Something that works... for FREE! Sign me on.
Troll, back to your cave! In the meantime, let the hobbyist photophiles have their triumph when it's truly an achievement... and it is!
You got a problem with it? Then make something better!
Now I can finally set-up an external in Gimp for Unsharp Mask!
Ok, I give you full credit for spotting the trends and putting it in your own words, BUT...
[...]
First, an introduction: I speak as someone who's actually been in the books; anyone remember the Micro House Technical Library? That was from my earlier career in Visual Communication.
Nothing reminds you that hardware used to be so tremendously complex more than having literally thousands of documents describing obscure, unmarked and occasionally impossible jumper configurations just to set the correct I/O port. (coveniently packed on to four easy-to-carry CD's </plug>)
Speaking as such, I can tell you with utmost certainty that, using the same amount of effort it took to successfully build and install a single PC in 1997, I could build a server farm with a dozen SAN's and set-up fifty workstations... simultaneously.
Seriously, I could crap-out a better PC today than a reasonably-working P/90 (yes, that's MHz) in the same time ten years ago. The sheer number of pre-built options nowadays is a full order of magnitude over what there was in ol' 97.
Don't even mention fifteen years ago! That's the sort of stuff that the MHTL would cover, and let me tell you, it reads like a horror novel. (or a bible? ...depends on your perspective, I guess- but you still get the same ending)
Suffice it to say, PC's are getting easier to build and manage, and so is Linux.
Can anyone truly explain why Microsoft is headed in the opposite direction?
It is nice to see that non-Linux people are continuing to give Linux a try. Most things in the world only get one chance and then its over.Hear hear! Well put, but you forgot the link to the referring article.
Cheers!
We mod Aladrin's post as “Troll” ...and we mod parent as “Insightful”!!???
Hey modder, who's your dealer!? Looks like your last score was a bunch of pencil shavings, dude!
[Heads off to meta-mod these as "Unfair"]
Welcome to /.
A traditional, hand-hammered wok would be more spherical; where the sides come further “up” than “out”. The shape would be closer to a perfect circle than a perfect parabola.
I don't believe that would be a huge hindrance on gaining a signal, except that your focus would now be more of a line, rather than a point in space.
Also of note is that a typical wok would be flat on the bottom (US stove-top variety) making a “dead zone” in the reflective gain. Not really a problem, in fact, it may just improve the design. In a typical parabolic dish, the dead-center area of the dish is already in the shadow of the antenna element. (unless you're talking about offset reflectors, a'la Dish Network or DirecTV) In fact, the flat bottom would be an excellent place to affix the antenna, rather than go with the Tripod or Boom Arm approach.
While it may work well enough as a receiver, it could get you in trouble as a transmitter. The variance in the focus would create a tremendous “cone”... both dissipating the signal and potentially interfering with nearby transponders. (big FCC no-no)
Still, if your application is short-distance Line of Sight or in a very remote area, you might just be able to get away with it.
When you say “need incandescent lighting”, I presume you're speaking of the quality and responsiveness of the light source, not of the need for an excited wire filament inside a vacuum-sealed glass orb. (clearly more efficient as a heat source than a light source... evidenced by the common Lava Lamp®)
I mean really, what's the need about? Is it about a strong-and-steady flow of photons? Is it about a light source that can be analog-controlled to dim and brighten in smooth steps?
I may not be speaking for everyone, but for those of us that are prone to the affliction, enduring the 60-66Hz “hummm” and the barely-perceptible flicker of fluorescent is a condition I will trade-in for just about anything.
I've seen a lot of lighting fads come and go. Fluorescent seems to stay just because it's so ergonomically attractive against vis-a-vis Heat Lamps. CF is about the same, just in a smaller package. Cold-cathode lamps are nifty, but they're about as useful as Xmas Lights, and cost ten times more. (with current Consumer Offerings) My bet is on up-and-coming technologies like bright LED and HID (High Intensity Discharge; the son of the Arc Lamp) lighting.
Just this past year, I've noticed an abundance of LED lighting technologies— not in the news, but in my hand. To me, that means a lot more than “coming soon”.
Butane lighters with a small LED flashlight are now common give-away items, as are just simple promotional pocket-lights. Battery-operated LED Xmas Lighting is now just about everywhere, and in many colors. (most popular, of course, is pure-white) When a technology becomes commonplace, that is when you know its about to come into its own.
Look at cellphones and GPS; both were considered Luxury or High End at first, then the price dropped enough that everyone found a reason to buy one. When everyone on the block has the same technology, the industry is pressured to make it better. As soon as cellphones became common, it was a race to make The Best Cellphone. Though there are clear leaders, that race is still on.
You watch; this will come to the Lighting Industry as well. As the knock-off CF and LED lighting floods the market, the leaders have to come-up with innovations to make their offering (seem) better than the others. (Note the implied reservation) Though I don't doubt their ability to innovate, I do doubt their veracity in purporting innovation.
There's already a remarkable offering of Consumer LED Lighting. Compact Fluorescents already have their well-earned niche, although I personally have distaste for them. As for high-end needs, such as photography and “spectacle” uses, (WARNING: token Wiki articles) HID is slowly emerging into its own. Your street may soon be lit with HID, rather than sodium vapor. (for example)
If General Electric can make a better light bulb, I say let them. If Australia never makes it legal to use one in your home when it would be just as viable as CF, it's their loss. I think a greater question is, how long is the “better light bulb” supposed to last? (LED “bulbs” are edging towards offering Lifetime Guarantees—and by that, meaning the lifetime of the consumer! W
Here's a little piece I penned recently, hope it lessens your confusion.
Analogies of women as they apply to OS platforms:
The College Freshman
Clearly insecure, entirely self-absorbed, and oblivious to the world-at-large, this specimen says she will do most anything to please, though when it comes down to it, her inexperience is obvious and you end-up either fighting or breaking it off. The on-again-off-again relationship that ensues is rife with games and torment. Ultimately, you move on to something more mature. (Win9x)
The Business “Model”
Brains and beauty, she knows how to get things done. She's professional in all matters, can follow-up on every commitment and is fairly in-touch with the world. On the flip side, she's almost entirely without humor and becomes jaded at the thought of playing any games. She doesn't laugh at your jokes, approaches intimacy like a German Factory Supervisor, and steadily removes all enjoyment from day-to-day life with the same efficiency as when organizing her shoes. (Win2000)
The Homemaker
Sweet and approachable, this little cutie aims to please. She's nurturing, kind and anticipates your needs with uncanny consistency. You are lulled into a sense of comfort by the constant attention, unaware that she is fulfilling her own agenda. Unscrupulous elements from her past have corrupted her true intentions, though she would never show it. Sometimes she's gone for hours on end, but always returns saying, “I just had to handle a few things.” She's a bit protective, too. Sometimes she feels more like a Mother than a Significant Other, and sporadically denies you what you want, even when you ask nicely. (WinXP)
The Hippie Chick
She's terribly cute, insanely fashionable and always upbeat. It seems she doesn't ever wear the same outfit twice, and can always brighten your day with a song. “Head in the stars and feet on the ground,” is Her Saying, though you eventually believe that it's only half true. Everything is perfect, but a bit too perfect. She never really disagrees with you, but she tends to take your desires too far on occasion. One time, after you said, “You should get some rest,” she ended-up sleeping half the day and dancing all night; keeping you awake. You always wonder if there's something better. (MacOS)
The College Grad
A drop-dead gorgeous, head-turning form makes this one outwardly irresistible. If you're brave enough to strike-up a conversation, you will only get the chit-chat at first. After a while, you begin to see that she holds more knowledge that she lets on. Stylish, versatile and attentive to your needs, she seems like Mrs. Right for a long while, and after spending a-bankroll-and-a-half in dating. Her penchant for parties and going-out are merely a facade for her Networking. It seems she's working on her public image night-and-day. When it comes to actually having fun, she claims there's not enough time or that she doesn't know how to play the game. Intimacy is a brief experience in-between making plans or shopping for expensive accessories. She's everything you want, and more than you need. (OS X)
The Girl Next Door
Though often outwardly plain, she hides a tremendous beauty within. Her beauty comes right through the rugged good-looks and belies an inner strength, which makes her both reliable and kind. She's not always forthcoming about her problems, but she tends to solve most of them herself. Whatever comes up, she is happy to discuss it and let you in on her past. Ver
They're smarter than that. They know what sabre-rattling means; that he's trying to flush-out a Champion for Linux. (read: scapegoat)
Not that there's really anything that MSFT could do to said scapegoat... except mire it down for years and years into court proceedings, perpetual lawyers on retainer, and certain bankruptcy. It would serve as a Tour De Force of MSFT's legal and financial might, and nothing more.
It's a waiting game, and time is not on Ballmer's side.
Sure, maybe the Linux Community is collectively looking at each other, nodding as if to say, “You first...” but the Habeas Corpus, Discovery Process, maybe even stockholders will ultimately pull-out the Ten Ton Gorilla everyone has been wondering; what exactly is The Violation?
In a nutshell, it appears that MSFT may be sore over just one thing; Samba. In essence, the Linux Samba Client was reverse-engineered by an individual, who crafted his code through straight trial-and-error on an SMB terminal, then packaged and released the client under GPL. Notably, the Linux GPL—by it's own definition—cannot be in voilation of any upstanding patent laws. (Nobody's making a dime from it, and GPL is nobody's licensed product, so no “violation”)
As for the argument from MSFT, it's about “losses”. It's the same agrument as RIAA/MPAA; they're just itchin’ to sue someone over Not Selling As Much As They Think They Should. (vis-a-vis: not selling as much as they promised to shareholders!) They aren't ready to write-off a loss, and while it may be but a minor injury to the MSFT Goliath, they see that there's still a potential Profit Margin in litigation, along with the potential to frighten Anyone On The Fence about using Linux versus Windoze.
<melodrama>
Wither the poor Goliath; standing in the square and pounding his chest. Who will dare come and challenge him?
</melodrama>
(Whoever it is, they had better have Wikkid Skillz or a Cunning Plan That Cannot Fail ...f’rael)
I would agree that the GPL, in a sense, relies on IP and Copyright standards to exist. In an ironic twist, the GPL relies on those standards to protect itself from the profiteering that Patent and Copyright systems also protect. Quite a Coup, if you ask me.
Aside from OSS parallels, I am a stauch supporter of the current U.S. model. Although TLA makes little (if any) mention of exactly how the various interpretations of Copyright Law are challenged, let's see who's behind it:
After all, what's holding Vista back the most right now? That's right; DRM and insistent limitations leveraged by MPAA and RIAA. (et al)
These organizations (and the like) are putting such “criticisms” out to the global community, not our Government! What's spooky is that it's beyond Foreign Policy. The Copyright “pressures” are being applied through trade and civic channels, not through official legislative or diplomatic channels.
The state of U.S. Copyright Law is really quite simple: (and was simplified further with DMCA) Content creators are the owners of copyright. When it comes to clearly original works, this is a no-brainer. The artist gets to say how his/her work is traded for profit. Derivative works are often a Grey Area (no matter where in the world you may be) and may even be lost-in-the-gap if the original creator did not take steps to protect their legacy.
From there, it becomes a matter of language. If you make an agreement for others to copy/sell your work, the law is in the language of the contract. After that, it becomes largely a matter of Contract Law rather than Copyright Law.
Not to say that (therefore) every case would be simple. Far from it!
In the case of any given up-and-coming American musical group; the group itself clearly has ownership of their songs, right? Well, then you have to take into account the producers, record label, distribution for Broadcast and content-channel partners. Aside from those, a real Shooting Star group will have to concern themselves with likeness rights, cover art, poster art, video production, video direction, creative consultants, personal appearances, concert scheduling, publicity appearances, and the various managers and agents that it takes to make a star actually rise. In all of this, there are already nearly a dozen more Original Content Creators; but how do you keep all that straight?
That's right; with a Contract.
Now back in the day, the RIAA would be much like a guild; where artists could lean upon them for support in cases where someone else is making a buck with their work where they shouldn't. With the rise of user-accessible recording devices (cassette tapes, DAT, CD-R, DVD±R, and now every form of Flash Memory) the organization quicky went from a defensive group into the profit-seeking pundits they are today.
In the case of MPAA, their original charter was to keep Motion Picture Production up to certain standards. In cases where even well-made movies were distributed outside of the original studio's agreement, it became a Big Brother to the studios and aided with criminal prosecution. Likewise with the RIAA, the MPAA has been getting steadily more agressive since the advent of VCR, DVD±R, DVR and MP4 technologies.
Both of these organizations claim “billions in losses” to their collective clientele. What's interesting
If you're going to use Half-Life as an example, I don't think the "end choice" is much of a parallel.
I mean, whether you go out the tram ("yes" to G-Man's proposal) or say put ("no") is only a slight difference in the final cutscene. Saying yes only gets you to the credits sooner; saying no gives you “a situation you cannot possibly win” and also goes to credits. It's the same thing, just two different flavors.
I still think it's in there... let's see... [/me rummages about]
Here it is; at the end of the chapter, Apprehension, the final "scene" pits you against a room full of cloaked assasin-like chicks. The only logical way to proceed is through the large loading-dock doors (...opened by a lever on the top platform; a deadly path unless you get the assassins first.)
As you proceed to the last logical doorway, you see a first-aid station on the far wall. The player has made it through some terribly punishing challenges and is likely thinking, "Oh, yes! I get health now!" (I know I did!)
Walking straight towards it, the lights go out, there's some sounds of a struggle, then the chuckling comments of a clever pair of enemy Marines. You're caught ...and it's an essential part of the story.
Remembering when I played this the first time, it looked like that was it. Game over, you get pummeled. I kept thinking to myself, "What did I do wrong? How do I avoid this after restoring my last savegame?"
Watching in anticipation of the final credits, I realized that I was still playing! The James-Bond-diabolical-slow-death garbage compactor was a puzzle you had only 30 seconds to solve. It was exhilirating! I felt like I'd been given another chance.
In a nutshell, I loved it. It felt like the game had started anew. Brilliant!
Now the question is, how to apply this experience to other games without looking like a knock-off of Half-Life?
[Agrees with parent]
Like the first Xbox360 units that shipped... how many uber-gamers just had to have the "latest and greatest"... then wound-up spraying a Class-C extinguisher on their carpet because the power supply started to burn?
They don't call it "bleeding edge" because it's painless, y'know.
I've used Windows; heavily. I've practically grown-up with Windows. It was familiar to me; it made sense to me; Windows made things work, and the games even made it fun. I trusted it even to the point where I truly believed, "Restarts are just the way the PC works."
Now, I've grown up. I've come to realize that PC's are precision tools; they need maintenance and attention to be effective. The software that operates this precision equipment need not be an obstacle to the potential of that equipment.
The moment I found I was ready for something different was the moment I chose Linux. (Coz' I ain't got no trust fund to buy a Mac and I already have the hardware!)
Light me up as your sacrifice if you truly think it's necessary, but let those that have truly tried an alternative cast the first stone. If you think that Windows is "all that", then you probably believe that the entire world should be forced to speak American English, too.
An earlier post provides an excellent point; I only keep Windows around for the quality games that still run on it. That is, except for the games released to OSS that have been ported... and those run amazingly well. (DXX Rebirth was such an improvement, I played the entire story over again... yet it's still just the original game, only much much smoother.)
If we truly wanted to make a difference, we would be seeking out what "really works", rather than chase after all the shiny, shiny things that are held in front of us. Support the things that work, and the platforms that support them, and it will create a power so irresistible that the world will bend over backwards just to see what's happening.
On the 'Net, nobody knows you're a sock.
You want 'astroturfing', I think, or maybe some subspecies of marketing virus.In that light, the term "sock-puppet" works for me!
I suspect you meant "viral marketing", and you'd be correct. The biggest diff' is that viral marketing takes on a "life of its own". What we're talking about here is a deliberate deception on the part of the marketeer; not a necessary part of viral marketing.
I'm going to object to the "astroturfing" remark. Though I acknowledge the parallels in something-fake-that-looks-like-something-real, I believe there are truly situations that deserve AstroTurf in lieu of natural grass. (like the porches of trailer homes)
In life, there is no situation where it's appropriate to fake your own merit or publicity; it's in bad taste the first time, the next, and every time thereafter. The analogy then, would be broken.
If we're going to bring to light a new, "viral" term that is to describe this action, (if not "sock-puppetry") then how about "dummyism" (e.g., lone drivers that strap a mannequin or other anthromoph to the passenger seat in order to take the HOV lane during rush hour) or "clonateering" or "avatar abuse"... something like that?
Puns! Ew! ...and, just EWWWwwww!
Mod parent -1000:BadTaste!
Ok, "hahaha" but then, EW!
Alas... no selling is going to happen here. Already there are open-source engines (but not content) for the first two installments.
I was able to grab the 3-disc compendium ("Definitive Collection") with original content, contest-winner levels and the D2 "Vertigo" levels all in one set. It's never really been put away. I've wondered if there are any new copies of D3 left? [checks eBay...] yep.
If Blizzard can do for SC what Ensemble did for AoE, and keep an interesting campaign, I'll buy it!
Didn't anyone remember the D3D patch for XvT? That was the first, and IMO most-awesome sim' for SW-themed games.
...though I don't have one to give, since I've been a fan of Flash ever since 1998. Still rocks... still a bit unstable, (design-time) but rocks when it's working well enough.
As for being "ignorant of Windows"... I'm sorry, but you have us mistaken with Mac Users.
Apart from an unruly bunch that were schooled in *nix from the start, (and the Commodore/Amiga camp) the Linux community is largely divorced from Windows; along with the metaphoric implication that we were once married to it.
Many of those who had early exposure to Macs (with the first PowerPC being the obvious exception) were instantly smitten and have remained in the Mac camp ever since.
So, before you brandish your label-gun with "I know squat about Windoze." queued-up, consider that many in the Linux camp are merely Windows refugees; we eventually learned that popularity does not equal quality.
For that matter; with TFA speaking about Flash—typically Win32 platform—it makes sense that most of us interested enough to contribute (CINT) would have experience on that platform.
In any case, I for one welcome our new animated-content-plus-streaming-video overlords.
Wow... borderline flamebait, dude.
On second thought, forget the borderline.
In any case...
I have to disagree with the bit about Rush Limbaugh... it's his American Right to have a show and say what he wants to say. You might as well say that Jon Stewart, Steven Colbert and Nancy Grace should be exiled from broadcast news. Their "coverage" of "events" and "expert analysis" of "facts" is laughable at best. (At least Jon and Steven do this on purpose.)
Remove Rush Limbaugh from broadcast news? That's censorship. That's Un-American. </yet-more-flamebait>
Now, calling Rush Limbaugh's show "News" or "fair" or even "sane" is really bending the meanings of those words... if not breaking them entirely. THAT is where I believe the concept of "fairness" enters; for what is to keep Rush, Jon, Nancy and Steve from purporting their "shows" as fact? (Jon and Steve often make a poignant statement to this effect... BRILLIANT!)
The only noticeable form of media regulation we've seen in the last 20 years is the V-chip. The ratings system technology was required by the FCC after 2000, but the ratings themselves still have no way to be legally enforced. (kinda like http://www.esrb.org/) A step in the right direction, but still "let the watcher beware".
Now, think of this: What if every show had to display tags at the beginning according to a set of FCC standardized keywords to reflect it's EXACT content? Maybe even a persistent side-band like the infrequently-used (T1/T2) caption channels? Now that's what I would call Regulation!
So many are missing the point... [sigh] A de-regulated media is just like free-market; everyone is out to get what they want, flying in the face of what they—or others—need. Do you remember the sound you heard back in 1987? Yes, it was the Great Whooshing Sound of the doors to mainstream media being opened for politicos, capital-gains brats, and anyone else with a vested interest in What The Public Will Believe. If there was any trend to the 90's, it was the media itself being bought 'n' sold again and again.
IMHO... a little regulation is a good thing. I don't condone censorship. Also, I DON'T condone censorship. [sic]
If you're thinking, "Reg-yoo-lay-shun... BA-AD," then you should take a moment to think of where we would be as a nation if nutrition content wasn't REQUIRED on packaged (and also prepared) foods? We would still be looking at labels that show obfuscated ingredients (no, not just chemical names, make-believe ingredients) and only "nutrition" that the manufacturer wants us to see. Scared yet? Take your imagination for a spin in that one. And think, today's Nutrition Facts have been provided to you by the FDA. (Hey! That's a Federal Agency... but I'm not SUPPOSED to trust THEM!)
We all can thank the Bush(whacker) "Administration" for our collective distrust. (that goes for Sr, too) The consistent litany of lies, half-truths, damn lies and "truthiness" have sure taken their toll. So, are we to unilaterally disagree all new movements at the Federal level?
C'mon, give something a chance. If this movement towards fairness in the media is to succeed, it will need Our Attention to guide it. If you can't back a big-brother campaign aimed at mass-media, at least become a supporter of Bringing Facts to Light!
For starters, I can imagine such an "overseeing committee" that monitors... I don't know I'm comfortable with "altering" broadcasts. I mean, how much can you do with a 5-second delay? Will all news be TiVo'ed at the source, only to be "fit for consumption" later on? <koff>China</koff>
That outlines my first disagreement with the quoted "charter" of the new fairness bill; altering is probably too strong a word. Imposing sanctions, monetary penalties and the like for non-compliance is a good start. Publishing the full charter for public and corporate consump
For those blokes who just don't know when to stop yappin' and drink their pint.
OR...
CERTIFIED OWL-FREE GUINNESSIf there's one thing I can't stand, it's an owl in my beer.
OR... better still...
BRILLIANT!You know, if you give them 25.4mm, they'll take 0.914m.
For that matter, where do all the old Imperial-based clichés go?
Why, he hit that ball there an' it flew a good 2.8km!See? It just doesn't have the same feel.
I, for one, would be satisfied just to own a single set of wrenches. This whole fracas has my toolbox in an utter disarray.
Now leave me in peace with my 1/5 gal. rum and 2-2/15 qt. coke with 13g ice cubes in a 354.88ml glass!