3 Can't "drug and drop" mp3 files on iPod- must use a software
If you're a Windows user, try using xplay if this is so important. With iTunes the automatic synchronization seems to be a little less complicated than "drug and drop".
7 Clip on the remote is designed in such a way that the controls face outside only when clipped to a shirt with buttons on the left- ladies style.Does it confirm a popular Slashdot opinion that Apple is for gays?
...because gay men only wear women's clothing? Am I missing something here?
I would argue that before businesses shift to telecommuting they allow more flexible work schedules, such that employees can beat rush hour traffic. Telecommuting isn't the solution to everything.
Cities, especially in the US, do need to start thinking of better public transportation. The day-to-day dependency on operating a car in the US is ridiculous.
Video games and cartoons are very single-dimensional when it comes to personality.
And movies have had no track record of having single-dimensional characters? What about books? They're a much more limited medium than comic-books or video games but Charles Dickens (unfortunately) didn't seem to have a problem building ridiculously complex characters. Strong and complete human characters can be developed independent of medium. Many (not all) video games ignore personality development to focus on gameplay and spectacle. There are more than a few comic books with characters that most of us can totally imagine meeting in person.
I think what you're trying to tell us is that they shouldn't convert comicbooks/videogames with limited personalities to the live-action screen because gaps in personality become more obvious. So if they want to do an adaptation, they should pick an appropriate game/comic-book to adapt from. Now, I can totally understand how there are licensing issues and other business obstacles that we are not privy to. Also, I can imagine some screenwriters adapting a game/book with incomplete plot and character development just because there are plenty of gaps to add new material.
I really wish movies were made to be entertained instead of to draw money.
So long ago I hijacked the phrase and, while I believe it is rather fitting, your comment shows the type of queries I have to constantly answer. Do you disagree with my assessment and my reasons for referring to WW II as the Great War? If so I would like to hear why.
I agree with your assessment in the sense that WWII did have greater moral undertones than WWI. Fine.
I disagree with the hijacking of the term Great War. The Great War is and always will be World War I. It may not be a complete fit, but as a historical term it is the truth. By your logic if we have another world war that has even more moral significance, do we call that the Great War instead? When the US has a depression worse than the original Great Depression, do we call the new one the REAL Great Depression? Do you change your first name or surname to something different when you find something more fitting? Unlike programming, odd historical terms can't really be refactored.
If you want a fancier name for WWII you're free to choose from a multitude of other words besides Great.
I think sales of Battlefield 1942 show that they haven't "beat the life out of this showboat" and that most people still find the Great War engaging and exciting, unlike you obviously.
I hope we haven't stopped printing history textbooks. The "Great War" was World War I.
Agreed. My method for finding good movies, books, and music is to simply get recommendations from people I think have interesting/good taste in general. Sometimes this does include the odd reviewer online, especially if there is a record of what they've reviewed. My main motivation is to avoid reviews and recommendations from fanboys -- as in someone who no matter what will like a certain product.
I might get behind a categorized list of all books, with quality ratings, but then, Amazon beat me to it, right? And Borders, and Barnes and Noble...
Right, because retailers are very reliable at providing quality ratings, and the general opinion of the public (ie. people that have bought the product) is always to be trusted.
I like the non-canon way things are built now. Someone has a great idea, they say "fuck everyone, I'm going to do this my way" and as a result, you get a new and interesting game that's weird and different.
How is one to know what is new and different without first knowing what is out there and what is "classic"? Sure they could have a natural feel for these things, or could just be so out there that nothing they think of is conventional or has been done before. But outside of this case, I don't think it's particularly bad to have some sort of established list.
Now after going through the article in question I do agree with you in some respects about canons being potentially unhealthy. A canon would require some extreme peer review and each entry in the list would need some solid justification, otherwise it would be too subjecive and in effect be useless.
Non profit organizations have no business going and buying expensive software like Windows. Unless they plan on using Warez, the obviously cheapest solution for an organization that probably won't have a lot of money lying around is to use Linux. Seems like common sence to me.
You state this as if it's a hard rule, but it's clear that you haven't done that much work with non-profit organizations. Non-profits work a little differently than for-profit companies. Although arguably they should be run like a business (in terms of accountability, etc), non-profits will sometimes apply for a technology grant or have access to some other public fund to provide for their tech needs. They'll typically draft a proposal that states the amount they need ($10k, $20k, whatever) and some governing body decides how much of this to provide. By pulling the right strings it's quite possible for a non-profit to order a fleet of high-end Dell workstations with Windows XP installed, complete with support. Also consider that they may obtain hardware/software for free (as a charitable donation) from a business, which in turn may have strings attached.
Now obviously they could save a bit by using Linux, but this opens up a support problem. Yes, I realize that there are for-pay Linux support organizations out there, and some computer vendors will bundle in Linux installation support with hardware sales, but these instances are unfortunately more rare.
In an ideal world, yes they would run Linux. In fact from a philosophical point of view all non-profits out to. But it's not an obvious solution to use Linux from a management/org point of view. For that matter most non-profits focus on their core mission/goals, and could care less about Linux vs. Windows.
They have realized that senior citizens, as a group are willing to pay less for things.
As a group, me, myself, and I, are more willing to pay less for just about everything. In fact I don't know of anyone that insists on paying more for something than it's worth.
And now I'm going to sit here and type for 20 seconds. Is it 20 seconds yet. Hmm... this is bold. This is italics. Wonder what happens when you overlaptags in your browser ?
How about [donating to ] anything that's mildly useful? Whoever runs this.. think of what your money could do in the hands of people who really need it.
You're right, these recipients most likely do not NEED the money. But they've certainly demonstrated that they're smart enough to know how to use it. When I read through what they did, the first thing I thought was..."I wonder what kind of (hopefully positive) impact they'd have on society if they got 5 or ten times that much".
a) You're presuming that he deals pot (a high volume, low margin business).
b) You presume that he smokes such good pot that he imagines that buys and experiences all these things. In which case, he needs to do more of A)
c) He's such a cool guy (always having a baggie on him) that a lot of people invite him over to use their cool shit. Not a bad occupation in life. Certainly better than being a sysadmin or software engineer.
A significant majority of us still think that academic integrity is something that needs to be upheld, and that's enough to not do it.
In which case, I would assume that students would attend class and participate because it's a good idea, not because there is a mechanism to force them to be present.
I'm not trying to debate this to death, but the reason I'm going through all this is because while I was in college I was subjected through innumerable schemes to boost attendance and participation, some of which involved technical solutions similar to the one you've described. I found the best solution was when the professor laboriously learned everyone's name and addressed them personally when discussing the topic at hand.
The end result is that the professor knew when students missed class, and blatant non-attendance would result in the student somehow being pointed out. This was usually done by the professor greeting him and welcoming him back, usually with a prominent seat up in front to be properly reacquainted with the classroom.
Well, in order for someone to press it for you, they'd have to actually have your "remote."
Right, that's what I'm saying. What's stopping someone from spoofing you by just bringing your remote (and a few others) to class and pressing buttons all through lecture?
I'm a little confused how this works exactly. What's stopping a student from getting his friend to press a button for him? Or even better, having the smart kid press buttons for you in exchange for beer/drugs/prostitutes.
Unfortunately, security isn't something you can bolt on to an application after it's developed; it has to be part of the design process. For a great example of some of the things that you should already have done, read the file SECURITY included in the qmail distribution.
Wonderful. I guess he should put in his resignation now because what he's doing is impossible.
I'm not trying to say you're wrong. I say the same thing about user interfaces and usability. What I've come to realize, however, is that although nothing can be bolted onto an application, sometimes that's just the way it is for business, product timelines, etc. It makes it a harder problem, but people *do* pay for hard problems to be solved.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're a Windows user, try using xplay if this is so important. With iTunes the automatic synchronization seems to be a little less complicated than "drug and drop".
7 Clip on the remote is designed in such a way that the controls face outside only when clipped to a shirt with buttons on the left- ladies style.Does it confirm a popular Slashdot opinion that Apple is for gays?
I suppose you throw away your computer when you need a new video card.
I totally agree. Terrorism would go away if we stopped asking for it.
If more people applied this philosophy to their driving as well as other facets of their lives the world would be a much better place.
I would argue that before businesses shift to telecommuting they allow more flexible work schedules, such that employees can beat rush hour traffic. Telecommuting isn't the solution to everything.
Cities, especially in the US, do need to start thinking of better public transportation. The day-to-day dependency on operating a car in the US is ridiculous.
If you're driving a purple car you don't need any more help looking like an assmunch.
And movies have had no track record of having single-dimensional characters? What about books? They're a much more limited medium than comic-books or video games but Charles Dickens (unfortunately) didn't seem to have a problem building ridiculously complex characters. Strong and complete human characters can be developed independent of medium. Many (not all) video games ignore personality development to focus on gameplay and spectacle. There are more than a few comic books with characters that most of us can totally imagine meeting in person.
I think what you're trying to tell us is that they shouldn't convert comicbooks/videogames with limited personalities to the live-action screen because gaps in personality become more obvious. So if they want to do an adaptation, they should pick an appropriate game/comic-book to adapt from. Now, I can totally understand how there are licensing issues and other business obstacles that we are not privy to. Also, I can imagine some screenwriters adapting a game/book with incomplete plot and character development just because there are plenty of gaps to add new material.
I really wish movies were made to be entertained instead of to draw money.
Is this a Soviet Russia joke?
Get an LCD screen that supports 1600x1200. What flicker?
I agree with your assessment in the sense that WWII did have greater moral undertones than WWI. Fine.
I disagree with the hijacking of the term Great War. The Great War is and always will be World War I. It may not be a complete fit, but as a historical term it is the truth. By your logic if we have another world war that has even more moral significance, do we call that the Great War instead? When the US has a depression worse than the original Great Depression, do we call the new one the REAL Great Depression? Do you change your first name or surname to something different when you find something more fitting? Unlike programming, odd historical terms can't really be refactored.
If you want a fancier name for WWII you're free to choose from a multitude of other words besides Great.
I hope we haven't stopped printing history textbooks. The "Great War" was World War I.
Agreed. My method for finding good movies, books, and music is to simply get recommendations from people I think have interesting/good taste in general. Sometimes this does include the odd reviewer online, especially if there is a record of what they've reviewed. My main motivation is to avoid reviews and recommendations from fanboys -- as in someone who no matter what will like a certain product.
Right, because retailers are very reliable at providing quality ratings, and the general opinion of the public (ie. people that have bought the product) is always to be trusted.
I like the non-canon way things are built now. Someone has a great idea, they say "fuck everyone, I'm going to do this my way" and as a result, you get a new and interesting game that's weird and different.
How is one to know what is new and different without first knowing what is out there and what is "classic"? Sure they could have a natural feel for these things, or could just be so out there that nothing they think of is conventional or has been done before. But outside of this case, I don't think it's particularly bad to have some sort of established list.
Now after going through the article in question I do agree with you in some respects about canons being potentially unhealthy. A canon would require some extreme peer review and each entry in the list would need some solid justification, otherwise it would be too subjecive and in effect be useless.
You state this as if it's a hard rule, but it's clear that you haven't done that much work with non-profit organizations. Non-profits work a little differently than for-profit companies. Although arguably they should be run like a business (in terms of accountability, etc), non-profits will sometimes apply for a technology grant or have access to some other public fund to provide for their tech needs. They'll typically draft a proposal that states the amount they need ($10k, $20k, whatever) and some governing body decides how much of this to provide. By pulling the right strings it's quite possible for a non-profit to order a fleet of high-end Dell workstations with Windows XP installed, complete with support. Also consider that they may obtain hardware/software for free (as a charitable donation) from a business, which in turn may have strings attached.
Now obviously they could save a bit by using Linux, but this opens up a support problem. Yes, I realize that there are for-pay Linux support organizations out there, and some computer vendors will bundle in Linux installation support with hardware sales, but these instances are unfortunately more rare.
In an ideal world, yes they would run Linux. In fact from a philosophical point of view all non-profits out to. But it's not an obvious solution to use Linux from a management/org point of view. For that matter most non-profits focus on their core mission/goals, and could care less about Linux vs. Windows.
As a group, me, myself, and I, are more willing to pay less for just about everything. In fact I don't know of anyone that insists on paying more for something than it's worth.
Considering that so many games market themselves as interactive movies I would think that an interactive movie would be classified as a game.
Making it a serious pain in the ass to explain all of a sudden why they're getting bombarded with stupid messages.
And now I'm going to sit here and type for 20 seconds. Is it 20 seconds yet. Hmm... this is bold. This is italics. Wonder what happens when you overlaptags in your browser ?
Ok hitting submit.
You're right, these recipients most likely do not NEED the money. But they've certainly demonstrated that they're smart enough to know how to use it. When I read through what they did, the first thing I thought was..."I wonder what kind of (hopefully positive) impact they'd have on society if they got 5 or ten times that much".
I think this is the only correct statement so far in this thread.
a) You're presuming that he deals pot (a high volume, low margin business).
b) You presume that he smokes such good pot that he imagines that buys and experiences all these things. In which case, he needs to do more of A)
c) He's such a cool guy (always having a baggie on him) that a lot of people invite him over to use their cool shit. Not a bad occupation in life. Certainly better than being a sysadmin or software engineer.
How do you prevent things from rattling around? I have something similar and it's noisy and things get dinged up.
In which case, I would assume that students would attend class and participate because it's a good idea, not because there is a mechanism to force them to be present.
I'm not trying to debate this to death, but the reason I'm going through all this is because while I was in college I was subjected through innumerable schemes to boost attendance and participation, some of which involved technical solutions similar to the one you've described. I found the best solution was when the professor laboriously learned everyone's name and addressed them personally when discussing the topic at hand.
The end result is that the professor knew when students missed class, and blatant non-attendance would result in the student somehow being pointed out. This was usually done by the professor greeting him and welcoming him back, usually with a prominent seat up in front to be properly reacquainted with the classroom.
Good old John
Right, that's what I'm saying. What's stopping someone from spoofing you by just bringing your remote (and a few others) to class and pressing buttons all through lecture?
I'm a little confused how this works exactly. What's stopping a student from getting his friend to press a button for him? Or even better, having the smart kid press buttons for you in exchange for beer/drugs/prostitutes.
Wonderful. I guess he should put in his resignation now because what he's doing is impossible.
I'm not trying to say you're wrong. I say the same thing about user interfaces and usability. What I've come to realize, however, is that although nothing can be bolted onto an application, sometimes that's just the way it is for business, product timelines, etc. It makes it a harder problem, but people *do* pay for hard problems to be solved.