Are you still working on the remake/reboot? Can you share any details (expected release date, etc..)? The original is one of my all-time favorite movies and I feel that there are very few writers/producers these days that could do it justice (possibly just you and Joss Whedon).
Agreed, and since Aereo isn't cutting out the ads, it gives you pretty solid numbers to feed to advertisers. If they made it true time-shifting (not allowing any fast-fwd through commercials) then it's even better for the networks than DVR numbers.
It was authorized by Congress so, by your logic, every member of Congress in 2002 should be held responsible along with former President Bush. It's as much their violation of law as it is his (IF the war is in fact illegal as you have been asserting).
What's illegal about it? Congress may not have approved it, which technically makes it a "Conflict", but last I checked they haven't tried to force a withdrawal by invoking the War Powers Act (which, as I said, may or may not be a Constitutional action).
Or is it illegal because you don't like it or agree with it?
What "illegal war" are you referring to? If you're referring to anything in relation to the War Powers Act, there's still questions on the table about how constitutional it is for Congress to regulate the President's duties as Commander in Chief. It's never been tested, since no Congress wants to be the ones to test it.
Didn't Obama *increase* military presence in Afghanistan immediately after taking office? After running on a platform promising an end to the War? The same War that is still being fought in his second term?
Obama has as much blood on his hands as Bush does.
The French weren't exactly un-biased at the time, since they had several Oil deals with Iraq before the war. Their objections to war had nothing to do with "the French/'Old Europe' are surrender-monkeys", it was all about Oil.
If I could I would mod this up.... I think the Slashdot editors should be obligated to stick a disclaimer in the summary when a link goes to a sister site (even when it was a user submitted summary/link).
My parents have had an iMac since 2007... I live 2000 miles away, so in-person support is limited to those fairly rare occasions that I'm in town (a handful of times throughout the year). They actually bought it without even a phone-call to me until they had already gotten it home and set it up. Most recently they ran into an issue with TurboTax not being compatible with OS X 10.5 and needed to upgrade to 10.6. This involved a trip to the Apple Store and $20 to get the 10.6 CD (since that was the last one to be physical media only). After doing all the software updates TurboTax was happy. They told me they wanted me to take a look (since I was back there this past weekend for other family stuff), and everything looked fine. It was up to 10.6.8 and according to the App Store they could skip Lion and go straight to Mountain Lion for another $20. Sure the computer cost them ~$2300 in 2007, but that's not too much more than they spent on their last couple computers, and this one has lasted twice as long. They hope to get another 1-2 years out of it before upgrading. Honestly, for what they do with it, it could probably go a bit longer.
The only real problem they have with it is that occasionally my Dad will drag an application out of/Applications onto his desktop (not realizing he's just moved the App itself and not just created a short-cut). This is easy for them to fix and it's happened enough (still only a handful of times) that they don't even need my help to know what the problem is or how to fix it (just put it back in Applications).
They've had this one computer for over 5 years. It still works as well as it did the day they bought it. The previous five year period they owned 3 different computers that all ran Windows and needed to be reinstalled pretty frequently (every 6 months or so, and this was when I was living within 100 miles, so it was less difficult to get back there to help out).
one that just picks it up as a module and does not necessarily contribute
FTFY
So, they're a Distro? Wow... [sarcasm]That's news to me[/sarcasm]
Last time I checked Distro's weren't required to be active members of the Kernel development community. The point of a Distro is *exactly* to pick up the Kernel like it's a module and throw some stuff on top of it. Some of them, though not all of them, have a few developers actively contributing back to the Kernel. Though this isn't exactly out of the kindness of their hearts... Usually it's because they want to use something that's broken/buggy or add some new feature.
I'm not convinced you actually want to have a separate UI...... I think there is some middle-ground where you can design a UI that works well for all the hardware.
Sure, for some types of apps you would want to go this route. Though Android discovered the hard way that people with tablets often don't just want that tablet to be cluttered with enlarged phone apps (ie: scaled up). MVC allows you to have separate UI's so that you can take advantage of larger screen spaces and the extra UI features they enable, while only having one set of program logic. This is how iOS Universal Apps work. You have one set of UI's for iPad and another for iPhone/iPod-Touch. The iPad has several UI Features that iPhone & iPod Touch don't (because their limited screen space makes these UI Features impractical).
This is pretty asinine... Sure someone with a CS degree isn't qualified to design engines or aeronautical devices, it would be scary if they were allowed to.
That said, a CS degree doesn't pigeon hole you any more than any other degree program. With a CS Degree you can go on to Systems Engineering, Software Architecture & Design, Software Engineering, IT, Software Team Management, Real Time Software (the stuff that gets embedded in Airplanes and such), any of the various aspects of Game Development, etc...
It's a VERY broad field... Pretending it isn't is just silly.
So how many people did they rape? You know, attack a woman, hold her down, beat the shit out of her, then forcefully have sex with her, kick her in the head and leave her for dead alone in an alleyway?
Nobody will ever know the answer to this because the wealthy bankers and politicians would have had enough money, resources, and connections to have it all swept under the rug. Look at the number of rich white politicians that have gotten away with rape and murder due to a "lack of evidence" throughout the years. Money matters because with enough of it to spread around into all the right pockets you can get away with rape and murder.
In tech circles (ie: Slashdot's core focus) SCO is infamous for crazy lawsuits claiming they own bits of the Unix/Linux kernel and that everyone was infringing their copyright... It was kind of a big deal for the better part of a decade.
As the article points out, they only have to get a license when they want to use a trade-marked name. One of the developers cited in the story figured out that they could use the Military designation for something and get away with it (and included the "M4A1 Carbine" as an example).
It depends on the context of the use. You need to obtain a license to use the trademark for a commercial purpose (like your hypothetical movie). In the case of Armani? I assume you're referring to it by name and in some positive light (ie: Tony Stark tells Jarvis to get one of his Armani suits out for some fancy party), in which case Armani may let you use the name for free. They may even provide you with suits to use. It's good advertisement for them. The beat up old Taurus? Ford may want you to pay a license because you're using one of their older cars in a possibly not-as-positive-as-they'd-like way. They won't necessarily see it as advertising unless you insert a bunch of lines about how dependable it is.
Another side of this practice is when a company PAYS to have their product artificially inserted into a TV show. Like when Bones turned into a Windows Mobile Ad ("I'm uploading some pictures to SkyDrive!" Excessive closeups of the phone, etc...) or a Toyota Ad ("Hey checkout how great this Prius is! It has all these awesome features and is eco friendly!"). It's usually pretty blatant and awkward (feels like the scene was never originally part of the plot and was wedged in to make the advertisers happy).
Given that in most war-type games guns will be used by bad-guys. If you want those guns to be named and modeled after the real deal, then the gun manufacturer will probably demand a cut of the profits in return. If the good guys are using them? I believe the article pointed out that in that case, the developer usually just has to ask permission and is allowed to for free.
Because that would destroy the "realism" of games like Call of Duty... People who play those games want to pretend they're using the ACTUAL rifles that are used by the Military.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you still working on the remake/reboot? Can you share any details (expected release date, etc..)? The original is one of my all-time favorite movies and I feel that there are very few writers/producers these days that could do it justice (possibly just you and Joss Whedon).
Agreed, and since Aereo isn't cutting out the ads, it gives you pretty solid numbers to feed to advertisers. If they made it true time-shifting (not allowing any fast-fwd through commercials) then it's even better for the networks than DVR numbers.
He was too obsessed with forgetting his flash drive with the research he wanted to show to that one physicist.
It was authorized by Congress so, by your logic, every member of Congress in 2002 should be held responsible along with former President Bush. It's as much their violation of law as it is his (IF the war is in fact illegal as you have been asserting).
What's illegal about it? Congress may not have approved it, which technically makes it a "Conflict", but last I checked they haven't tried to force a withdrawal by invoking the War Powers Act (which, as I said, may or may not be a Constitutional action).
Or is it illegal because you don't like it or agree with it?
Please clarify...
What "illegal war" are you referring to? If you're referring to anything in relation to the War Powers Act, there's still questions on the table about how constitutional it is for Congress to regulate the President's duties as Commander in Chief. It's never been tested, since no Congress wants to be the ones to test it.
Didn't Obama *increase* military presence in Afghanistan immediately after taking office? After running on a platform promising an end to the War? The same War that is still being fought in his second term?
Obama has as much blood on his hands as Bush does.
I don't know whether I should be laughing, or reporting this as spam >.
The French weren't exactly un-biased at the time, since they had several Oil deals with Iraq before the war. Their objections to war had nothing to do with "the French/'Old Europe' are surrender-monkeys", it was all about Oil.
Are you new here?
If I could I would mod this up.... I think the Slashdot editors should be obligated to stick a disclaimer in the summary when a link goes to a sister site (even when it was a user submitted summary/link).
and put a virus scanner on it...
/Applications onto his desktop (not realizing he's just moved the App itself and not just created a short-cut). This is easy for them to fix and it's happened enough (still only a handful of times) that they don't even need my help to know what the problem is or how to fix it (just put it back in Applications).
My parents have had an iMac since 2007... I live 2000 miles away, so in-person support is limited to those fairly rare occasions that I'm in town (a handful of times throughout the year). They actually bought it without even a phone-call to me until they had already gotten it home and set it up. Most recently they ran into an issue with TurboTax not being compatible with OS X 10.5 and needed to upgrade to 10.6. This involved a trip to the Apple Store and $20 to get the 10.6 CD (since that was the last one to be physical media only). After doing all the software updates TurboTax was happy. They told me they wanted me to take a look (since I was back there this past weekend for other family stuff), and everything looked fine. It was up to 10.6.8 and according to the App Store they could skip Lion and go straight to Mountain Lion for another $20. Sure the computer cost them ~$2300 in 2007, but that's not too much more than they spent on their last couple computers, and this one has lasted twice as long. They hope to get another 1-2 years out of it before upgrading. Honestly, for what they do with it, it could probably go a bit longer.
The only real problem they have with it is that occasionally my Dad will drag an application out of
They've had this one computer for over 5 years. It still works as well as it did the day they bought it. The previous five year period they owned 3 different computers that all ran Windows and needed to be reinstalled pretty frequently (every 6 months or so, and this was when I was living within 100 miles, so it was less difficult to get back there to help out).
one that just picks it up as a module and does not necessarily contribute
FTFY
So, they're a Distro? Wow... [sarcasm]That's news to me[/sarcasm]
Last time I checked Distro's weren't required to be active members of the Kernel development community. The point of a Distro is *exactly* to pick up the Kernel like it's a module and throw some stuff on top of it. Some of them, though not all of them, have a few developers actively contributing back to the Kernel. Though this isn't exactly out of the kindness of their hearts... Usually it's because they want to use something that's broken/buggy or add some new feature.
I'm not convinced you actually want to have a separate UI... ... I think there is some middle-ground where you can design a UI that works well for all the hardware.
Sure, for some types of apps you would want to go this route. Though Android discovered the hard way that people with tablets often don't just want that tablet to be cluttered with enlarged phone apps (ie: scaled up). MVC allows you to have separate UI's so that you can take advantage of larger screen spaces and the extra UI features they enable, while only having one set of program logic. This is how iOS Universal Apps work. You have one set of UI's for iPad and another for iPhone/iPod-Touch. The iPad has several UI Features that iPhone & iPod Touch don't (because their limited screen space makes these UI Features impractical).
This is pretty asinine... Sure someone with a CS degree isn't qualified to design engines or aeronautical devices, it would be scary if they were allowed to.
That said, a CS degree doesn't pigeon hole you any more than any other degree program. With a CS Degree you can go on to Systems Engineering, Software Architecture & Design, Software Engineering, IT, Software Team Management, Real Time Software (the stuff that gets embedded in Airplanes and such), any of the various aspects of Game Development, etc...
It's a VERY broad field... Pretending it isn't is just silly.
Wow... More racism... I suppose anyone with an Irish last name can't be called "White" either...
Historical Note: Less than 100 years ago Irish were still treated as a separate race from "real Whites".
So how many people did they rape? You know, attack a woman, hold her down, beat the shit out of her, then forcefully have sex with her, kick her in the head and leave her for dead alone in an alleyway?
Nobody will ever know the answer to this because the wealthy bankers and politicians would have had enough money, resources, and connections to have it all swept under the rug. Look at the number of rich white politicians that have gotten away with rape and murder due to a "lack of evidence" throughout the years. Money matters because with enough of it to spread around into all the right pockets you can get away with rape and murder.
In tech circles (ie: Slashdot's core focus) SCO is infamous for crazy lawsuits claiming they own bits of the Unix/Linux kernel and that everyone was infringing their copyright... It was kind of a big deal for the better part of a decade.
National Aeronautics & Space Agency.... Pretty sure that means they were never JUST a space agency
As the article points out, they only have to get a license when they want to use a trade-marked name. One of the developers cited in the story figured out that they could use the Military designation for something and get away with it (and included the "M4A1 Carbine" as an example).
It depends on the context of the use. You need to obtain a license to use the trademark for a commercial purpose (like your hypothetical movie). In the case of Armani? I assume you're referring to it by name and in some positive light (ie: Tony Stark tells Jarvis to get one of his Armani suits out for some fancy party), in which case Armani may let you use the name for free. They may even provide you with suits to use. It's good advertisement for them. The beat up old Taurus? Ford may want you to pay a license because you're using one of their older cars in a possibly not-as-positive-as-they'd-like way. They won't necessarily see it as advertising unless you insert a bunch of lines about how dependable it is.
Another side of this practice is when a company PAYS to have their product artificially inserted into a TV show. Like when Bones turned into a Windows Mobile Ad ("I'm uploading some pictures to SkyDrive!" Excessive closeups of the phone, etc...) or a Toyota Ad ("Hey checkout how great this Prius is! It has all these awesome features and is eco friendly!"). It's usually pretty blatant and awkward (feels like the scene was never originally part of the plot and was wedged in to make the advertisers happy).
Given that in most war-type games guns will be used by bad-guys. If you want those guns to be named and modeled after the real deal, then the gun manufacturer will probably demand a cut of the profits in return. If the good guys are using them? I believe the article pointed out that in that case, the developer usually just has to ask permission and is allowed to for free.
That would be why it's in quotes...
id probably has a trademark on BFG. With it being an iconic weapon in their Doom series.
Because that would destroy the "realism" of games like Call of Duty... People who play those games want to pretend they're using the ACTUAL rifles that are used by the Military.
Who didn't already know this?