The Rangers of the North... are the remenants of the people of Gondor, from like, way back in the day. If you want to get really into it, they're a group of a more sturdy, higher class of Men, and their bloodlines run fairly pure back to before men even came to Middle Earth. So, like, they're described as tall, grim, dirty, good fighters, etc. And they live longer than regular men.
It's revealed that Aragorn (who is refered to as Strider) is the heir appearant to the throne of Gondor. Remember Boromir, the dude that got killed in episode 1? Yeah, his dad is the "Steward" of Gondor, meaning that he's not actually king, but he's like, holding down the fort while the king is away, which has been for like a thousand years or something.
So, the true king has been hanging out with his kinfolk, the Rangers, until such time as this and that prophecy can be resolved, and then the heir can take back the throne. It's been like that so long that few people in Gondor even know the king's bloodline still exists.
Anyway, the paths (not pass) of the dead... Back in ep.1 when they went into the enchanted forest, Galadriel (cate blanchett) in the book makes mention of something to the effect of "if you're in a hurry, aragorn, remember the paths of the dead". As it turns out, in book 3, Aragorn is hanging out by Edoras (the horse people - the guy who was possessed by Saramaun before gandalf hooked him up), and he discovers that he has to get to gondor, like, yesterday. He remembers what the chick said, and realizes that, even though it means certain death, it's a shortcut.
So, he goes up a hill behind Edoras, and he enters this valley, known as the path of the dead (or mabey paths of the dead, plural). Gimli and Legolas are with him, as are his ranger folk. It's really creepy, and Gimli is freaked the hell out, even though it's like partly underground and he's a dwarf.
As it turns out, the ghostly inhabitants of the Paths of the Dead are the spirits of men who deserted Gondor WAAAY back in the day, the first time they fought Sauron (remember the arguement to the first movie? Cut the ring from Sauron's finger?). These guys deserted and went over to the other side, and ever since then, they've been cursed to wander this valley for a thousand years, until they can fulfill their oath of service to gondor, which they do in the climactic battle fought in front of the gates of Gondor.
As for why you'll be dissapointed, I honestly don't think you'll be dissapointed. I loved the 1st and 2nd movies so far, and I've only seen the theatrical releases. And I'm a huge fan of the books (read the lord of the rings probably 20-25 times, all the way through, read the silmarillion, the hobbit, and even took a college class on fantasy novels, which included a study of Tolkien's work). I mean, it comes as no surprise that no one can, in 9 hours over 3 movies, represent over 2000 pages of very complex, intricate text.
But there are some things that I like in the books that are being left out. For example, since you'll never read the books - Saruman has a resolution (a lot of people bitch about this, you may have seen it). In the books, after he is stripped of his power by Gandalf, he is imprisoned in his tower by treebeard and the rest of the ents to sit and steam out all his problems, and notice that everything he had built around him (all of his orcs and contraptions) have come to naught. Well, after a while, he gets loose, and makes his way back to the shire, and wreaks havoc among the inhabitants, destroying, pulling down trees, and all this stuff, and there's a battle of hobbits vs. invaders (it's really short). Then Sam marries Rosie Cotton (whom you see in ep. 1, but aren't introduced to - the girl that sam couldn't dance with). They have a daughter, and then like more kids, and sam is mayer of hobbiton, and all that, and frodo is all sad all the time.
All the elves are leaving middle earth because their time was the 2nd age (from the fall of saur
Online petitions did *NOT* work for farscape. Certainly there were online petitions, but, dude, give scapers some credit.
SaveFarscape.com raised almost $100,000 in funds directed at convincing Sci-Fi and whoever else that they *would* spend money for farscape. That's not counting any labor, and all of the money spent on postage, paper, and envelopes of the THOUSANDS of letters sent to network exec's.
SaveFarscape has even gone so far as to do things like get a complete set of Farscape DVD's (about $450) into at least one library in every major metropolitan area in the U.S. - Over 80% of the U.S. has access to Farscape DVD's for free. Not to mention wacky things like BraScape, where female scapers mailed network exec's their netherwear to show that the demographic did, indeed, include female viewers. Or, how about working out a deal with the U.S. military to have DVD's at home bases for soldiers to watch at leisure?
Online petitions may have some relevance, but they certainly aren't what brought farscape back. Scapers put their money where their mouths were, and made a difference. In person, on paper, on the phone, and on the internet, they worked relentlessly.
It's because you have to *pay* and *suscribe* to cable - broadcast is... you know... broadcasted. It's free, and anyone can pick it up.
Same thing with the radio - can't swear on the radio, becasue it's a free, open medium, not requiring a payment (and by inference, an understanding that you may be purchasing lewd programming???). But, you can buy CD's with swearing on them (tipper gore aside).
----QUOTE----
"For more than two decades, the SCO name has been synonymous with reliability, stability and cost efficiency. Now, the coexistence and collaboration of UNIX and Linux systems from a single source offers our customers and channel partners a powerful choice of solutions, backed by a name that powers millions of servers around the world - SCO." ---ENDQUOTE---
Darl McBride, CEO and President of SCO, as quoted in Linux and Main Aug 26, 2001.
How can they claim that Novell, by buying SuSE, is participating in practices which, contrary to the agreement between SCO and Novell, are in direct competition with SCO, when they *no longer sell linux*??
I feel the need to comment on this from the other side...
As someone who has *never* played DnD (table top), I must say "don't let that stop you from playing NWN". It's the only game I've bought in recent memory, and it's the only one I have played consistantly since it came out. It's that damn good, and if you don't care about all of the tabletop DnD stuff, and don't want to see the dice rolls, you can ignore them (they're just in a dialogue box at the bottom of the screen).
In fact, playing NWN has made me wonder how it is to play the DnD table top game. But, in reality, I don't know that I could get into it.
Mabey i've been reading slashdot too long to actually trust people to make intelligent comments on windows security. Mabey I assume that everyone is too sarcastic.
Only one mitigated security issue in a month for WS03, a default configuration where almost everything is off by default.
Yep, that's secure.
Boy, you could replace "WSO3" with "OpenBSD" here pretty easily, couldn't you?
Any feature that is not enabled by default is not a security risk in the default installation. That's just common sense. Blasting Windows for it, and then praising OSS for the exact same thing, is a true double standard.
Oh, and "Windows Sucks". I'm just saying, spout fair and balanced arguements on it's sucking.
Our main PC is in our living room, so anyone using it sits with their back to the room. My kids have never had a problem with that, because it's always been that way.
I agree with your reason. However, from like a psycological and fung shuei point of view, that's really uncomfortable. I want to do the same thing with my kid once I've got a computer for it (not sure sex yet =), so that I can, at a glance, see what's up, but it always made me nervous to have my back to the door/room anyway, and I would get pissed off when I'd talk to people who weren't there, because I hadn't heard them walk away, etc.
I don't know how I will react to the computer question - installing parental filters and all that... my parents didn't, but then, there really was no internet until I was about 15. But, I'm sure it will all fall into place. I will explain to my kids about love and trust and relationships and all of that, and then let them make their own decisions.
But, I felt that I had to chime in on this:
I've known them all, and honor students, giften musicians and (in Canada) Air/Army/Sea Cadets or Boy/Girl scouts get just as drunk and have just as much sex as every other teenager. You can't watch your kids all of the time, it's physically impossible, and you have to accept the fact that they WILL try drinking, they WILL have sex and chances are they will try drugs. These are just things kids do in high school, and your restrictivness and controlling attitude may actually encourage these things to happen.
I'm 22 now, and when in high school, I graduated with a 3.66. I am an Eagle Scout. I'm a musician (been in several bands, release a CD, also played french horn for 7 years and still play mellophone). Then again, I smoked pot in high school, smoked a pack a day until 2 years ago, and lost my virginity at 17.
Now, I'm living with the best girl in the world, we're getting married, and we're having a baby in June.
So, which side to I sit on? I've successfully completed high school, am a hair's breadth away from graduating with a degree in a major which I love and enjoy, I play music, I got my eagle scout, and I've snagged a fantastic, loving and edifying significant other, who I'm marrying. I don't smoke anymore, and I am very anti-drug.
On the other hand, I've done several drugs in my life (including acid, on multiple occasions), I've had unprotected sex with a girl who ment nothing to me, I drink (less now that my g/f can't drink with me, but still), I failed out of college for a year and I knocked my girlfriend up.
This kind of stuff means nothing as far as how well you've raised your kid. The measure of my upbringing was that my parents, while strict, have always loved me, even through dissapointment. In fact, I sometimes wonder where they reach down into to find the amount of love they have poured out on me. And because of their love and desire to see me happy (as opposed to "successful", meaning rich, which is what a lot of parents want in their kids), I have learned from my mistakes, I have grown through my mistakes. I am a better person because of them. I am happy with who I am, and I am happy with my situation, and more than anything, that to me signifies success.
*That's* parenting, folks. And as I'm about to become a parent myself, I realize that, while I am a little frightened, I have an excellent blueprint to follow, given to me constantly since birth.
Re:Still just speculation
on
Farscape is Back
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I am deliberately giving you this news in the dryest language possible, and I remind you that NOTHING IS SET IN STONE. It's so easy to get excited. But there's reason to at least keep our hopes and efforts going...
After the Jay Leno show, many of the scapers returned to the hotel. RaeLee Hill (Sikozu) was in the lobby. RoseyM and I were standing there waiting for Tiriel. Naturally, I couldn't find myself standing two feet from this adorable (and tiny!) woman without saying something to her, so we struck up a conversation. RoseyM asked RaeLee if there was anything she could tell us about the show's future. I didn't have the nerve. I assumed RaeLee would say there was nothing to tell.....
OMG! RaeLee told us several things:
1. All of the Farscape actors are "on hold".
2. The studio has been reserved for the months of December, January, and February. RaeLee said they had reserved the "big one" that they used when the show first started.
3. She said the sets were being built now.
4. RaeLee said she believes a three part mini-series and a feature movie combination is being discussed. But she's not sure....
5. She said Ben Browder had signed something. She's not sure but, RaeLee believes it was a letter of intent of some type.
You can imagine how excited RoseyM and I were to hear this news!! I asked RaeLee if it was ok to put this news on the internet because there were a lot of people who would want to hear about this. I also have no desire to get RaeLee into trouble. She said that no one had told her to keep this information a secret. It was ok to tell 5,000 of my closest friends. She just wanted me to make sure that I say clearly that NOTHING IS SET IN STONE
RoseyM and I split the pleasant task of posting this information. You will find her post on the Kanasas site.
I guess the bottom line here is that we have every reason to keep hope a alive scapers!!!
Considering the following: The Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES Basic edition 1.) Is comprised of well over 95% GPL/Free software that redhat did not write 2.) Comes with no tech support other than the user's forums 3.) Can only be installed on ONE computer, and has a non-transferable licence 4.) Comes with no warranty 5.) Costs $349 per year, per computer
I would like to ask why have you not offered any sort of solution for the small scale business owner. Even as your least expensive RedHat solution is $350 per year, per computer, this adds almost 40% to the cost of a dedicated server which can be provided to a customer for about $100/month. In an industry where profit margins are razor thin, are you looking only to cater to companies which have lots of money or extremely high end hardware, in favor of the small guys?
Heh, thank god for playstation2. My standalone DVD player is great, it has digital and componant out and lots of good features, but it doesn't play DVD-R (or DVD+r for that matter), whereas the PS2 does.
Lots of directors have stated numerous times that when you perform cuts on a movie for the final version, sometimes as little as 2 or 3 frames can make the difference between a scene that's brilliant, funny, powerful, etc, and a scene that drags on too long and loses its audience.
Just for example, rent Criterion Collection chasing amy. The cut scenes would have lengthened the movie by about 5 minutes, but would have destroyed it.
Oh, come on. There's such a fine line between trolling and humor around here, it's stupid.
I was trying to think of the one place that everyone in the world is afraid of being redirected to, and of course I came up with goatse. It's worse than any advertisement or microsoft-affiliated page or anything.
But I get modded troll? Come on!
Anyway, on haloween, someone sent me an IM claiming that goatse had replaced the picture of the dude with a jack-o-lantern depicting the goatse guy. Not believing it, I checked. And it was true.
Seems to me that all that Debian has got to offer these days is apt-get.
Well, it offers more, but apt-get is the raison d'etre to switch. For people that are sick of RPM dependancy hell or can't figure out how to compile things to make them go exactly where they want, with exactly the options that make them work, apt-get is the utility of the gods. Apt-get is *that* good.
Debian users say that debian is great because it's so stable. Well, if i wanted to use a stable server i would use freebsd (record in uptime in netcraft)
Feel free. I'd prefer to use linux to *bsd. Just personal preference. But, if you're using only packages from debian-stable, you'd be hard pressed to install *anything* that broke the system. That's nice.
Debian users say that debian is great because the latest software is always available, i still say "no xfree 4.3" and tons of other packages that are missing, and they don't mention that mixing stable packages with unstable packages will break the system. You either use stable or unstable, and if you go with unstable you cannot go back unless you reinstall.
No one ever accused debian of having the bleeding edge software advantage; that's not why anyone I know runs it. If you're in stable, you know it's been tested to be, well, stable. If you're in unstable, you know that it probably will work but that it's not guaranteed. I really thought it was stated somewhere explicitly, but it just makes common sense not to mix stable and unstable, or at least I thought it was common sense.
Debian users say that debian is great because of the social contract. Well, that social contract is the one that keeps some great packages from being packaged officially like mplayer and tons others.
The social contract is amazingly cool with debian. You know you're not getting anything that's not free. It doesn't matter to some, but it makes a world of difference to others. Accept that it's ok for people to be zealous about somethings, especially if all it involves is choice (don't listen to music from riaa lables, or don't install an os that's not absolutely free, beer and speech). If you want to install other things on debian, please do so. Thousands of people maintain their own debs, and debian just chooses not to distribute them with the os in the official release.
So, what's the only thing that debian really does (good) that others can't? It runs on tons of architectures.
Actually, I consider this a downfall of debian, that it is so generic. I'd appreciate a "highly optimized" 686 or athlon-xp or pentium3/4 version of debian; it would really make me consider switching back from gentoo. But having the same 386 distro running on your 386 and your athlon xp 2400+ seems like it could better make use of the instruction set. But, whatever.
I dont know who is a bigger PITA, the debian zealot talking about apt-get and.debs or the gentoo zealot talking about their customized, bloat-free systems (they seem to forget that you need extra libraries to compile programs that you only need for compiling and not for regular use, filling up your drive really good with all the development libraries)
This is simple flamebait. If you don't like it, don't listen. Gentoo is optimized. It doesn't matter much in a server environment, but from expierence, I can tell you that gentoo with gnome 2.2 flies on a 500mhz laptop, where redhat crawled and debian poked along. As for apt-get and.debs, it is the first and one of the best of it's kind. You only realize how cool it is after you have to go back to redhat.
Slashdot Mirror
***SPOILER****
The Rangers of the North... are the remenants of the people of Gondor, from like, way back in the day. If you want to get really into it, they're a group of a more sturdy, higher class of Men, and their bloodlines run fairly pure back to before men even came to Middle Earth. So, like, they're described as tall, grim, dirty, good fighters, etc. And they live longer than regular men.
It's revealed that Aragorn (who is refered to as Strider) is the heir appearant to the throne of Gondor. Remember Boromir, the dude that got killed in episode 1? Yeah, his dad is the "Steward" of Gondor, meaning that he's not actually king, but he's like, holding down the fort while the king is away, which has been for like a thousand years or something.
So, the true king has been hanging out with his kinfolk, the Rangers, until such time as this and that prophecy can be resolved, and then the heir can take back the throne. It's been like that so long that few people in Gondor even know the king's bloodline still exists.
Anyway, the paths (not pass) of the dead... Back in ep.1 when they went into the enchanted forest, Galadriel (cate blanchett) in the book makes mention of something to the effect of "if you're in a hurry, aragorn, remember the paths of the dead". As it turns out, in book 3, Aragorn is hanging out by Edoras (the horse people - the guy who was possessed by Saramaun before gandalf hooked him up), and he discovers that he has to get to gondor, like, yesterday. He remembers what the chick said, and realizes that, even though it means certain death, it's a shortcut.
So, he goes up a hill behind Edoras, and he enters this valley, known as the path of the dead (or mabey paths of the dead, plural). Gimli and Legolas are with him, as are his ranger folk. It's really creepy, and Gimli is freaked the hell out, even though it's like partly underground and he's a dwarf.
As it turns out, the ghostly inhabitants of the Paths of the Dead are the spirits of men who deserted Gondor WAAAY back in the day, the first time they fought Sauron (remember the arguement to the first movie? Cut the ring from Sauron's finger?). These guys deserted and went over to the other side, and ever since then, they've been cursed to wander this valley for a thousand years, until they can fulfill their oath of service to gondor, which they do in the climactic battle fought in front of the gates of Gondor.
As for why you'll be dissapointed, I honestly don't think you'll be dissapointed. I loved the 1st and 2nd movies so far, and I've only seen the theatrical releases. And I'm a huge fan of the books (read the lord of the rings probably 20-25 times, all the way through, read the silmarillion, the hobbit, and even took a college class on fantasy novels, which included a study of Tolkien's work). I mean, it comes as no surprise that no one can, in 9 hours over 3 movies, represent over 2000 pages of very complex, intricate text.
But there are some things that I like in the books that are being left out. For example, since you'll never read the books - Saruman has a resolution (a lot of people bitch about this, you may have seen it). In the books, after he is stripped of his power by Gandalf, he is imprisoned in his tower by treebeard and the rest of the ents to sit and steam out all his problems, and notice that everything he had built around him (all of his orcs and contraptions) have come to naught. Well, after a while, he gets loose, and makes his way back to the shire, and wreaks havoc among the inhabitants, destroying, pulling down trees, and all this stuff, and there's a battle of hobbits vs. invaders (it's really short). Then Sam marries Rosie Cotton (whom you see in ep. 1, but aren't introduced to - the girl that sam couldn't dance with). They have a daughter, and then like more kids, and sam is mayer of hobbiton, and all that, and frodo is all sad all the time.
All the elves are leaving middle earth because their time was the 2nd age (from the fall of saur
Online petitions did *NOT* work for farscape. Certainly there were online petitions, but, dude, give scapers some credit.
SaveFarscape.com raised almost $100,000 in funds directed at convincing Sci-Fi and whoever else that they *would* spend money for farscape. That's not counting any labor, and all of the money spent on postage, paper, and envelopes of the THOUSANDS of letters sent to network exec's.
SaveFarscape has even gone so far as to do things like get a complete set of Farscape DVD's (about $450) into at least one library in every major metropolitan area in the U.S. - Over 80% of the U.S. has access to Farscape DVD's for free. Not to mention wacky things like BraScape, where female scapers mailed network exec's their netherwear to show that the demographic did, indeed, include female viewers. Or, how about working out a deal with the U.S. military to have DVD's at home bases for soldiers to watch at leisure?
Online petitions may have some relevance, but they certainly aren't what brought farscape back. Scapers put their money where their mouths were, and made a difference. In person, on paper, on the phone, and on the internet, they worked relentlessly.
~Will
It's because you have to *pay* and *suscribe* to cable - broadcast is... you know... broadcasted. It's free, and anyone can pick it up.
Same thing with the radio - can't swear on the radio, becasue it's a free, open medium, not requiring a payment (and by inference, an understanding that you may be purchasing lewd programming???). But, you can buy CD's with swearing on them (tipper gore aside).
~Will
Dude! What about the raccoon in the Deep South episode?
I thought they had killed it, and then they brought it back and it was brilliant!
Overusing a joke = bad.
Overusing a joke, understanding that it was over used, and using it one more time = funny.
~Wx
Wow, dude.
I mean... you said "assfucking" and yet your comment got modded +5.
Talk about the liberalization of slashdot... I mean, I don't care, but I remember a time that I used to get modded down for language.
Congratulations. I've seen several +5's with "fuck", but never a +5 insightful, and never one that said "assfucking".
~Will
In fredericksburg, va, where I'm from, there's a lawyer firm called "Cox and Johnson's".
I just refuse to believe that they don't know.
~Will
hrm, that's not what he said earlier:
----QUOTE----
"For more than two decades, the SCO name has been synonymous with reliability, stability and cost efficiency. Now, the coexistence and collaboration of UNIX and Linux systems from a single source offers our customers and channel partners a powerful choice of solutions, backed by a name that powers millions of servers around the world - SCO."
---ENDQUOTE---
Darl McBride, CEO and President of SCO, as quoted in Linux and Main Aug 26, 2001.
~Will
Another question:
How can they claim that Novell, by buying SuSE, is participating in practices which, contrary to the agreement between SCO and Novell, are in direct competition with SCO, when they *no longer sell linux*??
~Will
I feel the need to comment on this from the other side...
As someone who has *never* played DnD (table top), I must say "don't let that stop you from playing NWN". It's the only game I've bought in recent memory, and it's the only one I have played consistantly since it came out. It's that damn good, and if you don't care about all of the tabletop DnD stuff, and don't want to see the dice rolls, you can ignore them (they're just in a dialogue box at the bottom of the screen).
In fact, playing NWN has made me wonder how it is to play the DnD table top game. But, in reality, I don't know that I could get into it.
Even better - distribute patches via kazaa or through a worm.
oh.
hrm.
Mabey i've been reading slashdot too long to actually trust people to make intelligent comments on windows security. Mabey I assume that everyone is too sarcastic.
Thanks!
~Will
Only one mitigated security issue in a month for WS03, a default configuration where almost everything is off by default.
Yep, that's secure.
Boy, you could replace "WSO3" with "OpenBSD" here pretty easily, couldn't you?
Any feature that is not enabled by default is not a security risk in the default installation. That's just common sense. Blasting Windows for it, and then praising OSS for the exact same thing, is a true double standard.
Oh, and "Windows Sucks". I'm just saying, spout fair and balanced arguements on it's sucking.
~Will
Isn't the name of the thing the Digital Millenium Copyright Act?
If so, tell me
1.) How a garage door or garage door opener uses a digital signal.
2.) What copyrighted material was accessable after the alleged violation.
~Will
Our main PC is in our living room, so anyone using it sits with their back to the room. My kids have never had a problem with that, because it's always been that way.
I agree with your reason. However, from like a psycological and fung shuei point of view, that's really uncomfortable. I want to do the same thing with my kid once I've got a computer for it (not sure sex yet =), so that I can, at a glance, see what's up, but it always made me nervous to have my back to the door/room anyway, and I would get pissed off when I'd talk to people who weren't there, because I hadn't heard them walk away, etc.
I don't know how I will react to the computer question - installing parental filters and all that... my parents didn't, but then, there really was no internet until I was about 15. But, I'm sure it will all fall into place. I will explain to my kids about love and trust and relationships and all of that, and then let them make their own decisions.
But, I felt that I had to chime in on this:
I've known them all, and honor students, giften musicians and (in Canada) Air/Army/Sea Cadets or Boy/Girl scouts get just as drunk and have just as much sex as every other teenager. You can't watch your kids all of the time, it's physically impossible, and you have to accept the fact that they WILL try drinking, they WILL have sex and chances are they will try drugs. These are just things kids do in high school, and your restrictivness and controlling attitude may actually encourage these things to happen.
I'm 22 now, and when in high school, I graduated with a 3.66. I am an Eagle Scout. I'm a musician (been in several bands, release a CD, also played french horn for 7 years and still play mellophone). Then again, I smoked pot in high school, smoked a pack a day until 2 years ago, and lost my virginity at 17.
Now, I'm living with the best girl in the world, we're getting married, and we're having a baby in June.
So, which side to I sit on? I've successfully completed high school, am a hair's breadth away from graduating with a degree in a major which I love and enjoy, I play music, I got my eagle scout, and I've snagged a fantastic, loving and edifying significant other, who I'm marrying. I don't smoke anymore, and I am very anti-drug.
On the other hand, I've done several drugs in my life (including acid, on multiple occasions), I've had unprotected sex with a girl who ment nothing to me, I drink (less now that my g/f can't drink with me, but still), I failed out of college for a year and I knocked my girlfriend up.
This kind of stuff means nothing as far as how well you've raised your kid. The measure of my upbringing was that my parents, while strict, have always loved me, even through dissapointment. In fact, I sometimes wonder where they reach down into to find the amount of love they have poured out on me. And because of their love and desire to see me happy (as opposed to "successful", meaning rich, which is what a lot of parents want in their kids), I have learned from my mistakes, I have grown through my mistakes. I am a better person because of them. I am happy with who I am, and I am happy with my situation, and more than anything, that to me signifies success.
*That's* parenting, folks. And as I'm about to become a parent myself, I realize that, while I am a little frightened, I have an excellent blueprint to follow, given to me constantly since birth.
It's speculation, but the announcement came from a post by LAScaper on the savefarscape forums, which is here: http://www.watchfarscape.com/forums/showthread.php ?s=dc744150f682e3c42e1199c30d15fdf8&threadid=17172
And duplicated here:
----snip----
Hey Y'all!!
I am deliberately giving you this news in the dryest language possible, and I remind you that NOTHING IS SET IN STONE. It's so easy to get excited. But there's reason to at least keep our hopes and efforts going...
After the Jay Leno show, many of the scapers returned to the hotel. RaeLee Hill (Sikozu) was in the lobby. RoseyM and I were standing there waiting for Tiriel. Naturally, I couldn't find myself standing two feet from this adorable (and tiny!) woman without saying something to her, so we struck up a conversation. RoseyM asked RaeLee if there was anything she could tell us about the show's future. I didn't have the nerve. I assumed RaeLee would say there was nothing to tell.....
OMG! RaeLee told us several things:
1. All of the Farscape actors are "on hold".
2. The studio has been reserved for the months of December, January, and February. RaeLee said they had reserved the "big one" that they used when the show first started.
3. She said the sets were being built now.
4. RaeLee said she believes a three part mini-series and a feature movie combination is being discussed. But she's not sure....
5. She said Ben Browder had signed something. She's not sure but, RaeLee believes it was a letter of intent of some type.
You can imagine how excited RoseyM and I were to hear this news!! I asked RaeLee if it was ok to put this news on the internet because there were a lot of people who would want to hear about this. I also have no desire to get RaeLee into trouble. She said that no one had told her to keep this information a secret. It was ok to tell 5,000 of my closest friends. She just wanted me to make sure that I say clearly that NOTHING IS SET IN STONE
RoseyM and I split the pleasant task of posting this information. You will find her post on the Kanasas site.
I guess the bottom line here is that we have every reason to keep hope a alive scapers!!!
-----end snip----
s/if/of/g
hah, but (since i'm using dd a lot lately) the first thing I thought of was dd if=valinux of=something.
god, tired.
Here's an even better question:
Considering the following:
The Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES Basic edition
1.) Is comprised of well over 95% GPL/Free software that redhat did not write
2.) Comes with no tech support other than the user's forums
3.) Can only be installed on ONE computer, and has a non-transferable licence
4.) Comes with no warranty
5.) Costs $349 per year, per computer
What am I paying for?
I would like to ask why have you not offered any sort of solution for the small scale business owner. Even as your least expensive RedHat solution is $350 per year, per computer, this adds almost 40% to the cost of a dedicated server which can be provided to a customer for about $100/month. In an industry where profit margins are razor thin, are you looking only to cater to companies which have lots of money or extremely high end hardware, in favor of the small guys?
Sincerely,
William Dunn
Heh, thank god for playstation2. My standalone DVD player is great, it has digital and componant out and lots of good features, but it doesn't play DVD-R (or DVD+r for that matter), whereas the PS2 does.
Lots of directors have stated numerous times that when you perform cuts on a movie for the final version, sometimes as little as 2 or 3 frames can make the difference between a scene that's brilliant, funny, powerful, etc, and a scene that drags on too long and loses its audience.
Just for example, rent Criterion Collection chasing amy. The cut scenes would have lengthened the movie by about 5 minutes, but would have destroyed it.
~Will
Oh, come on. There's such a fine line between trolling and humor around here, it's stupid.
I was trying to think of the one place that everyone in the world is afraid of being redirected to, and of course I came up with goatse. It's worse than any advertisement or microsoft-affiliated page or anything.
But I get modded troll? Come on!
Anyway, on haloween, someone sent me an IM claiming that goatse had replaced the picture of the dude with a jack-o-lantern depicting the goatse guy. Not believing it, I checked. And it was true.
God, sometimes slashdot can't take a joke.
...Not Goatse!!! Please, let there be a god!
(incedentially, has anyone looked lately? They've got a (marginally safe) halloween picture up.)
I'll bite.
.debs or the gentoo zealot talking about their customized, bloat-free systems (they seem to forget that you need extra libraries to compile programs that you only need for compiling and not for regular use, filling up your drive really good with all the development libraries)
.debs, it is the first and one of the best of it's kind. You only realize how cool it is after you have to go back to redhat.
Seems to me that all that Debian has got to offer these days is apt-get.
Well, it offers more, but apt-get is the raison d'etre to switch. For people that are sick of RPM dependancy hell or can't figure out how to compile things to make them go exactly where they want, with exactly the options that make them work, apt-get is the utility of the gods.
Apt-get is *that* good.
Debian users say that debian is great because it's so stable. Well, if i wanted to use a stable server i would use freebsd (record in uptime in netcraft)
Feel free. I'd prefer to use linux to *bsd. Just personal preference. But, if you're using only packages from debian-stable, you'd be hard pressed to install *anything* that broke the system. That's nice.
Debian users say that debian is great because the latest software is always available, i still say "no xfree 4.3" and tons of other packages that are missing, and they don't mention that mixing stable packages with unstable packages will break the system. You either use stable or unstable, and if you go with unstable you cannot go back unless you reinstall.
No one ever accused debian of having the bleeding edge software advantage; that's not why anyone I know runs it. If you're in stable, you know it's been tested to be, well, stable. If you're in unstable, you know that it probably will work but that it's not guaranteed. I really thought it was stated somewhere explicitly, but it just makes common sense not to mix stable and unstable, or at least I thought it was common sense.
Debian users say that debian is great because of the social contract. Well, that social contract is the one that keeps some great packages from being packaged officially like mplayer and tons others.
The social contract is amazingly cool with debian. You know you're not getting anything that's not free. It doesn't matter to some, but it makes a world of difference to others. Accept that it's ok for people to be zealous about somethings, especially if all it involves is choice (don't listen to music from riaa lables, or don't install an os that's not absolutely free, beer and speech). If you want to install other things on debian, please do so. Thousands of people maintain their own debs, and debian just chooses not to distribute them with the os in the official release.
So, what's the only thing that debian really does (good) that others can't? It runs on tons of architectures.
Actually, I consider this a downfall of debian, that it is so generic. I'd appreciate a "highly optimized" 686 or athlon-xp or pentium3/4 version of debian; it would really make me consider switching back from gentoo. But having the same 386 distro running on your 386 and your athlon xp 2400+ seems like it could better make use of the instruction set. But, whatever.
I dont know who is a bigger PITA, the debian zealot talking about apt-get and
This is simple flamebait. If you don't like it, don't listen. Gentoo is optimized. It doesn't matter much in a server environment, but from expierence, I can tell you that gentoo with gnome 2.2 flies on a 500mhz laptop, where redhat crawled and debian poked along. As for apt-get and
~Will
evil dead 2 is another one in a trilogy that was the best.