What the other guys said. It's got nothing to do with Buffy - I don't think I've ever watched a full episode of Buffy, much less Angel (and the only other thing by Whedon I can recall seeing is Alien 4, which was mostly rubbish). They've never interested me. But Firefly is brilliant. If the universe had any justice at all, we wouldn't have had 4 seasons of Enterprise and less than 1 of Firefly, it would have been the other way around. The movie is some compensation - though I doubt I'll be buying the comics!
Cosmos was probably my first introduction to the canals too - I always loved the (admittedly slightly cheesy) panning shot over the dusty, dry canal and dead Martian city, to the strains of Holst's Mars. I literally cried like a child when I heard of Sagan's death, he was a childhood hero of mine. But anyway - the best accounts of the canals controversy that I have read were in Michael J. Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, 1750-1900 (New York: Dover, 1999) and especially Stephen J. Dick, The Biological Universe: The Twentieth Century Extraterrestrial Life Debate and the Limits of Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). If you like electronic books (and I don't!), this is less scholarly but very good, and of course there's Percival Lowell's 1895 classic, Mars.
Oh sorry, I should have twigged you were talking about virtual particles.
By the way, Google scares me sometimes. I did a search on "FTL" and "Heisenberg" and it expanded "FTL" to include "faster than light" and "faster-than-light"! Forget about SkyNet, Google is where the rise of the machines started...
There have still been no images released from the high res imager HSRC.
Actually, plenty of HSRC images have been released already, but the fact that you didn't know that just proves your point about ESA being bad at PR. (Or do you mean the Super Resolution Channel of the HSRC? Because you may be right about that, I can't find anything. If so, my apologies.)
The problem with traditional Unix configuration files is that they're not self-validating.
There's no reason why they can't be. In fact, crontab already is to some extent, at least on the Solaris, Debian and OS X systems I just checked out. If the syntax is wrong, the changes are not accepted. That could be extended to other config file edits, though you'd need to get used to using a crontab-like wrapper instead of editting the files directly.
No, it must be something like it. The engine does not replace the horse as a mode of transport, because it doesn't have wheels or anything. Add those and yes, it is something like a horse: they are both things that provide locomotive force for transporting other things. The fact that they do this in completely different ways is irrelevent, there is still some sort of similarity.
Sorry but I had this same argument with a friend recently and clearly I'm still bitter about it:)
I've never been interested in Buffy or Angel either, despite most of my friends raving about them. And Alien 4 sucked majorly (as an Alien film anyway, it might not have been so bad as a stand-alone). But I love Firefly - the characters and dialogue are very engaging and well-written, the actors well-cast, there's a good sense of humour, as well as an endearing disregard for both genre and tv conventions/cliches. But, well, I just like it, is all. YMMV and clearly does.
I've never heard of anyone who disliked Aliens because of the low-tech weaponry involved, and you know, maybe people dislike holodeck stories because they are an incredibly lazy hook to hang an episode on. As for "great influence" of "hardcore sci-fi'ers", can you give some examples?
Tim Bisley: You are so blind! You so do not understand! You weren't there at the beginning. You don't know how good it was! How important! This is it for you! This jumped-up firework display of a toy advert! People like you make me sick! What's wrong with you? Now, I don't care if you've saved up all your fifty 'p's, take your pocket money and get out!
Oh, nice, thanks for THAT spoiler. Sure, the way the story is told is far more important, overall, especially in the long run. But there's a certain amount of pleasure to be gained from being suprised upon seeing something for the first time. If you don't understand that, fine, but there's no need to spoil it for the rest of us.
Good point, but soon enough it will be possible to have perfectly realistic CG humans (as opposed to fantastic beings like Jar-Jar or Gollum) and then he won't need Fisher and Hamill. He might use them for motion capture work, though.
So Lucas originally wanted Greedo to fire at Han first? So presumably he originally originally must have wanted Greedo and Han to fire simultaneously.
I generally like the updated effects and suchlike, but the Greedo thing is not Lucas finally realising his initial vision. And no, I can't watch the Star Wars of my youth anymore, or can you tell me where I can buy a version of Star Wars where Han fired first?
It's not just anti-nuclear people who don't like this. Robert Zubrin was pretty damning about the way the nuclear electric lobby hijacked JIMO and caused the cost to balloon due to unrealistic program goals, leading Bush eventually to not request any more money for it. It's a cool idea and I'd love to see it tried out, but the nuclear industry's greed has postponed it, at best.
I like 2010 (the movie and the book) too. I think a lot of the negative reactions is because the film just isn't Kubrickesque in any way, not so much because it's not a good adaptation of the book (which it actually is).
Slashdot Mirror
Swoosh ... straight over your head.
Yeah, but "twice" isn't "never" either.
What the other guys said. It's got nothing to do with Buffy - I don't think I've ever watched a full episode of Buffy, much less Angel (and the only other thing by Whedon I can recall seeing is Alien 4, which was mostly rubbish). They've never interested me. But Firefly is brilliant. If the universe had any justice at all, we wouldn't have had 4 seasons of Enterprise and less than 1 of Firefly, it would have been the other way around. The movie is some compensation - though I doubt I'll be buying the comics!
Cosmos was probably my first introduction to the canals too - I always loved the (admittedly slightly cheesy) panning shot over the dusty, dry canal and dead Martian city, to the strains of Holst's Mars. I literally cried like a child when I heard of Sagan's death, he was a childhood hero of mine. But anyway - the best accounts of the canals controversy that I have read were in Michael J. Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, 1750-1900 (New York: Dover, 1999) and especially Stephen J. Dick, The Biological Universe: The Twentieth Century Extraterrestrial Life Debate and the Limits of Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). If you like electronic books (and I don't!), this is less scholarly but very good, and of course there's Percival Lowell's 1895 classic, Mars .
By the way, Google scares me sometimes. I did a search on "FTL" and "Heisenberg" and it expanded "FTL" to include "faster than light" and "faster-than-light"! Forget about SkyNet, Google is where the rise of the machines started ...
OK, I'll bite. Which particles would those be?
Light is more or less massless and is forever frozen in "time".
No, light is exactly massless. More or less.
Well, exactly. Who wants to party with a bunch of nerds at MIT?
Actually, plenty of HSRC images have been released already, but the fact that you didn't know that just proves your point about ESA being bad at PR. (Or do you mean the Super Resolution Channel of the HSRC? Because you may be right about that, I can't find anything. If so, my apologies.)
There's no reason why they can't be. In fact, crontab already is to some extent, at least on the Solaris, Debian and OS X systems I just checked out. If the syntax is wrong, the changes are not accepted. That could be extended to other config file edits, though you'd need to get used to using a crontab-like wrapper instead of editting the files directly.
Sorry but I had this same argument with a friend recently and clearly I'm still bitter about it :)
I've never been interested in Buffy or Angel either, despite most of my friends raving about them. And Alien 4 sucked majorly (as an Alien film anyway, it might not have been so bad as a stand-alone). But I love Firefly - the characters and dialogue are very engaging and well-written, the actors well-cast, there's a good sense of humour, as well as an endearing disregard for both genre and tv conventions/cliches. But, well, I just like it, is all. YMMV and clearly does.
I've never heard of anyone who disliked Aliens because of the low-tech weaponry involved, and you know, maybe people dislike holodeck stories because they are an incredibly lazy hook to hang an episode on. As for "great influence" of "hardcore sci-fi'ers", can you give some examples?
Yeah, but there's a fatal flaw in their plan: nobody ever reads the article ...
Well, that's cleared that up. Thanks!
[to a Star Wars: The Phantom Menace fan]
Tim Bisley: You are so blind! You so do not understand! You weren't there at the beginning. You don't know how good it was! How important! This is it for you! This jumped-up firework display of a toy advert! People like you make me sick! What's wrong with you? Now, I don't care if you've saved up all your fifty 'p's, take your pocket money and get out!
[the little boy runs off, crying]
Tim Bisley: What a prick.
There's no way it can possibly be that low.
Ohhh, you mean with each other, don't you? Never mind then.
Oh, nice, thanks for THAT spoiler. Sure, the way the story is told is far more important, overall, especially in the long run. But there's a certain amount of pleasure to be gained from being suprised upon seeing something for the first time. If you don't understand that, fine, but there's no need to spoil it for the rest of us.
When this did start happening? Last time I ordered from Amazon US, it actually came from the US. Admittedly that was in August.
Good point, but soon enough it will be possible to have perfectly realistic CG humans (as opposed to fantastic beings like Jar-Jar or Gollum) and then he won't need Fisher and Hamill. He might use them for motion capture work, though.
I generally like the updated effects and suchlike, but the Greedo thing is not Lucas finally realising his initial vision. And no, I can't watch the Star Wars of my youth anymore, or can you tell me where I can buy a version of Star Wars where Han fired first?
It's not just anti-nuclear people who don't like this. Robert Zubrin was pretty damning about the way the nuclear electric lobby hijacked JIMO and caused the cost to balloon due to unrealistic program goals, leading Bush eventually to not request any more money for it. It's a cool idea and I'd love to see it tried out, but the nuclear industry's greed has postponed it, at best.
I like 2010 (the movie and the book) too. I think a lot of the negative reactions is because the film just isn't Kubrickesque in any way, not so much because it's not a good adaptation of the book (which it actually is).
You beat me to it!
No, you're not!
No doubt NASA can do better, but they're currently not planning to. Hence the problem.