It would be better than anything else this decade, with exception being the martian.
What, you didn't see Geostorm?/s
I liked Arrival, I also thought Bladerunner 2049 was good too, though I can see how they were both pretty slow for most movie goers these days. Source Code and Moon were both good too. Edge of Tomorrow and Snowpiercer were good action sci-fi movies. What about Looper and Gravity? Ex-Machia was interesting. Under the Skin would have fit in good with some of the more experimental 1960's type of movies.
I could keep going, and I'm sure you didn't like some of those movies, but I'd be surprised if you thought all of them were bad. I think there's been a lot of good science fiction in the last couple of years. Just go back 40 or 50 years. There were a few really great movies, but a lot of the science fiction from before 30 years ago was really bad.
Although this one will probably be adrift in space, I just realized that they could claim the title of the fastest car in history since it'll be zooming through space at speeds not possible on land. Too bad it won't be under it's own power.
It won't take too long until it also logs more miles than any other car. It'll also go the longest distance without repairs, fastest electric car, etc. Or it may just blowup on takeoff. Either way, it's probably one of the biggest PR stunts by a car manufacturer in history.
Without getting into the argument regarding streaming quality, there's another reason I prefer CD's. I listen to a lot of music from my youth, or older even. Much of which has been remastered, remixed and re-released several times over the years. Often times the streaming/downloadable versions are not the versions I want to listen to. The loudness wars are real and often times remastered versions don't have the dynamic range of the older versions.
There are also a lot of weird things that happened in older recordings. There was a recording studio in the late 1960's that did not have the speed of their recording equipment calibrated correctly for a fairly long time, and it was running slightly too slow. Since that time several albums from that studio have been remastered. Fortunately some of the remasters took this into account. However many did not. The ones that did not have shorter run-times and are pitch shifted accordingly. The problem is that the play times for the tracks do not match what is actually on those disks, so you can't tell by looking at the track times. It's been my experience that many of the remasters that did take this mis-calibration into account are also now out of print. Any streaming service or digital download would likely be from the newest remaster and not sound very good in my opinion.
Some albums were actually changed in later releases. One of the lyrics of the Eagles song "Life in the Fast lane" was actually changed after the initial release of the Hotel California album.
I can't say I'm a big Ice-T fan, but his song Cop Killer was unavailable for a couple of decades at one point. There have been other albums that are no long available due to other legal reasons as well. In those cases, you will not be able to hear them on your streaming service either.
I also listen to a lot of classical music. There are numerous versions recorded by different orchestras. There are many version of Wagner's opera Der Ring des Nibelungen. Since it's a very long opera and is broken up into 4 parts/cycles, it can take several years between the opening of the first and last cycle. So there is a considerable amount of variation between versions of the full recording. I'm going to guess that I'd be lucky to find one version of of it on a streaming service, let alone two or more.
"NASA Poised To Topple a Planet-Finding Barrier" is the headline. Was there really a barrier to overcome here, or is it a milestone in improving capabilities?
Welcome to the English language, and the even worse news headlines. As someone who remembers the Watergate scandal, I'm tired of every scandal being named something-gate. The abuse of the word "literally" I find downright confusing at times. But I started to become inoculated against some of this when my daughter became a teenager. If the barrier thing is bothering you, just try sitting in a room full of teens and listen to them communicate in their pseudo English sometime.
And said race is between heavier AWD cars versus lighter 2WD cars? No.
Are you seriously going to pretend that a 2WD Toyota is going to do better in the mountains than a AWD Jeep because it's lighter?
I don't know about what Toyota you want to compare it to, but on a maintained windy mountain road, most cars are going to be able to take turns better than a heavy jeep that has a much higher center of gravity. A Toyota 86 (Scion FRS) is a RWD car, but it's designed for handling. I doubt there's a single AWD Jeep that would outperform it on a windy road.
Seriously, we're comparing the price on new luxury cars to old used Yarises now? Hey, how's the automatic emergency braking in your Yaris? How's its remote-controlled cabin climate conditioning doing for you? How are you enjoying its streaming media? I mean, come on.
I have no idea what kind of driving the OP was referring to. But for autocross racing, a Yaris will probably make a Model S look pathetic. If the OP is using the Yaris as a second car/toy, then all of the crap you listed is dead weight and would be removed from any serious Solo II car. When I was young and road raced, we would remove anything that wasn't needed from a car. This included extra seats, sound deadening, radio, AC, Also replacing steel body panels with fiberglass. I also knew a few people that would go as far as acid dipping body panels to reduce the thickness to shave a few more pounds off.
Not to mention, despite their commercials, their coverage just isn't that good.
Really? I've been using them for a long time and used to travel extensively. I can't say I've been many places that didn't have coverage. I originally went with T-Mobile because I traveled outside of the US frequently and at the time I think Verizon and T-Mobile were the best choices. There have been a few place in the US that I didn't have coverage years ago, and I have no service when I visit my mother, but she's in the middle of nowhere and there's actually no carrier that has coverage where she lives.
How times have changed. When I was much younger I remember people getting caught sneaking in cameras and recording equipment. It typically resulted in the equipment getting smashed by security/roadies and getting the shit kicked out of them by security/roadies. In all honesty, I preferred that to people holding up phones and fucking iPads in front of everyone behind them.
I don't have an problem with people taking a picture during a concert, with a non tablet sized device, but recording the entire concert is ridiculous. I'd prefer to not go through the inconvenience of locking/unlocking a bag to use my phone though. I'd like to see them simply ban tablets and throw people out of the venue after one warning for holding up their camera for more than a quick snapshot.
To the contrary. It's not a problem of the police. It's a problem of people wanting such a police force. If you elect officials on a "tough on crime" platform, you get police brutality and police actions out of proportions.
I both agree and disagree with you. Part of the issue is historic, and before many on/. we're alive and/or can remember. In the late 1970's and early 80's crime was much worse and criminals in many cases were much better armed than the police. Granted, the war on drugs fueled most of this. But you can't have a police force using revolvers going up against criminals with fully automatic weapons. Part of the reason (certainly not all) crime stats were lowered is that police were able to get SWAT teams and APC's.
However they aren't really needed as much anymore. But like most government programs, they're hard to get rid of once they are in place. I'd certainly like my local law enforcement to have the tools they need in cases where they are appropriate, but it's also difficult to make the right call on this. You sure don't want to be the guy in charge and send a bunch of your subordinates to be slaughtered when you could have equipped them properly. But you don't want to send in an Abrams tank for a domestic call either. I'm not sure what the solution is though. Better training would obviously be a good start, and better psychological screening would also be smart. But obviously there's going to be a lot of push back from senior officers.
York City's five pension funds have about $5 billion in fossil fuel investments.
So if NYC wins, do they also have to take responsibility for being a a co-conspirator? They did help the oil companies by financing what they were doing with $5 billion in just the pension funds alone. What other investments do/did they have with oil and coal I wonder? How much fossil fuel was, and still is used by NYC? Are they going to shut down all of the ports that oil burning ships dock at? What about all of the freight by diesel truck and trains? How about all of the stock brokers on Wall Street that deal with investments in oil and coal? They should go after them too.
I'm all for being responsible for the environment, but this is just stupid.
Vantablack absorbs 99.965% of visible light. Which is admittedly better, but to think that these birds have been able to absorb 99.95% of visible light with these feathers for so long is still pretty damn impressive. Especially since it's taken this long do understand why. It's truly impressive how many things we have and can learn from a material science perspective just by looking at what nature has already figured out seemingly at random.
I think you may have gone back one president too far. I don't recall George Bush Sr. talking about the internet. Bill and Al did go on about the "information super highway" a lot though.
That's some pretty secure luggage. I've rarely seen luggage locks that go past 1234. Not that it matters. Even the ones the TSA can unlock they just throw away. I gave up on luggage locks within the first month of the existence of the TSA.
First of all I was responding to the poster that stated that "AM2+ was rather old hardware and even Intel has drives issues with hardware this old". Implying that they shouldn't have to worry about this. But if Microsoft originally cleared these computers to be Win10 compatible, it's pretty shitty to just drop support.
Perhaps. It depends on if they fix the issue, doesn't it? To be fair, the title is also a bit of an over reaction. This update isn't bricking the system. It's still possible to (re)install an OS.
No one is forced to send usable hardware to a landfill.
If the users are running Windows 10 and have no control over updates, then their options are somewhat limited. They can reinstall Windows 10 and hope that a clean install will work, install another OS, use the computer for a doorstop, or throw it away. But anyway you look at it, users who are affected by this are being forced into a pain in the ass situation.
No one at Microsoft intentionally ruined any machines, they just have a bug somewhere and, more important, an inadequate testing system.
It doesn't matter if they did it intentionally or through incompetence. They are still causing the issue.
Please don't make a software bug into a conspiracy.
I never said there was. I'm just tired of being told that something is obsolete and I should go buy a new one when the item I have works perfectly fine for my needs. As this kind of crap becomes more acceptable, how long will it be until it happens with other things. I'll be pretty pissed when my refrigerator suddenly stops working because of a bad update. Not that I put appliances with this capability on the internet. Won't it be nice when your car refuses to start in the morning after a forced overnight update? Or even better when you're visiting relatives that are hundreds of miles from where you live.
I currently have 4 AM2+ systems running at home and while they are old, they are more then capable for what I need them to do. They're all running Windows 7. So I'll have to look into this before allowing them to be updated.
Processors are not like they were in the 80's and 90's. In the 1980's it was seriously expensive to update, so I didn't do so as often as I did in the 1990's. I probably updated my systems every 2 to 3 years back then. But I don't' see the need to do so anymore. Unless you are a serious gamer, or do a lot of video editing/transcoding there's no need. It's been a while since I played any games, but the Phenom 2 1100T with an NVidia 730 had enough power to keep all of the settings pretty high and no issues with frame rate. Why should people be forced to send perfectly usable hardware to a landfill simply because it's not the latest shiny thing on the market?
Why is there supposedly addiction to everything these days?
Back when the internet wasn't ubiquitous, I remember people bitching about internet addiction. Now it's called everyday life.
Video game addiction was another one. But now that everyone is playing goat farmer (or whatever) on their phone, no one cares.
One of my favorites is "sex addiction". You have to be really rich to get that one though. If you're not rich you're just a cheating scumbag. But don't confuse this with "love addiction"
Then to keep a balance, there's food addiction and exercise addiction.
I do and always have since the first iphone. Never roken one either. But you arelikeall the other idiots i see. You cant have noce things. So get the case. For me no problems. Carry in mront left jeans pocket..no case. Even riding the motorcycles. So obviously you like so many others need some sort of potection and will probably still break your phone. You are probably as careless with the rest of your life. Funny thing is my devices tend to last working beyond their useful lives. I have very good luck with electronics. But then again im not a clumbsy animal such as yourself and the rest of the idiots with phones. You people.....are ridiculous.
I can't tell if you are trying to be funny or not. Either way, your post gave me a good laugh.
Slashdot Mirror
It would be better than anything else this decade, with exception being the martian.
What, you didn't see Geostorm? /s
I liked Arrival, I also thought Bladerunner 2049 was good too, though I can see how they were both pretty slow for most movie goers these days. Source Code and Moon were both good too. Edge of Tomorrow and Snowpiercer were good action sci-fi movies. What about Looper and Gravity? Ex-Machia was interesting. Under the Skin would have fit in good with some of the more experimental 1960's type of movies.
I could keep going, and I'm sure you didn't like some of those movies, but I'd be surprised if you thought all of them were bad. I think there's been a lot of good science fiction in the last couple of years. Just go back 40 or 50 years. There were a few really great movies, but a lot of the science fiction from before 30 years ago was really bad.
Although this one will probably be adrift in space, I just realized that they could claim the title of the fastest car in history since it'll be zooming through space at speeds not possible on land. Too bad it won't be under it's own power.
It won't take too long until it also logs more miles than any other car. It'll also go the longest distance without repairs, fastest electric car, etc. Or it may just blowup on takeoff. Either way, it's probably one of the biggest PR stunts by a car manufacturer in history.
Without getting into the argument regarding streaming quality, there's another reason I prefer CD's. I listen to a lot of music from my youth, or older even. Much of which has been remastered, remixed and re-released several times over the years. Often times the streaming/downloadable versions are not the versions I want to listen to. The loudness wars are real and often times remastered versions don't have the dynamic range of the older versions.
There are also a lot of weird things that happened in older recordings. There was a recording studio in the late 1960's that did not have the speed of their recording equipment calibrated correctly for a fairly long time, and it was running slightly too slow. Since that time several albums from that studio have been remastered. Fortunately some of the remasters took this into account. However many did not. The ones that did not have shorter run-times and are pitch shifted accordingly. The problem is that the play times for the tracks do not match what is actually on those disks, so you can't tell by looking at the track times. It's been my experience that many of the remasters that did take this mis-calibration into account are also now out of print. Any streaming service or digital download would likely be from the newest remaster and not sound very good in my opinion.
Some albums were actually changed in later releases. One of the lyrics of the Eagles song "Life in the Fast lane" was actually changed after the initial release of the Hotel California album.
I can't say I'm a big Ice-T fan, but his song Cop Killer was unavailable for a couple of decades at one point. There have been other albums that are no long available due to other legal reasons as well. In those cases, you will not be able to hear them on your streaming service either.
I also listen to a lot of classical music. There are numerous versions recorded by different orchestras. There are many version of Wagner's opera Der Ring des Nibelungen. Since it's a very long opera and is broken up into 4 parts/cycles, it can take several years between the opening of the first and last cycle. So there is a considerable amount of variation between versions of the full recording. I'm going to guess that I'd be lucky to find one version of of it on a streaming service, let alone two or more.
"NASA Poised To Topple a Planet-Finding Barrier" is the headline. Was there really a barrier to overcome here, or is it a milestone in improving capabilities?
Welcome to the English language, and the even worse news headlines. As someone who remembers the Watergate scandal, I'm tired of every scandal being named something-gate. The abuse of the word "literally" I find downright confusing at times. But I started to become inoculated against some of this when my daughter became a teenager. If the barrier thing is bothering you, just try sitting in a room full of teens and listen to them communicate in their pseudo English sometime.
And said race is between heavier AWD cars versus lighter 2WD cars? No.
Are you seriously going to pretend that a 2WD Toyota is going to do better in the mountains than a AWD Jeep because it's lighter?
I don't know about what Toyota you want to compare it to, but on a maintained windy mountain road, most cars are going to be able to take turns better than a heavy jeep that has a much higher center of gravity. A Toyota 86 (Scion FRS) is a RWD car, but it's designed for handling. I doubt there's a single AWD Jeep that would outperform it on a windy road.
Seriously, we're comparing the price on new luxury cars to old used Yarises now? Hey, how's the automatic emergency braking in your Yaris? How's its remote-controlled cabin climate conditioning doing for you? How are you enjoying its streaming media? I mean, come on.
I have no idea what kind of driving the OP was referring to. But for autocross racing, a Yaris will probably make a Model S look pathetic. If the OP is using the Yaris as a second car/toy, then all of the crap you listed is dead weight and would be removed from any serious Solo II car. When I was young and road raced, we would remove anything that wasn't needed from a car. This included extra seats, sound deadening, radio, AC, Also replacing steel body panels with fiberglass. I also knew a few people that would go as far as acid dipping body panels to reduce the thickness to shave a few more pounds off.
Not to mention, despite their commercials, their coverage just isn't that good.
Really? I've been using them for a long time and used to travel extensively. I can't say I've been many places that didn't have coverage. I originally went with T-Mobile because I traveled outside of the US frequently and at the time I think Verizon and T-Mobile were the best choices. There have been a few place in the US that I didn't have coverage years ago, and I have no service when I visit my mother, but she's in the middle of nowhere and there's actually no carrier that has coverage where she lives.
Jobs would of NEVER allowed this product to go out unless it was as good or better than the competition.
I know right. It's not like he released the original iPhone without the ability to copy/paste. Or the iPod that wouldn't play mp3 files.
Do people really look at that to decide if they're going to the movies or not?
I usually look, but it doesn't influence my decision to go. It does influence my expectations though.
How times have changed. When I was much younger I remember people getting caught sneaking in cameras and recording equipment. It typically resulted in the equipment getting smashed by security/roadies and getting the shit kicked out of them by security/roadies. In all honesty, I preferred that to people holding up phones and fucking iPads in front of everyone behind them.
I don't have an problem with people taking a picture during a concert, with a non tablet sized device, but recording the entire concert is ridiculous. I'd prefer to not go through the inconvenience of locking/unlocking a bag to use my phone though. I'd like to see them simply ban tablets and throw people out of the venue after one warning for holding up their camera for more than a quick snapshot.
To the contrary. It's not a problem of the police. It's a problem of people wanting such a police force. If you elect officials on a "tough on crime" platform, you get police brutality and police actions out of proportions.
I both agree and disagree with you. Part of the issue is historic, and before many on /. we're alive and/or can remember. In the late 1970's and early 80's crime was much worse and criminals in many cases were much better armed than the police. Granted, the war on drugs fueled most of this. But you can't have a police force using revolvers going up against criminals with fully automatic weapons. Part of the reason (certainly not all) crime stats were lowered is that police were able to get SWAT teams and APC's.
However they aren't really needed as much anymore. But like most government programs, they're hard to get rid of once they are in place. I'd certainly like my local law enforcement to have the tools they need in cases where they are appropriate, but it's also difficult to make the right call on this. You sure don't want to be the guy in charge and send a bunch of your subordinates to be slaughtered when you could have equipped them properly. But you don't want to send in an Abrams tank for a domestic call either. I'm not sure what the solution is though. Better training would obviously be a good start, and better psychological screening would also be smart. But obviously there's going to be a lot of push back from senior officers.
Lets make the wires radioactive as well!
Do you have any idea how much it's going to cost to airlift Godzilla to the US to take care of giant radioactive mutant rats?
.. do not carry phone when performing criminal acts.
The way things are going, not having your phone on and with you will become suspicious behavior, if not presumption of guilt.
Didn't Norway just do away with FM radio. I keep seeing articles about how FM is dying and Digital is taking over. Great timing for doing this.
York City's five pension funds have about $5 billion in fossil fuel investments.
So if NYC wins, do they also have to take responsibility for being a a co-conspirator? They did help the oil companies by financing what they were doing with $5 billion in just the pension funds alone. What other investments do/did they have with oil and coal I wonder? How much fossil fuel was, and still is used by NYC? Are they going to shut down all of the ports that oil burning ships dock at? What about all of the freight by diesel truck and trains? How about all of the stock brokers on Wall Street that deal with investments in oil and coal? They should go after them too.
I'm all for being responsible for the environment, but this is just stupid.
What's scary is how accurately that star is to be able to hit the radio telescope, especially since the radio signal is so strong that it's visible!
Well a dish of that size is probably pretty well grounded.
Also, you wouldn't want to wear Vantablack clothes due to the danger of breathing in the carbon nanotubes.
And people would try to sit on you in a movie theater.
Vantablack has already been invented, move on!
Vantablack absorbs 99.965% of visible light. Which is admittedly better, but to think that these birds have been able to absorb 99.95% of visible light with these feathers for so long is still pretty damn impressive. Especially since it's taken this long do understand why. It's truly impressive how many things we have and can learn from a material science perspective just by looking at what nature has already figured out seemingly at random.
Hopefully in a few years someone can finally build that spaceship for Disaster Area's concert.
I think you may have gone back one president too far. I don't recall George Bush Sr. talking about the internet. Bill and Al did go on about the "information super highway" a lot though.
12345? That's the same combination as my luggage!
That's some pretty secure luggage. I've rarely seen luggage locks that go past 1234. Not that it matters. Even the ones the TSA can unlock they just throw away. I gave up on luggage locks within the first month of the existence of the TSA.
This is a bit of an overreaction.
First of all I was responding to the poster that stated that "AM2+ was rather old hardware and even Intel has drives issues with hardware this old". Implying that they shouldn't have to worry about this. But if Microsoft originally cleared these computers to be Win10 compatible, it's pretty shitty to just drop support.
Perhaps. It depends on if they fix the issue, doesn't it? To be fair, the title is also a bit of an over reaction. This update isn't bricking the system. It's still possible to (re)install an OS.
No one is forced to send usable hardware to a landfill.
If the users are running Windows 10 and have no control over updates, then their options are somewhat limited. They can reinstall Windows 10 and hope that a clean install will work, install another OS, use the computer for a doorstop, or throw it away. But anyway you look at it, users who are affected by this are being forced into a pain in the ass situation.
No one at Microsoft intentionally ruined any machines, they just have a bug somewhere and, more important, an inadequate testing system.
It doesn't matter if they did it intentionally or through incompetence. They are still causing the issue.
Please don't make a software bug into a conspiracy.
I never said there was. I'm just tired of being told that something is obsolete and I should go buy a new one when the item I have works perfectly fine for my needs. As this kind of crap becomes more acceptable, how long will it be until it happens with other things. I'll be pretty pissed when my refrigerator suddenly stops working because of a bad update. Not that I put appliances with this capability on the internet. Won't it be nice when your car refuses to start in the morning after a forced overnight update? Or even better when you're visiting relatives that are hundreds of miles from where you live.
I currently have 4 AM2+ systems running at home and while they are old, they are more then capable for what I need them to do. They're all running Windows 7. So I'll have to look into this before allowing them to be updated.
Processors are not like they were in the 80's and 90's. In the 1980's it was seriously expensive to update, so I didn't do so as often as I did in the 1990's. I probably updated my systems every 2 to 3 years back then. But I don't' see the need to do so anymore. Unless you are a serious gamer, or do a lot of video editing/transcoding there's no need. It's been a while since I played any games, but the Phenom 2 1100T with an NVidia 730 had enough power to keep all of the settings pretty high and no issues with frame rate. Why should people be forced to send perfectly usable hardware to a landfill simply because it's not the latest shiny thing on the market?
Why is there supposedly addiction to everything these days?
Back when the internet wasn't ubiquitous, I remember people bitching about internet addiction. Now it's called everyday life.
Video game addiction was another one. But now that everyone is playing goat farmer (or whatever) on their phone, no one cares.
One of my favorites is "sex addiction". You have to be really rich to get that one though. If you're not rich you're just a cheating scumbag. But don't confuse this with "love addiction"
Then to keep a balance, there's food addiction and exercise addiction.
I do and always have since the first iphone. Never roken one either. But you arelikeall the other idiots i see. You cant have noce things. So get the case. For me no problems. Carry in mront left jeans pocket..no case. Even riding the motorcycles. So obviously you like so many others need some sort of potection and will probably still break your phone. You are probably as careless with the rest of your life. Funny thing is my devices tend to last working beyond their useful lives. I have very good luck with electronics. But then again im not a clumbsy animal such as yourself and the rest of the idiots with phones. You people.....are ridiculous.
I can't tell if you are trying to be funny or not. Either way, your post gave me a good laugh.