Might I suggest: if it's just that one program, and it'll run well in Crossover Mac, you might have a slightly better experience doing it that way, instead of having to deal with another whole desktop.
The quality of writing on ECW has to be at least as good as the writing on Atlantis.:D
In all seriousness I think the wrestling geeks don't like to be linked with the sci-fi geeks, and vice versa, but I am more or less on the outside of both and can tell you objectively that there is a lot of overlap in terms of the dedication of the fan base, the amount of history one has to absorb, and, well, the costumes.
Yes. Yes. Yes. The part where charging for a client is not the same as charging for the service it hooks up to.
There are plenty of Twitter clients for iPhone. Maybe some cost money. But Twitter is free. The situation is the same with other, similar services.
Was it OK to do what they did? I guess not, since had to shut it down. But maybe they wouldn't have if the traffic wasn't so severe. If Google planned on directly monetizing the service, they would have done that initially. But as is the case with Blogger and any number of other things that they provide, a lot of it is just about getting you to use their services. The more people use it, the more they can sell the ad space for.
Dude builds a $16,000 server that for all we know is just going to sit there and look cool, as well as run the occasional solitaire game. He deserves to be flamed.
Again, I'm more inclined to call it vigilantism. If you want Google out of your life, one line in your hosts file will do it. Cookies and all. Calling this civil disobedience is extremely insulting to people who've been locked up for *actual* civil disobedience.
On my MPB, if it's plugged in, I just have to attach or remove a USB device to wake the computer up, even while the lid is closed. It does get a little warm but it's not bad. The important thing is to leave the back unobstructed.
Oddly enough I agree with your point but not with your conclusion.
Here, "civil" has more in common "civilized" than not "civil servant".
But civil disobedience is still reserved for the breaking of laws, and sometimes the refusal to acknowledge the authority of a government or an army. Actively sabotaging a private company to stop a practice you don't like, however civilly, is vigilantism.
This is to say nothing of the morality or the effectiveness of the plan. I am merely pointing out that this is not civil disobedience, because Google's word is not actual law.
I was hearing that Bell Canada was about to charge extra for Twitter (even people who had unlimited SMS). But I think they gave up after the twitter community got really vocal. You can fit a lot of swears into 140 characters.
I don't know how they do it in the movie but in the book there's sort of a question as to whether or not he actually caught it, but then he opens his hand and it's all bloody. Superman would not have bled, and he could easily catch bullets. But Veidt stands in contrast to that...he can do it but it's the extreme limit of what he can do, and more importantly, he still bleeds. Like the rest of Watchmen, we have an updated, realist version of what once was a comic book cliche.
He's sort of a superhero in the sense that he has pushed his body and mind to the absolute limit. He's what's possible. It's outlandish, sure, but I don't think he's meant to have any more power than, say, Batman.
The Woodward thing is interesting. I hadn't realized that. But Dr. Manhattan definitely is responsible for more of Nixon's success than The Comedian.
Re:Faithful representation of source material
on
Watchmen Watched
·
· Score: 1
Well, a lot of Watchmen had to do with tearing down comic book cliches and I doubt those made the transition to film. If you limit what you're saying to just the story itself rather than how it's told, then I agree.
Well, then, here's my anecdote. I read it about a year ago, I'm well into my 20s. I liked it a lot.
I'm not a big comic fan but had previously read all of the The Preacher and some of Transmetropolitan. Compared to those, sometimes Watchmen couldn't decide whether it was camp or a serious graphic novel.
But this was precisely the point. Watchmen is about tearing down the old superhero comic. Seeing the surface is not enough to foster a real enjoyment. They're flawed -- yeah, we all get that. So's Spiderman. It's what they do with the *form* that's so interesting. Not just artistically but in terms of story-telling. Again and again comic book cliches are brought up but the context is all wrong and so the results are different. Finally there is the staple city-destroying supermonster, and suprise, no one's there to fight it! But I thought it was a comic book?
I thought all this was rather neat. I really dug what you called fluff...that is, the pieces of the autobiography and the news clippings. The only individual chapter that I remember standing out from the rest was the one with Rorschach's back story. But I still liked where they put it.
The pirate stuff I never got into. Apparently it's supposed to be this brilliant allegory for Veidt's plan but it felt shallow to me in that regard.
More importantly, it was a throwback to older comic book monsters. The juxtaposition between old and new concludes Moore's experiments with form via a final unavoidable statement: "it's dead."
Here's this traditional comic book monster, but the traditional heroes are nowhere to be seen. They're weak, and depraved, and they wear costumes for all the wrong reasons. So the bad guy wins. (Even Ozy's not super enough...he wants to create peace but all he can really do is buy is some time, and then only by flattening a city).
For the comic book to grow, the superhero had to be shown to be ineffectual. At least, that's how I see it.
Slashdot Mirror
Might I suggest: if it's just that one program, and it'll run well in Crossover Mac, you might have a slightly better experience doing it that way, instead of having to deal with another whole desktop.
The quality of writing on ECW has to be at least as good as the writing on Atlantis. :D
In all seriousness I think the wrestling geeks don't like to be linked with the sci-fi geeks, and vice versa, but I am more or less on the outside of both and can tell you objectively that there is a lot of overlap in terms of the dedication of the fan base, the amount of history one has to absorb, and, well, the costumes.
SciFi shows a lot of crap. At least ECW got them ratings.
Totally. The eye sockets are supposed to be on a straight line with the motherboard.
Made my day, buddy.
That was a beautiful blanket statement, Mr. Malthus, but I'm left wondering who it is exactly that you are speaking about.
Have you really not seen people here complaining about not being able to buy a particular mobile phone without it affecting their carrier & contract?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
The part where charging for a client is not the same as charging for the service it hooks up to.
There are plenty of Twitter clients for iPhone. Maybe some cost money. But Twitter is free. The situation is the same with other, similar services.
Was it OK to do what they did? I guess not, since had to shut it down. But maybe they wouldn't have if the traffic wasn't so severe. If Google planned on directly monetizing the service, they would have done that initially. But as is the case with Blogger and any number of other things that they provide, a lot of it is just about getting you to use their services. The more people use it, the more they can sell the ad space for.
I'm pretty sure that "American" is universally understood to be someone from any country in America.
Even if there's somewhere in the world where American does not refer to a person living in the US, it is most certainly not universal.
Regards,
Reality
Not sure "never getting laid ever" counts as bragging rights.
Flamebait? Really?
Dude builds a $16,000 server that for all we know is just going to sit there and look cool, as well as run the occasional solitaire game. He deserves to be flamed.
I just don't see where Google demands obedience. They offer you something, you are free not to take it.
I'm not saying the click campaign is wrong or shouldn't be done. But real civil disobedience doesn't happen in an armchair.
Again, I'm more inclined to call it vigilantism. If you want Google out of your life, one line in your hosts file will do it. Cookies and all. Calling this civil disobedience is extremely insulting to people who've been locked up for *actual* civil disobedience.
You keep saying this. Religion is older than agriculture. In what culture did it not factor into marriage?
On my MPB, if it's plugged in, I just have to attach or remove a USB device to wake the computer up, even while the lid is closed. It does get a little warm but it's not bad. The important thing is to leave the back unobstructed.
Oddly enough I agree with your point but not with your conclusion.
Here, "civil" has more in common "civilized" than not "civil servant".
But civil disobedience is still reserved for the breaking of laws, and sometimes the refusal to acknowledge the authority of a government or an army. Actively sabotaging a private company to stop a practice you don't like, however civilly, is vigilantism.
This is to say nothing of the morality or the effectiveness of the plan. I am merely pointing out that this is not civil disobedience, because Google's word is not actual law.
Or maybe I am reading your final sentence wrong?
I'll be sure to not fax you any ads then.
The rest of you: stay off the phone, I've got something for ya.
And yet, they didn't. Victim mentality is so 2008.
Not just the internet. They've been around since before the internet was popular.
I was hearing that Bell Canada was about to charge extra for Twitter (even people who had unlimited SMS). But I think they gave up after the twitter community got really vocal. You can fit a lot of swears into 140 characters.
I hate myself yet feel superior to my friends and colleagues.
Congrats, you're now officially a comic book nerd!
Yeah, Watchmen will do that to ya.
I don't know how they do it in the movie but in the book there's sort of a question as to whether or not he actually caught it, but then he opens his hand and it's all bloody. Superman would not have bled, and he could easily catch bullets. But Veidt stands in contrast to that...he can do it but it's the extreme limit of what he can do, and more importantly, he still bleeds. Like the rest of Watchmen, we have an updated, realist version of what once was a comic book cliche.
He's sort of a superhero in the sense that he has pushed his body and mind to the absolute limit. He's what's possible. It's outlandish, sure, but I don't think he's meant to have any more power than, say, Batman.
The Woodward thing is interesting. I hadn't realized that. But Dr. Manhattan definitely is responsible for more of Nixon's success than The Comedian.
Well, a lot of Watchmen had to do with tearing down comic book cliches and I doubt those made the transition to film. If you limit what you're saying to just the story itself rather than how it's told, then I agree.
Well, then, here's my anecdote. I read it about a year ago, I'm well into my 20s. I liked it a lot.
I'm not a big comic fan but had previously read all of the The Preacher and some of Transmetropolitan. Compared to those, sometimes Watchmen couldn't decide whether it was camp or a serious graphic novel.
But this was precisely the point. Watchmen is about tearing down the old superhero comic. Seeing the surface is not enough to foster a real enjoyment. They're flawed -- yeah, we all get that. So's Spiderman. It's what they do with the *form* that's so interesting. Not just artistically but in terms of story-telling. Again and again comic book cliches are brought up but the context is all wrong and so the results are different. Finally there is the staple city-destroying supermonster, and suprise, no one's there to fight it! But I thought it was a comic book?
I thought all this was rather neat. I really dug what you called fluff...that is, the pieces of the autobiography and the news clippings. The only individual chapter that I remember standing out from the rest was the one with Rorschach's back story. But I still liked where they put it.
The pirate stuff I never got into. Apparently it's supposed to be this brilliant allegory for Veidt's plan but it felt shallow to me in that regard.
More importantly, it was a throwback to older comic book monsters. The juxtaposition between old and new concludes Moore's experiments with form via a final unavoidable statement: "it's dead."
Here's this traditional comic book monster, but the traditional heroes are nowhere to be seen. They're weak, and depraved, and they wear costumes for all the wrong reasons. So the bad guy wins. (Even Ozy's not super enough...he wants to create peace but all he can really do is buy is some time, and then only by flattening a city).
For the comic book to grow, the superhero had to be shown to be ineffectual. At least, that's how I see it.
I'd say mics were the first and stereo sound was a distant second.