The Disc that you may be refering to with the T2 limited Edition that was HD on DVD, and required a PC to play it. It used VC1 and fit on a standard Dual-Layer DVD. T2 Extreme I believe.
No. The disc I'm referring to is the T2 Ultimate Edition, released August 29 2000, UPC 1223610967b. It was one of the first actual releases (yes, the spec for DVD Video has always allowed for dsdl; that doesn't mean that all the early players could actually handle it.)
And I didn't say 'dual layer,' I said 'dual-sided, dual layered.' DVD-18.
Between the incompatibility and the outcry over disc art, it was almost immediately re-issued with two ssdl discs (two DVD-9s, in other words).
Don't forget that what the Market wants isn't often what you'd think.
Back in the day, when we were still heady from defeating DivX (the physical disc, not what's now become Xvid) and still bandied about terms like 'day-and-date,' the Terminator 2 Ultimate DVD was released, in a rather nifty metal slipcover.
It was one of the first major DVDs released on the double-sided, dual-layer format. There were two complaints:
Captain Power was awesome. Probably because a good chunk of it was written by Babylon 5 guy, who's name I'm not going to even try to write, and can't be bothered to look up.
Quite a few of the original stories could be refilmed today with very little change and still hold up.
Yup yup. I have, literally, stacks of OOP RPG books, video games going back all the way to the C64 era, and so on, that I can simply no longer be bothered to put on Ebay.
If Google were to create an auction type site, I'd be there the very next day.
See Asimov's very own The Evitable Conflict, wherein the robots decide that you can logically support harming a few for the greater good of the many.
You notice in I, Robot the Movie that the robots only instigate harm towards humans who are actively and violently resisting, or to humans who are in a position to directly threaten the 'Master Plan.' By the robot's logic, not subjugating the humans will lead to massive harm; thus, by not harming specific humans, they are knowingly allowing harm to come to many other humans.
Or Civilization: Call To Power, where the developers tried to explain away bronze age warriors downing stealth bombers as 'hypnotic phalanxes.'
In the original Civilization, as well, veteran spearmen, in a city on a mountain, with city walls, could often hold off battleships. Civ3 had some problems as well, as pointed out.
If you compare Sonny to Daneel, rather than the giant mainframe to Daneel, it makes a bit more sense; the sense I got at the end of the movie was that Sonny was going to try to separate the Robots from humans, and form a separate society.
The Three Laws *did* work. The giant robot brain just figured out that Humanity's biggest threat was...itself. And a Robot Cannot Through Inaction Allow Harm To Come To A Human. Hence, Humans must be forcibly rendered unable to harm one another.
Quite honestly, all of Asimov's robot books can be distilled down to One Law: The Law of Unintended Consequences. The stories were all about figuring out why a robot was acting in a given way, based on the Three Laws.
Not really a five second summary, but without trying to give much away: Watchmen is the story of a group of costumed vigilantes (only one has real 'super powers,' and these powers cause him to become very detached by humanity indeed) who, while trying to track down a suspected murderer, who seems to be killing memebers of their group, stumbles across a plot by one of their own to do something terrible; but which will potentially result in something wonderful. They each, then, have to decide if the ends justify the means.
It was groundbreaking at the time mainly for taking the idea of costumed crimefighters utterly seriously, and examining what might drive people to do it, and what might result from it. For example, one character is scarred from his time in Vietnam. One is in it for the thrill. One is (was) in it out of a sense of 'somebody has to do it, and I'm more qualified by most, I guess.' One is utterly psychotic, a sort of 'stare at the abyss, the abyss stares back, I'm a monster to fight monsters, so regular folks don't have to know that there are monsters' sort.
Oh definately; I was giving a simplistic retort to a simplistic statement.
On the other hand, I know people who have put their kids in the hospital by taking 'low sodium cooking' too far.
Oh, and I'd not say 'that kind of food is a habit,' I'd say 'that kind of food is standard fare.' American eating habits both fascinate and fighten me.
The really funny part is that its not just a trademark case the same law that protects the red cross, 18 U.S.C. 706, prohibits the use of the mark by anyone else, the red cross doesn't have the legal power to licence that mark to anyone.
Mrrr? Wouldn't that be the "its duly authorized employees and agents" part in the bit of the law that you copied?
...Lost Odyssey for Xbox 360, North Amercian release, most certainly allows you to select the Japanese voice track with English subtitles. As does Blue Dragon, and, if I recall correctly, Enchanted Arms; in other words, all three JRPGs for the 360.
See, this is one of those correlation/causation fallacies.
Linux has fewer of these 'user blindly runs stupid shit' problems because, at the moment, it's only run by people who also know about that sort of thing.
If Linux was the everyday OS, it would have just as many idiots blindly typing in their root passwords on demand.
I've never understood the thousands of HOWTOs and install guides that say 'now, don't run this as root!' then preface damn near ever step with 'sudo and type in your root password.' There's not a whole lot of difference there.
And lets face it, if the user runs it, can it be considered a security failure on the OS part?
It's not Vista's fault that the user said 'Run SnowWhiteNailsDopey.scr.exe! Yes! Yes! Allow! Yes! I'm Sure! Yes! Yes! Don't Care That It's a Virus!'
Lets face it, if Vista didn't allow this, Slashdot would be running stories about how Big Bad Microsoft doesn't let users run programs on their own computers, that DRM watches you pee, and so on.
Also, if your schema is complex enough, or even if the data itself is complex enough, the people who want the queries might not have the knowledge to actually pull meaningful data out of the system.
Now, that having been said, ''No!' is never a valid response, especially a 'No, MINE!' response, which is exactly what the OP gave.
'If we do that....' is certainly a valid response, or 'The reservations I have about that request are....' is certainly a valid response, 'That's against best practices; this, this and that are considered bad ideas by the industry, for the following reasons...' or even 'that's against standard practices, because...' are always good ones, too.
I'd amend that to 'These are Customs guys; minimum wage, and probably have to buy their own uniforms, too. They're not going to have any idea what constitutes valuta or paydata, let alone what to do with it if they get it.'
Now, a lot of these techniques will help when some asshole grabs your laptop bag and runs while you're digging out some cash for the cabbie, admittedly...
That's rational, and logical. Therefore, for human beings, it isn't true.
The technical term, by the way, for what you're describing, is 'psychopath.'
I'll bet that if you got you hands on the proceedures book for this position, you'd find something which immediately puts an RSO who actually has to push the button on a manned flight on medical leave, and that if/when he recovers, he's never put into the RSO position again.
Sex
ALL the above are DRM-free sources of entertainment.
Overall, I agree with you, but if you really and honestly believe that sex doesn't involve digital rights management, try slipping your SO the shocker.
Too bloody bad. "On call" means "I need to be available," not "I get to inconvenience everybody around me so I can get around a requirement of the job I chose."
And yes, I'm an "on call" sort myself. And sometimes, that means I don't get to go out and do things. Boo hoo, that's kind of the point.
Re:*SPOILER ALERT* in my reply
on
Iron Man Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
In one of the Ultimates comics, somebody asks Fury who he'd want to play him in the movie. He replies 'Samuel L. Jackson.'
Slashdot Mirror
No. The disc I'm referring to is the T2 Ultimate Edition, released August 29 2000, UPC 1223610967b. It was one of the first actual releases (yes, the spec for DVD Video has always allowed for dsdl; that doesn't mean that all the early players could actually handle it.)
And I didn't say 'dual layer,' I said 'dual-sided, dual layered.' DVD-18.
Between the incompatibility and the outcry over disc art, it was almost immediately re-issued with two ssdl discs (two DVD-9s, in other words).
Don't forget that what the Market wants isn't often what you'd think.
Back in the day, when we were still heady from defeating DivX (the physical disc, not what's now become Xvid) and still bandied about terms like 'day-and-date,' the Terminator 2 Ultimate DVD was released, in a rather nifty metal slipcover.
It was one of the first major DVDs released on the double-sided, dual-layer format. There were two complaints:
1: Older players couldn't deal with it.
2: NO DISC ART!
Actually, dead-ended sararimen used to get moved to a windowed office; the Japanese term for them translates as 'beside the window tribe.'
Japanese companies have gotten a lot less reticent about firing people, these days.
Captain Power was awesome. Probably because a good chunk of it was written by Babylon 5 guy, who's name I'm not going to even try to write, and can't be bothered to look up.
Quite a few of the original stories could be refilmed today with very little change and still hold up.
Captain Power was by no means a kid show.
Yup yup. I have, literally, stacks of OOP RPG books, video games going back all the way to the C64 era, and so on, that I can simply no longer be bothered to put on Ebay.
If Google were to create an auction type site, I'd be there the very next day.
Well, it can be damn handy when there's two large landmasses connected by a single square; your very own Panama Canal.
See Asimov's very own The Evitable Conflict, wherein the robots decide that you can logically support harming a few for the greater good of the many.
You notice in I, Robot the Movie that the robots only instigate harm towards humans who are actively and violently resisting, or to humans who are in a position to directly threaten the 'Master Plan.' By the robot's logic, not subjugating the humans will lead to massive harm; thus, by not harming specific humans, they are knowingly allowing harm to come to many other humans.
Or Civilization: Call To Power, where the developers tried to explain away bronze age warriors downing stealth bombers as 'hypnotic phalanxes.'
In the original Civilization, as well, veteran spearmen, in a city on a mountain, with city walls, could often hold off battleships. Civ3 had some problems as well, as pointed out.
If you compare Sonny to Daneel, rather than the giant mainframe to Daneel, it makes a bit more sense; the sense I got at the end of the movie was that Sonny was going to try to separate the Robots from humans, and form a separate society.
The Three Laws *did* work. The giant robot brain just figured out that Humanity's biggest threat was...itself. And a Robot Cannot Through Inaction Allow Harm To Come To A Human. Hence, Humans must be forcibly rendered unable to harm one another.
Quite honestly, all of Asimov's robot books can be distilled down to One Law: The Law of Unintended Consequences. The stories were all about figuring out why a robot was acting in a given way, based on the Three Laws.
Not really a five second summary, but without trying to give much away: Watchmen is the story of a group of costumed vigilantes (only one has real 'super powers,' and these powers cause him to become very detached by humanity indeed) who, while trying to track down a suspected murderer, who seems to be killing memebers of their group, stumbles across a plot by one of their own to do something terrible; but which will potentially result in something wonderful. They each, then, have to decide if the ends justify the means.
It was groundbreaking at the time mainly for taking the idea of costumed crimefighters utterly seriously, and examining what might drive people to do it, and what might result from it. For example, one character is scarred from his time in Vietnam. One is in it for the thrill. One is (was) in it out of a sense of 'somebody has to do it, and I'm more qualified by most, I guess.' One is utterly psychotic, a sort of 'stare at the abyss, the abyss stares back, I'm a monster to fight monsters, so regular folks don't have to know that there are monsters' sort.
Oh definately; I was giving a simplistic retort to a simplistic statement.
On the other hand, I know people who have put their kids in the hospital by taking 'low sodium cooking' too far.
Oh, and I'd not say 'that kind of food is a habit,' I'd say 'that kind of food is standard fare.' American eating habits both fascinate and fighten me.
More sodium just means drink more water.
Strap on some wrist weights and get even more out of it.
Mrrr? Wouldn't that be the "its duly authorized employees and agents" part in the bit of the law that you copied?
...Lost Odyssey for Xbox 360, North Amercian release, most certainly allows you to select the Japanese voice track with English subtitles. As does Blue Dragon, and, if I recall correctly, Enchanted Arms; in other words, all three JRPGs for the 360.
See, this is one of those correlation/causation fallacies.
Linux has fewer of these 'user blindly runs stupid shit' problems because, at the moment, it's only run by people who also know about that sort of thing.
If Linux was the everyday OS, it would have just as many idiots blindly typing in their root passwords on demand.
I've never understood the thousands of HOWTOs and install guides that say 'now, don't run this as root!' then preface damn near ever step with 'sudo and type in your root password.' There's not a whole lot of difference there.
And lets face it, if the user runs it, can it be considered a security failure on the OS part?
It's not Vista's fault that the user said 'Run SnowWhiteNailsDopey.scr.exe! Yes! Yes! Allow! Yes! I'm Sure! Yes! Yes! Don't Care That It's a Virus!'
Lets face it, if Vista didn't allow this, Slashdot would be running stories about how Big Bad Microsoft doesn't let users run programs on their own computers, that DRM watches you pee, and so on.
Also, if your schema is complex enough, or even if the data itself is complex enough, the people who want the queries might not have the knowledge to actually pull meaningful data out of the system.
Now, that having been said, ''No!' is never a valid response, especially a 'No, MINE!' response, which is exactly what the OP gave.
'If we do that....' is certainly a valid response, or 'The reservations I have about that request are....' is certainly a valid response, 'That's against best practices; this, this and that are considered bad ideas by the industry, for the following reasons...' or even 'that's against standard practices, because...' are always good ones, too.
I'd amend that to 'These are Customs guys; minimum wage, and probably have to buy their own uniforms, too. They're not going to have any idea what constitutes valuta or paydata, let alone what to do with it if they get it.'
Now, a lot of these techniques will help when some asshole grabs your laptop bag and runs while you're digging out some cash for the cabbie, admittedly...
'Information Wants To Be Free' doesn't mean you get to abduct it and release it into the wild.
That's rational, and logical. Therefore, for human beings, it isn't true.
The technical term, by the way, for what you're describing, is 'psychopath.'
I'll bet that if you got you hands on the proceedures book for this position, you'd find something which immediately puts an RSO who actually has to push the button on a manned flight on medical leave, and that if/when he recovers, he's never put into the RSO position again.
Overall, I agree with you, but if you really and honestly believe that sex doesn't involve digital rights management, try slipping your SO the shocker.
Too bloody bad. "On call" means "I need to be available," not "I get to inconvenience everybody around me so I can get around a requirement of the job I chose."
And yes, I'm an "on call" sort myself. And sometimes, that means I don't get to go out and do things. Boo hoo, that's kind of the point.
In one of the Ultimates comics, somebody asks Fury who he'd want to play him in the movie. He replies 'Samuel L. Jackson.'