So what's your point? The poster I was responding to said he couldn't believe people would act that way. I, in contrast can. I don't find it very hard to believe that college age kids would act like that at all, as, IMHO (and I was no better at the time and never suggested I was), most people that age are self-absorbed and most people used to city-life (as I took these characters to be, an occasional hike in the woods does not make you a "woodsman"), would not behave in a very rational fashion and would very easily get lost....(a point which you seem to agree with.)
So again I ask, what's your point? Are you able to imagine 3 people this age acting like this or not? I can also imagine 3 "adults" acting like this as well, but since that wasn't what was being discussed, I didn't feel this overwhelming need to point it out. The urge to point out the flaws in one group (ie adults) to mitigate or rationalize the flaws in another (ie college kids) is not a form of debate that I use much. It's pointless and detracts from the orginal topic.
So what's your point? The poster I was responding to said he couldn't believe people would act that way. I, in contrast can. I don't find it very hard to believe that college age kids would act like that at all, as, IMHO (and I was no better at the time and never suggested I was), most people that age are self-absorbed and most people used to city-life (as I took these characters to be, an occasional hike in the woods does not make you a "woodsman"), would not behave in a very rational fashion and would very easily get lost....(a point which you seem to agree with.)
So again I ask, what's your point? Are you able to imagine 3 people this age acting like this or not?
While a sizable percentage of people might just not like this film..due to, whatever, camera usage, plot, etc, etc., at least they have a valid complaint. They went, they experienced, they made their judgement. That's good, that's what is supposed to happen. The problem I see is all of the non-thinkers out there who go to movies and *expect* the movie to live up to their preconceived notions of it's scariness, funniness or coolness. This attitude of "It didn't live up to the hype." Well DUH! NOTHING lives up to it's hype, get over it moron, and next time don't be such a frickin sheep to buy into the "BEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME!" headlines.
People who walk into movies with preconceived notions on the "hype" are bound to lead a bitter and disappointed life. These are the same type of people who sit at home and complain that their favorite laundry detergent doesn't get their clothes "100% BRIGHTER THAN THE LEADING BRANDS!!"
...One of the many things that bugged me was the attitude of the 3 kids. Since this was supposed to be a "realistic" movie, I expected them to act and behave in a rational way. But, after a while they just came across as boorish, annoying kids with no survival skills in face of a daunting situation.
This is what made the movie believable for me. I find most kids these days to be boorish and annoying, and I really don't expect them to act like much more than driveling idiots when confronted by a situation any tougher then sneaking a sip of Daddy's beer from the fridge or perhaps getting lost on the way to the mall.
...whats wrong with a person legally owning guns or explosives ?..
Because these same people that you want to own guns and explosives are also the one's that make pro-wrestling one of the most watched programs on TV and keep buying Budweiser by the truckload.
The combination of that and explosives frightens the bejeezes out of me.
Re:absolutely the worst movie ever
on
Lo-Tech Cinema
·
· Score: 1
Whose fault is it that the whole "expectation" game gets played anyway?
Stop being led around by the big marketing hook in your nose. Watch a movie and judge it on it's own merits, not what the public (who, by the way have made wrestling shows some of the most popular on TV, so fuck them anyway), media and marketing machines tell you to.
If you saw the movie and didn't like it as a matter of taste, that's fine, not everyone is going to like the same things. But if you dislike it for failing to live up to your *expectations*, then you're an idiot for playing that game in the first place. Plus, you are doomed to be disappointed by everything, since expectations are seldom met in this day and age.
The occupation powers signed an agreement in 1990 that relinquished their rights as wartime victors and occupiers. This was done to allow the re-unification of Germany to proceed.
Oh yes..you are soooo oppressed. Why don't you take daddy and mommy's car down to the local suburban mall and after using their credit card to buy yourself some new, fly, baggy-ass jeans, you could then start some sort of protest movement
While I have no problem with allowing parents to make the decision on what their kids can and cannot see, I do have a problem with the fact that this mother just wanted to drop them off and abrogated her responsibility as a parent to some stranger.
If foul-mouthed cartoons are such an important part of her kid's life, she sure as hell can be expected to spend 2 hours with the little brat and accompany him herself.
Don't get me wrong, I laughed through the entire movie, and if I had a teenage child I would probably have taken her/him, but I'd be damned if I'd let some stranger being the one to explain some of the more *ahem* sensitive parts of the movie. I loved the audience's reaction to Mr. Garrett's line...
"I don't trust anything that bleeds for 5 days straight and doesn't die."
.
You could here the entire theater draw in their breathe and pause for about 2 seconds on that one.
Please tell me what wrong with movie chains telling parents that they actually have to spend time with their kids if they want to allow them to see this movie. And don't give me any of the bleeding heart, single parent crap. Mommie doesn't work 24/7, she could have found the time. I guess plopping her fat ass down on the couch after work to watch re-runs of Friends or the latest on JFK Jr.is more important.
Hmm, it was an interesting article. I didn't agree with him totally though, and it seems he uses words like "fuck" just for shock value. But I do agree more with him more than most.
By my count he used the word "fuck" or "fucking" one time. Or are you just speaking of his style in general?
While I agree with you that it will be next to impossible to get rid of every single flamer in any group, that fact does not mean we should sit one our hands an do nothing. Even getting 30% of the flamers to give it a rest is a step in the right direction.
1) RAID 0 can either be striping, doing writes a chunk at a time to each disk in the stripe set, or concatenation, which is slapping multiple disks together to make one big virtual disk and then writing so you fill up the disks in sequence.
2) RAID 5 can only tolerate losing 1 disk in its set. The volume can continue in "degraded" mode where for every read off of the volume, the system has to calculate the parity bit to make up for the lost disk. If you throw in one hot spare you could lose 2 disks total. (The hot spare takes over for the 1st disk to go..the volume needs a period of time to sync the data/parity to it, but then continues normally. You can then lose 1 more disk..this will put you in "degraded" mode.)
3) I'm not sure where you've gotten the impression that RAID 5 is excellent for performance. Calculating parity bits for *every* read is the antithesis of performance. RAID 5 (or "poor man's mirroring") is good for systems that need the data redundancy but cannot afford the cost of doubling their disk usage for mirroring. However, no compentent SysAdmin would use the terms "performance" and "RAID 5" in the same sentence.
"...2) You've set foot in four states at the same time (Wyoming, Arizona, Colorado, and Utah)? Feh! I can do all fifty, AND have it legally accurate in a court of law...."
Well given the fact that Wyoming doesn't come close to bordering Arizona I'd say that's a much more impressive feat than yours. (Hint: The Four Corners you are referring to are Colorado, Arizona, Utah and, New Mexico.)
This message brought to you by the Society of Better Map Reading.
No..I think you missed his point on the "good with the bad"...
Good...by writing Open Source Software you can take pride in the fact that you are contributing something back. You can pat yourself on the back and give yourself an "Attaboy!" for the fact that you are helping to make proprietary and closed source software a thing of the past.
Bad...by using the GPL license you are agreeing to letting other people/companies take your software and modify it, redistribute it and basically take your work with little or no effort on their part.
That being said, I disagree with your original statement that RedHat does nothing to give back to the community. As they employ a certain number of hard-core hackers who in turn release ALL of their work under the GPL I find your ignorant statement disturbing but about par for the course for someone who tries to disparage a computer users experience (your pithy 5 year comment) when you in fact have absolutely no idea who or what you are talking about. For all you know that could be Dennis Ritchie himself in disguise.
NFL Sunday Ticket is a service of DirectTV only. They are the ones who lock the NFL into exclusive agreements to service only their customers. I see that slowly changing as DishNetwork's subscriber base keeps growing at the rate it is.
Besides, the only team you really need to see is the Vikings and since they are a top NFC team..Fox broadcasts most of their games! Make sure you get all of the network feeds you can and you can catch most top-name games.
"...If they were really pulling it out of good taste, and didn't want to show it, then why did it air in Canada?..."
Well..one of the better reasons that has been brought to my attention is that Canadians have no taste in the first place. So there really isn't anything to offend there.
I still fail to see how setting a price on a product you spent time/effort/money to produce is *evil* just because every begger on the street can't afford to pay the price you have set.
There is no law that forces people to buy these products. If they can't afford them, they should do without until they can. Even if some budding Linus Torvalds was out there just itching to get that fancy new compiler, but gee...mommy and daddy won't ante up for it...it does not make the company who produced it evil. The kid is also not morally justified in bootlegging it. He was not born with a magical "Software Bill of Rights" that entitles him to all the latest and greatest games and toys in life.
Your socio-economic status in life does not entitle you to ignore IP laws.
This is what I've been trying to point out over and over....there are nothing but questions here. rpm-only? Who knows? Will it work with Debian? Who knows? Does this mean you can install it on other platforms and that metroworks will only *support* (ie...answer questions...fix bugs..etc., etc.) for RedHat? Again no one knows.
The one thing I do know though is that there are plenty of idiots willing to speculate and bash and generally work themselves into a froth when they have little to no *facts* on the reality of the situation.
And why are people bashing RedHat for anyway? Metroworks is the one making their product one-distro only...christ, like RedHat should say "gee...no, please don't place our company logo prominantly on your package. Think of SuSe's feelings! Let's have a group hug instead!"
"...the redhat corporation had to make a choise bettween rasterman and the un-named manager and the obvously chose the manager..."
And you are basing this profound statement on what exactly? Do you have some sort of insider info on how this thing went down? Or, more likely, do you just like stickin it to da Man? Really going out on a political limb there aren't you?
At no point in this whole tabloid mess going on have we heard what exactly transpired between the manager and Raster. All we have are the disjointed ramblings of a pissed-off former employee. You have absolutely no idea what RedHat's corporate level involvement in this whole mess is.
How did RedHat make a big mistake? It was Raster who quit...RedHat didn't fire him. Is it a loss for RedHat? Most assuredly...but, unless Raster himself comes forward to outline the steps he took to address his problem with his superior (ie. private meeting, greivence procedures..etc, etc), how do we know that this manager and Raster simply did not get along and the moment the manager made a stupid comment, or slipped up (newflash folks, otherwise decent people can and will make mistakes), Raster just used it as an excuse to bolt?
We are seeing one side of the story here people, and while one can laud Raster for standing up for the E users, he was playing in a completely different world than the grade school sandbox where one can pick up their toys and leave if Johnny doesn't play nice, and he should have acted like it. It would have been far better if there was at least an attempt at a understanding of the situation...and maybe there was, it's just no one who knows is talking about it.
Why do you decry the media in their attempts to say who *is* a geek...then turn around and try to define who *isn't* a geek?
While I would agree with you that *all* people who liked the Matrix are not geeks...your attempt to then distance *your* definition of geekdom away from the Columbine shooters makes you guilty of the same geek profiling you are condemning.
How do you *know* that the Columbine shooters weren't geeks? As I find it highly doubtful that you knew the two boys personally, I find your conclusions, based on media portrayals, suspect at best. The fact that your pre-conceived notions of geekdom do not jibe with the actions of the Columbine shooters has absolutely nothing to do with anything. The media can't pigeonhole geeks, to be sure..but, then again, self-proclaimed *geeks* cannot do it either.
Slashdot Mirror
So what's your point? The poster I was responding to said he couldn't believe people would act that way. I, in contrast can. I don't find it very hard to believe that college age kids would act like that at all, as, IMHO (and I was no better at the time and never suggested I was), most people that age are self-absorbed and most people used to city-life (as I took these characters to be, an occasional hike in the woods does not make you a "woodsman"), would not behave in a very rational fashion and would very easily get lost....(a point which you seem to agree with.)
So again I ask, what's your point? Are you able to imagine 3 people this age acting like this or not? I can also imagine 3 "adults" acting like this as well, but since that wasn't what was being discussed, I didn't feel this overwhelming need to point it out. The urge to point out the flaws in one group (ie adults) to mitigate or rationalize the flaws in another (ie college kids) is not a form of debate that I use much. It's pointless and detracts from the orginal topic.
So what's your point? The poster I was responding to said he couldn't believe people would act that way. I, in contrast can. I don't find it very hard to believe that college age kids would act like that at all, as, IMHO (and I was no better at the time and never suggested I was), most people that age are self-absorbed and most people used to city-life (as I took these characters to be, an occasional hike in the woods does not make you a "woodsman"), would not behave in a very rational fashion and would very easily get lost....(a point which you seem to agree with.)
So again I ask, what's your point? Are you able to imagine 3 people this age acting like this or not?
While a sizable percentage of people might just not like this film..due to, whatever, camera usage, plot, etc, etc., at least they have a valid complaint. They went, they experienced, they made their judgement. That's good, that's what is supposed to happen. The problem I see is all of the non-thinkers out there who go to movies and *expect* the movie to live up to their preconceived notions of it's scariness, funniness or coolness. This attitude of "It didn't live up to the hype." Well DUH! NOTHING lives up to it's hype, get over it moron, and next time don't be such a frickin sheep to buy into the "BEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME!" headlines.
People who walk into movies with preconceived notions on the "hype" are bound to lead a bitter and disappointed life. These are the same type of people who sit at home and complain that their favorite laundry detergent doesn't get their clothes "100% BRIGHTER THAN THE LEADING BRANDS!!"
Expectations...they'll be the death of us yet.
This is what made the movie believable for me. I find most kids these days to be boorish and annoying, and I really don't expect them to act like much more than driveling idiots when confronted by a situation any tougher then sneaking a sip of Daddy's beer from the fridge or perhaps getting lost on the way to the mall.
Don't know what due process is do you AC? Hint...5th amendment...mitnick had it, he pled guilty.
Because these same people that you want to own guns and explosives are also the one's that make pro-wrestling one of the most watched programs on TV and keep buying Budweiser by the truckload.
The combination of that and explosives frightens the bejeezes out of me.
Whose fault is it that the whole "expectation" game gets played anyway?
Stop being led around by the big marketing hook in your nose. Watch a movie and judge it on it's own merits, not what the public (who, by the way have made wrestling shows some of the most popular on TV, so fuck them anyway), media and marketing machines tell you to.
If you saw the movie and didn't like it as a matter of taste, that's fine, not everyone is going to like the same things. But if you dislike it for failing to live up to your *expectations*, then you're an idiot for playing that game in the first place. Plus, you are doomed to be disappointed by everything, since expectations are seldom met in this day and age.
No..but if you pose as the phone repair man to get my phone number it most certainly is.
Now, the other side of the coin, ie. what kind of stupid idiot let's themselves be fooled by such a ruse, is an entirely different discussion.
The occupation powers signed an agreement in 1990 that relinquished their rights as wartime victors and occupiers. This was done to allow the re-unification of Germany to proceed.
Oh yes..you are soooo oppressed. Why don't you take daddy and mommy's car down to the local suburban mall and after using their credit card to buy yourself some new, fly, baggy-ass jeans, you could then start some sort of protest movement
Help Help..I'm being oppressed!
When was the last time you saw a room full of women stand up when a man entered the room?
Just wondering
While I have no problem with allowing parents to make the decision on what their kids can and cannot see, I do have a problem with the fact that this mother just wanted to drop them off and abrogated her responsibility as a parent to some stranger.
If foul-mouthed cartoons are such an important part of her kid's life, she sure as hell can be expected to spend 2 hours with the little brat and accompany him herself.
Don't get me wrong, I laughed through the entire movie, and if I had a teenage child I would probably have taken her/him, but I'd be damned if I'd let some stranger being the one to explain some of the more *ahem* sensitive parts of the movie. I loved the audience's reaction to Mr. Garrett's line...
.You could here the entire theater draw in their breathe and pause for about 2 seconds on that one.
Please tell me what wrong with movie chains telling parents that they actually have to spend time with their kids if they want to allow them to see this movie. And don't give me any of the bleeding heart, single parent crap. Mommie doesn't work 24/7, she could have found the time. I guess plopping her fat ass down on the couch after work to watch re-runs of Friends or the latest on JFK Jr.is more important.
By my count he used the word "fuck" or "fucking" one time. Or are you just speaking of his style in general?
Just wondering.
While I agree with you that it will be next to impossible to get rid of every single flamer in any group, that fact does not mean we should sit one our hands an do nothing. Even getting 30% of the flamers to give it a rest is a step in the right direction.
Couple of corrections:
1) RAID 0 can either be striping, doing writes a chunk at a time to each disk in the stripe set, or concatenation, which is slapping multiple disks together to make one big virtual disk and then writing so you fill up the disks in sequence.
2) RAID 5 can only tolerate losing 1 disk in its set. The volume can continue in "degraded" mode where for every read off of the volume, the system has to calculate the parity bit to make up for the lost disk. If you throw in one hot spare you could lose 2 disks total. (The hot spare takes over for the 1st disk to go..the volume needs a period of time to sync the data/parity to it, but then continues normally. You can then lose 1 more disk..this will put you in "degraded" mode.)
3) I'm not sure where you've gotten the impression that RAID 5 is excellent for performance. Calculating parity bits for *every* read is the antithesis of performance. RAID 5 (or "poor man's mirroring") is good for systems that need the data redundancy but cannot afford the cost of doubling their disk usage for mirroring. However, no compentent SysAdmin would use the terms "performance" and "RAID 5" in the same sentence.
Well given the fact that Wyoming doesn't come close to bordering Arizona I'd say that's a much more impressive feat than yours. (Hint: The Four Corners you are referring to are Colorado, Arizona, Utah and, New Mexico.)
This message brought to you by the Society of Better Map Reading.
No..I think you missed his point on the "good with the bad"...
Good...by writing Open Source Software you can take pride in the fact that you are contributing something back. You can pat yourself on the back and give yourself an "Attaboy!" for the fact that you are helping to make proprietary and closed source software a thing of the past.
Bad...by using the GPL license you are agreeing to letting other people/companies take your software and modify it, redistribute it and basically take your work with little or no effort on their part.
That being said, I disagree with your original statement that RedHat does nothing to give back to the community. As they employ a certain number of hard-core hackers who in turn release ALL of their work under the GPL I find your ignorant statement disturbing but about par for the course for someone who tries to disparage a computer users experience (your pithy 5 year comment) when you in fact have absolutely no idea who or what you are talking about. For all you know that could be Dennis Ritchie himself in disguise.
NFL Sunday Ticket is a service of DirectTV only. They are the ones who lock the NFL into exclusive agreements to service only their customers. I see that slowly changing as DishNetwork's subscriber base keeps growing at the rate it is.
Besides, the only team you really need to see is the Vikings and since they are a top NFC team..Fox broadcasts most of their games! Make sure you get all of the network feeds you can and you can catch most top-name games.
Well..one of the better reasons that has been brought to my attention is that Canadians have no taste in the first place. So there really isn't anything to offend there.
Disagree? Ever seen Degrassi Junior High?
P.S. this was humor.
I still fail to see how setting a price on a product you spent time/effort/money to produce is *evil* just because every begger on the street can't afford to pay the price you have set.
There is no law that forces people to buy these products. If they can't afford them, they should do without until they can. Even if some budding Linus Torvalds was out there just itching to get that fancy new compiler, but gee...mommy and daddy won't ante up for it...it does not make the company who produced it evil. The kid is also not morally justified in bootlegging it. He was not born with a magical "Software Bill of Rights" that entitles him to all the latest and greatest games and toys in life.
Your socio-economic status in life does not entitle you to ignore IP laws.
I usually hate to write the "Me too!" type posts...but damn...your post rocked!
That is the attitude that the Linux community needs...not this..."look at evil company X...they aren't supporting *my* distro...they suck!"
Preach on Brother!
This is what I've been trying to point out over and over....there are nothing but questions here. rpm-only? Who knows? Will it work with Debian? Who knows? Does this mean you can install it on other platforms and that metroworks will only *support* (ie...answer questions...fix bugs..etc., etc.) for RedHat? Again no one knows.
The one thing I do know though is that there are plenty of idiots willing to speculate and bash and generally work themselves into a froth when they have little to no *facts* on the reality of the situation.
And why are people bashing RedHat for anyway? Metroworks is the one making their product one-distro only...christ, like RedHat should say "gee...no, please don't place our company logo prominantly on your package. Think of SuSe's feelings! Let's have a group hug instead!"
And you are basing this profound statement on what exactly? Do you have some sort of insider info on how this thing went down? Or, more likely, do you just like stickin it to da Man? Really going out on a political limb there aren't you?
At no point in this whole tabloid mess going on have we heard what exactly transpired between the manager and Raster. All we have are the disjointed ramblings of a pissed-off former employee. You have absolutely no idea what RedHat's corporate level involvement in this whole mess is.
This knee-jerk hero worship is gettting very old.
How did RedHat make a big mistake? It was Raster who quit...RedHat didn't fire him. Is it a loss for RedHat? Most assuredly...but, unless Raster himself comes forward to outline the steps he took to address his problem with his superior (ie. private meeting, greivence procedures..etc, etc), how do we know that this manager and Raster simply did not get along and the moment the manager made a stupid comment, or slipped up (newflash folks, otherwise decent people can and will make mistakes), Raster just used it as an excuse to bolt?
We are seeing one side of the story here people, and while one can laud Raster for standing up for the E users, he was playing in a completely different world than the grade school sandbox where one can pick up their toys and leave if Johnny doesn't play nice, and he should have acted like it. It would have been far better if there was at least an attempt at a understanding of the situation...and maybe there was, it's just no one who knows is talking about it.
Why do you decry the media in their attempts to say who *is* a geek...then turn around and try to define who *isn't* a geek?
While I would agree with you that *all* people who liked the Matrix are not geeks...your attempt to then distance *your* definition of geekdom away from the Columbine shooters makes you guilty of the same geek profiling you are condemning.
How do you *know* that the Columbine shooters weren't geeks? As I find it highly doubtful that you knew the two boys personally, I find your conclusions, based on media portrayals, suspect at best. The fact that your pre-conceived notions of geekdom do not jibe with the actions of the Columbine shooters has absolutely nothing to do with anything. The media can't pigeonhole geeks, to be sure..but, then again, self-proclaimed *geeks* cannot do it either.