I took a class called, "Biology for Non-Majors," and I was really upset because it was all about biology. I even told the professor, "Look, why are you trying to teach biology? I'm a non-major!"
This isn't a US/UK thing. It's about knowing your market.
A lot of the films that get rated 15 over there get rated R over here, since we don't really have an equivalent for a 15 rating. We probably should, though. There's a fairly big difference between "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre," but you wouldn't know it from looking at our ratings.
If you look at the 4 top-grossing films in Britain that are rated R over here, you'll see that all of them (The Full Monty, the Bridget Jones movies, Love Actually) are comedies set in England. And those aren't really at the top. Lesson: if you want to make a rated R film that does well in the UK, make it about the quirky romantic lives of British people.
(Not that I'm judging. The Passion of the Christ is our top grossing R-rated film, sadly.)
I was trying to find out what the highest-grossing rated 18 film is in Britain, but I get tired of scrolling down the Wikipedia page looking for films that are rated R over here and checking them in IMDB. Lesson: you're damn straight it's something to worry about at the box office, there's no way Verbinski could get "Pirates of the Caribbean"-level box office receipts no matter how good it was, either in the US, the UK, or anywhere else.
What is the world coming to? The discussion is about the shock value of mutilated bits of human flesh exploding across your computer monitor in a massive display of senseless carnage. AC tries to troll said discussion by posting link to video of sex between consenting adults.
That means that there is no point in ousting its leaders
I don't think that's necessarily accurate. It may prove to be the case, but it's certainly not a foregone conclusion.
It's a risk/reward structure. People participate in Anonymous, they get some sort of ideological or social reward for it, and they view their risk as being fairly minimal. (WE ARE ANONYMOUS. YOU CAN'T CATCH US. BLAH DEE FUCKING BLAH.) It's entirely reasonable to posit that there is a relatively small group of die-hard Anonymous types, who are ideologically driven to...mayhem, for whatever reason. And that there's a much larger group of sheep in the flock, who are either attached to a particular social milieu or just think DDoSing makes them cool. The way that Anonymous works (for the moment, at least), it needs some sort of critical mass of participation. So if you're the Feds, you increase the risk of participation, you make some high-profile convictions, then you grin and say, "Hey, dude, you're next." You won't scare off the wolves, but the sheep might think twice if they're actually putting their asses on the line...for something as meaningless as bringing down the MasterCard website.
And it's not just about chipping away at the morale of the extant Anonymous. The point is to spread FUD. Anonymous is "recruiting." Setting an example may curb that growth.
Of course, this sort of thing doesn't always work. (See, the drug war, for instance, or even the *AA's attempts at curbing file-sharing.) The difference, I think, is that the incentives are relatively soft compared to the punishments that the Justice Department is capable of doling out. The anarcho-lunatics will keep doing what they're doing, which is more or less okay, because without massive participation Anonymous is toothless.
Well, thanks for the review. I've been wanting to start doing some hobby electronics for some time now; haven't been sure how to start with it. A few years ago, I'm sure I would have started with something like a PIC, but my fear is that I'd spend my short supply of dollars on something and then discover that I'm missing a half-dozen parts even before I start screwing around with it.
My big problem is that this might end up breaking addons that don't need to be broken. Firefox install manifests allow extension-writers to specify the maximum version of the browser that the addon supports. From using FF4, it seems that a lot of addon authors will just select the current major version of Firefox---in this case, Firefox 3---as the "maximum supported version." Sure, that makes a lot of sense from their perspective, since when the addon was written the author had no idea whether it would work on Firefox 4 or not, but it's rather annoying when you get a new version of the browser and the author hasn't updated the addon.
Firefox obviously won't install the addon if its specified "max version" is lower than the version you're using. So I have a couple of addons that I use in Firefox 4, where I've had to manually change the "max version" to FF4. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. More to the point, it's kind of annoying to deal with, and I don't expect your Average Joe user to go around editing XML files just to see if it's possible that their favorite addon works.
If you start incrementing your version numbers more rapidly, it means a lot of addons are going to be out of date for anyone on the bleeding edge. Since the large variety of addons are really Firefox's best feature...I'm not sure how they plan to deal with that.
You know, you'd think that if you scoffed over them calling themselves "democratic," you might a little bit of skepticism toward their use of the "communist" label. Whatever China is---and I'm not saying I like them---but whatever they are, they haven't been communist for a while now.
Where in the world is it legal to not have car insurance? I don't care if you were genetically engineered in a secret government lab to be the ultimate safe driver, you sure as shit better have insurance if you're on the same road as me.
Most of my friends are big video game players. A number of them are nutso drivers. We all used to play Mario Kart when we were 14, one friend in particular would always win. Great reflexes, totally twitch, and when he turned 16, he took to driving a real car like it was a game.
I don't remember how many cars he's crashed. He's mellowed out on the road over the years, as hyper-aggressive teen drivers tend to do when they hit their twenties, but I still get nervous when I see him near a car.
He's technically proficient with a vehicle. Yes, he can maneuver out of a tricky situation much better than I can. On the other hand, he's more likely to put himself in a tricky situation than anyone I've ever met. He would try to min-max his driving, slam on the brakes not a second later than he needed to, slow down only at the brink of an accident, and tailgate like crazy. These are all very good things to do in Mario Kart. In the highway, you've probably seen someone like him: that maniac who zooms past you when you're already going 10 over, swerves a foot in front of you to avoid rear-ending a semi, and vanishes on the horizon.
1) Your chances of finding "the one" out of any given sample of human beings, even selecting for particularly "compatible" traits, is very low 2) Sites like OkCupid need their customers to find people who are, at the very least, passable by whatever their standards are in order to maintain that customer base 3) Nobody has written a matching algorithm so good that, "By golly, we're such good matchmakers, we're putting ourselves out of business!" And if they did, it wouldn't put them out of business, it would just increase their cachet and get a lot of people on the site by word-of-mouth....I'd say you're full of crap.
Slashdot Mirror
I took a class called, "Biology for Non-Majors," and I was really upset because it was all about biology. I even told the professor, "Look, why are you trying to teach biology? I'm a non-major!"
This isn't a US/UK thing. It's about knowing your market.
A lot of the films that get rated 15 over there get rated R over here, since we don't really have an equivalent for a 15 rating. We probably should, though. There's a fairly big difference between "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre," but you wouldn't know it from looking at our ratings.
If you look at the 4 top-grossing films in Britain that are rated R over here, you'll see that all of them (The Full Monty, the Bridget Jones movies, Love Actually) are comedies set in England. And those aren't really at the top. Lesson: if you want to make a rated R film that does well in the UK, make it about the quirky romantic lives of British people.
(Not that I'm judging. The Passion of the Christ is our top grossing R-rated film, sadly.)
I was trying to find out what the highest-grossing rated 18 film is in Britain, but I get tired of scrolling down the Wikipedia page looking for films that are rated R over here and checking them in IMDB. Lesson: you're damn straight it's something to worry about at the box office, there's no way Verbinski could get "Pirates of the Caribbean"-level box office receipts no matter how good it was, either in the US, the UK, or anywhere else.
What is the world coming to? The discussion is about the shock value of mutilated bits of human flesh exploding across your computer monitor in a massive display of senseless carnage. AC tries to troll said discussion by posting link to video of sex between consenting adults.
We are a fucked-up people.
That means that there is no point in ousting its leaders
I don't think that's necessarily accurate. It may prove to be the case, but it's certainly not a foregone conclusion.
It's a risk/reward structure. People participate in Anonymous, they get some sort of ideological or social reward for it, and they view their risk as being fairly minimal. (WE ARE ANONYMOUS. YOU CAN'T CATCH US. BLAH DEE FUCKING BLAH.) It's entirely reasonable to posit that there is a relatively small group of die-hard Anonymous types, who are ideologically driven to...mayhem, for whatever reason. And that there's a much larger group of sheep in the flock, who are either attached to a particular social milieu or just think DDoSing makes them cool. The way that Anonymous works (for the moment, at least), it needs some sort of critical mass of participation. So if you're the Feds, you increase the risk of participation, you make some high-profile convictions, then you grin and say, "Hey, dude, you're next." You won't scare off the wolves, but the sheep might think twice if they're actually putting their asses on the line...for something as meaningless as bringing down the MasterCard website.
And it's not just about chipping away at the morale of the extant Anonymous. The point is to spread FUD. Anonymous is "recruiting." Setting an example may curb that growth.
Of course, this sort of thing doesn't always work. (See, the drug war, for instance, or even the *AA's attempts at curbing file-sharing.) The difference, I think, is that the incentives are relatively soft compared to the punishments that the Justice Department is capable of doling out. The anarcho-lunatics will keep doing what they're doing, which is more or less okay, because without massive participation Anonymous is toothless.
No, the point was never to ask, "do coffee shops have a legal right to ban Kindles from their businesses?", but rather, "should they?"
That's not the point.
Well, thanks for the review. I've been wanting to start doing some hobby electronics for some time now; haven't been sure how to start with it. A few years ago, I'm sure I would have started with something like a PIC, but my fear is that I'd spend my short supply of dollars on something and then discover that I'm missing a half-dozen parts even before I start screwing around with it.
You're thinking of the Americans.
/. is better than this!
[citation needed]
You must be new here.
The cake is a lie.
Wasn't sure what the process was. Figures. Writing and editing manifests is the opposite of fun.
My big problem is that this might end up breaking addons that don't need to be broken. Firefox install manifests allow extension-writers to specify the maximum version of the browser that the addon supports. From using FF4, it seems that a lot of addon authors will just select the current major version of Firefox---in this case, Firefox 3---as the "maximum supported version." Sure, that makes a lot of sense from their perspective, since when the addon was written the author had no idea whether it would work on Firefox 4 or not, but it's rather annoying when you get a new version of the browser and the author hasn't updated the addon.
Firefox obviously won't install the addon if its specified "max version" is lower than the version you're using. So I have a couple of addons that I use in Firefox 4, where I've had to manually change the "max version" to FF4. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. More to the point, it's kind of annoying to deal with, and I don't expect your Average Joe user to go around editing XML files just to see if it's possible that their favorite addon works.
If you start incrementing your version numbers more rapidly, it means a lot of addons are going to be out of date for anyone on the bleeding edge. Since the large variety of addons are really Firefox's best feature...I'm not sure how they plan to deal with that.
You're right, this isn't primarily a free speech issue, it's a due process issue. Which is arguably more important, although less well-defined.
Well, you could write him a check for his re-election campaign. I would but I'm broke.
I'm the CEO of Verizon Wireless. I'm intrigued by your idea. Just one question: how does your plan make us more money?
No, not just for political reasons, and not just for children. See the back and forth and censorship over World of Warcraft, for instance.
Okay, ignoring the obvious asshole troll factor, you do realize that evolution is not normative?
Okay, clearly you're thinking of somewhere that is not Texas.
You think China doesn't ban video games?
I was playing the version where I came in last. Which is every version. I'm not a very good video gamer. Evidently, because I tailgate in Mario Kart.
(I'm also not that great of a driver, but at least I'm not a maniac.)
Aww, your shell scripts don't work in my Cygwin terminal. :-(
You know, you'd think that if you scoffed over them calling themselves "democratic," you might a little bit of skepticism toward their use of the "communist" label. Whatever China is---and I'm not saying I like them---but whatever they are, they haven't been communist for a while now.
I think you think I said something that I didn't say.
have never had car insurance
Where in the world is it legal to not have car insurance? I don't care if you were genetically engineered in a secret government lab to be the ultimate safe driver, you sure as shit better have insurance if you're on the same road as me.
Most of my friends are big video game players. A number of them are nutso drivers. We all used to play Mario Kart when we were 14, one friend in particular would always win. Great reflexes, totally twitch, and when he turned 16, he took to driving a real car like it was a game.
I don't remember how many cars he's crashed. He's mellowed out on the road over the years, as hyper-aggressive teen drivers tend to do when they hit their twenties, but I still get nervous when I see him near a car.
He's technically proficient with a vehicle. Yes, he can maneuver out of a tricky situation much better than I can. On the other hand, he's more likely to put himself in a tricky situation than anyone I've ever met. He would try to min-max his driving, slam on the brakes not a second later than he needed to, slow down only at the brink of an accident, and tailgate like crazy. These are all very good things to do in Mario Kart. In the highway, you've probably seen someone like him: that maniac who zooms past you when you're already going 10 over, swerves a foot in front of you to avoid rear-ending a semi, and vanishes on the horizon.
He might even drop a banana in your lane.
Well, considering that:
1) Your chances of finding "the one" out of any given sample of human beings, even selecting for particularly "compatible" traits, is very low ...I'd say you're full of crap.
2) Sites like OkCupid need their customers to find people who are, at the very least, passable by whatever their standards are in order to maintain that customer base
3) Nobody has written a matching algorithm so good that, "By golly, we're such good matchmakers, we're putting ourselves out of business!" And if they did, it wouldn't put them out of business, it would just increase their cachet and get a lot of people on the site by word-of-mouth.