Shatner was making a living as a stage and television actor long before he did Trek. You don't get callbacks for Shakespeare if you suck. With ST:TOS he wasn't exactly getting Shakespeare-quality scripts to work with...
So drink a few beers, gather round a camp fire, close your eyes and sing. Or play a guitar, learn to drum, pick up a kazoo, banjo, or tamborine, or even how to clap in time.
"That's it man. Game over, man! Game over! What the fuck are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?" "How 'bout we build a fire, sing a couple of songs, huh? How 'bout we try that?"
If by "success" you mean "widespread radio play and subsequent financial comfort". THEY PAY THE RADIO TO PLAY THEIR SONGS. That means the little guy is NEVER going to get played, no matter how good they are or how hard they work, or how much the disc jockey likes them, unless they have the money to pay the radio themselves. Forget "promotion", it's payola, period. You can't fight that except with equal amounts of money.
"If it's so irrelevant, why are all the resolutions vetoed?" Maybe it's irrelevant because everything gets vetoed;)
You are of course partly correct. The point I was trying to make, though, was that the US (and the Soviet Union in their day) uses its veto to prevent the UN from acting against their interests, especially when it comes to situations like Israel. The US are the ones declaring the UN "irrelevant" unless it "gets on side" with them - but they're also the ones hobbling the process. As flawed as the UN is, it's better than the alternative, which would be having no global organization capable of speaking out against the tyrants and empire-builders of the world. After all, the SC members can't veto a General Assembly resolution.
...If it's not bad enough that the UN is a sprawling bureaucracy that burns through billions of dollars a year and can always be counted on to sit on its ass while tens of millions of civilians are murdered by their own governments, it still maintains a petina of legitimacy among those who like to maintain their comfortable illusions. Just listen to how dogmatically its apologists defend it. "It must be good... because it must be." It's only real contribution to the world is to provide a meeting place for representatives from around the world to talk. But surely a tables and chairs can be had for less than the UN's annual budget.
Yeah, but it takes more than that to get people from (sometimes very mutually antagonistic) countries to sit in those chairs and talk. I can't claim encyclopedic knowledge of the UN's history and function, but I'm pretty sure those defending it have better arguments than "it must be good". UN peacekeeping alone is a unique entity in the history of the world, the fact that soldiers with unloaded weapons and *very* restrictive Rules of Engagement can considerably reduce the violence in an area just by being there goes a long way to proving the UN's worth in my mind.
The fact that the current US gov't (and the Clinton one before that) declares the UN "irrelevant" does not make it so. If it's so irrelevant, why do Security Council members still bother to routinely veto the resolutions that condemn their, and their client states', abuses?
I think nylon was developed during WWII, wasn't it? That must have been a big boost to rapid innovation cycles. All we need is another big war, to be fought entirely with computers... hmm...
Just within the past month, I was in line at Safeway who was paying for her groceries with one of those newfangled food stamp debit cards so I knew she was economically challenged. But to my amazement, she was talking on a cell phone the whole freakin' time she was in line. Now there's someone who's well on the way to financial responsibility and welfare independence...
It's probably cheaper for her than having a land line. If she's unemployed, then a cell phone might (theoretically) be a good option as a contact for prospective employers. I doubt she was arranging an interview when you saw her, granted...
If I was king of the world everyone on welfare would get a cell phone with free incoming calls, also free to call 911 and the welfare/employment office of course. It'd make sense.
"I'm guessing the companies felt they had a god-given right to vast profits and are upset that they will now be stuck only making huge profits instead."
Watch the movie "The Corporation". You'll like it.
I'm sure that even *pretending* to plan a terrorist attack is freakishly illegal now, and might have been before. Obviously if I post here saying:
"I want some people to help me bomb the Acme widget factory in Nowheresville, USA, for the glory of Bob Dobbs. Please e-mail me if you're interested."
I am unlikely to arouse any serious suspicion that I'm an actual terrorist. However, going so far as to design an actual plan, featuring real dates, times and places, will make you indistinguishable from an actual terrorist. At which point you are seriously f*cked, and will have zero human rights, possibly for a long long time.
Yeah, he was a Vietnam War hero, and when he came back, he protested side-by-side, at Jane "Hanoi Jane" Fonda's protests - he'd become a pacifist and has remainded one ever since, including now.
I find it amazing how America is STILL fighting that damn jungle war, thirty years later. Those little men in black pyjamas not only kicked the U.S. out of Vietnam, they chased it all the way back across the ocean and have been a major force in every Presidential election since...
one commentator put it "Imagine if the Nazis upon invading France had pulled down every church except Norte Dame, and burned and looted every museum except the Louvre. That's what China did in Tibet."
He forgot "forcibly sterilized", "imprisoned & tortured clergy", etc. but I guess the guy didn't have a spare half hour to extend his analogy. The Chinese gov't = teh suck. Evil, hypocritical old men. Thank god they're our allies (mostly).
I have a couple of pairs of speakers that really showcase the audio improvement the broadcast flag generates. They're left over from an installation we did at this club and we need to get rid of them before the boss finds out we screwed up the purchase order. You can have them for $100 a pair if you like... genuine Sorny brand too.
the younger generation doesn't think twice about obtaining copies of the music they want, despite what legislation you buy.
I dunno, the lawsuits make me pretty wary of sharing music online, since I would be financially gutted if I had to settle out of court with these mafiosi (it's not like they have to prove anything *in* court after all, since mounting a defense would bankrupt me too). If they can delay the inevitable for a couple of years, and permanently skew the terms of the copyright/P2P debate, their $ and efforts will be well-spent (by their standards)
If only there were something like a communicator. That would be cool. A handheld walkie talkie-like thing only able to talk to almost anybody on the planet.
"I can't contact them, Captain. There must not be any cell phone towers on that primitive planet." - see my point?
Because part of being a geek is to climb mountains "because they are there". OK, not mountains but seemingly pointless but technically-demanding tasks. It's an offshoot of the fact that many of us spend our days accomplishing *useful*, technically-demanding tasks. A little challenging pointlessness is a great stress relief without the mind-numbing effects of say, watching NASCAR.
Don't insult the legitimate porn industry by linking them with spammers.
It shows how awful spam is, when an industry which generates pictures of women (and men I suppose) with two penises simultaneously crammed into their rectums, or drenched in semen, can be insulted by a comparison to them.
In Canada you pay a tax on blank media, the assumption being you are going to use it to break somebody's copyright.
Yeah, but in return, I feel zero guilt about using the blank media to violate copyright. I give away at least one copy of nearly every CD I buy now, to friends who might be interested. The blank media levy "pays for it", and the band gets two more ears they didn't have before. I know my logic is screwed up but that $.25/disc is paid on every disc, and I only use about 1/4 of them for music.
Most people are profoundly uneducated about science because most good science is very difficult. Most science can't be 'popularised' because it takes years of education to understand.
I think most people are uneducated about science because it's taught poorly, and not emphasized as important. I think that if science and logical thinking were taught well at the grade school and high school level, and you had to take them until grade 12, people would at least have the basic mental tools to be more skeptical than they are.
It's true that a lot of science is cryptic, obscure and takes years of education to understand. But even the incredibly important discoveries and theories are freakishly misreported in the popular media (because of news agencies who assign a spare sports reporter to science stories, and don't care about the result) and are thus impossible to really understand correctly if that's your only source of science information...
I think pseudoscience meshes better with many people's worldview than actual science does. It's hard for laypeople to understand the terminology and goals of real science, and the language is often couched in ambiguity and qualification (because scientists don't want to make unsupported statements). "Pseudoscientists" on the other hand, can say whatever they want, because their only concern is attracting eyeballs and therefore either religious converts (in the case of "Creation Science") or people's dollars (in many other cases). And there are a huge number of people out there who are PROFOUNDLY uneducated about science, and either distrust REAL scientists because they can't understand them, or because they've been taught that nonsense feel-good alternative theories etc. are being "suppressed" by the scientific community.
The scientific community shares some blame as well - "popularizing" science is seen as a vulgar activity by many, when in fact it should be seen as essential as long as the truth is not distorted along the way.
It's probably illegal for an interviewer to ask if somebody's been *investigated* for a crime. After all, a lot of people become suspects in criminal cases. Your wife commits suicide? You're an automatic suspect in her possible murder (however quickly that theory is dropped). You've just been "investigated".
The term you're looking for is "chilling effect". Hostile interrogation (the kind where you ask somebody about ACLU membership or why they wear their hair long, for instance) of people who make FOIA requests... dissuades others from making FOIA requests. Handy, that.
Slashdot Mirror
Shatner was making a living as a stage and television actor long before he did Trek. You don't get callbacks for Shakespeare if you suck. With ST:TOS he wasn't exactly getting Shakespeare-quality scripts to work with...
So drink a few beers, gather round a camp fire, close your eyes and sing. Or play a guitar, learn to drum, pick up a kazoo, banjo, or tamborine, or even how to clap in time.
"That's it man. Game over, man! Game over! What the fuck are we gonna do now? What are we gonna do?"
"How 'bout we build a fire, sing a couple of songs, huh? How 'bout we try that?"
If by "success" you mean "widespread radio play and subsequent financial comfort". THEY PAY THE RADIO TO PLAY THEIR SONGS. That means the little guy is NEVER going to get played, no matter how good they are or how hard they work, or how much the disc jockey likes them, unless they have the money to pay the radio themselves. Forget "promotion", it's payola, period. You can't fight that except with equal amounts of money.
"If it's so irrelevant, why are all the resolutions vetoed?" ;)
Maybe it's irrelevant because everything gets vetoed
You are of course partly correct. The point I was trying to make, though, was that the US (and the Soviet Union in their day) uses its veto to prevent the UN from acting against their interests, especially when it comes to situations like Israel. The US are the ones declaring the UN "irrelevant" unless it "gets on side" with them - but they're also the ones hobbling the process. As flawed as the UN is, it's better than the alternative, which would be having no global organization capable of speaking out against the tyrants and empire-builders of the world. After all, the SC members can't veto a General Assembly resolution.
...If it's not bad enough that the UN is a sprawling bureaucracy that burns through billions of dollars a year and can always be counted on to sit on its ass while tens of millions of civilians are murdered by their own governments, it still maintains a petina of legitimacy among those who like to maintain their comfortable illusions. Just listen to how dogmatically its apologists defend it. "It must be good... because it must be." It's only real contribution to the world is to provide a meeting place for representatives from around the world to talk. But surely a tables and chairs can be had for less than the UN's annual budget.
Yeah, but it takes more than that to get people from (sometimes very mutually antagonistic) countries to sit in those chairs and talk. I can't claim encyclopedic knowledge of the UN's history and function, but I'm pretty sure those defending it have better arguments than "it must be good". UN peacekeeping alone is a unique entity in the history of the world, the fact that soldiers with unloaded weapons and *very* restrictive Rules of Engagement can considerably reduce the violence in an area just by being there goes a long way to proving the UN's worth in my mind.
The fact that the current US gov't (and the Clinton one before that) declares the UN "irrelevant" does not make it so. If it's so irrelevant, why do Security Council members still bother to routinely veto the resolutions that condemn their, and their client states', abuses?
I think nylon was developed during WWII, wasn't it? That must have been a big boost to rapid innovation cycles. All we need is another big war, to be fought entirely with computers... hmm...
Just within the past month, I was in line at Safeway who was paying for her groceries with one of those newfangled food stamp debit cards so I knew she was economically challenged. But to my amazement, she was talking on a cell phone the whole freakin' time she was in line. Now there's someone who's well on the way to financial responsibility and welfare independence...
It's probably cheaper for her than having a land line. If she's unemployed, then a cell phone might (theoretically) be a good option as a contact for prospective employers. I doubt she was arranging an interview when you saw her, granted...
If I was king of the world everyone on welfare would get a cell phone with free incoming calls, also free to call 911 and the welfare/employment office of course. It'd make sense.
"I'm guessing the companies felt they had a god-given right to vast profits and are upset that they will now be stuck only making huge profits instead."
Watch the movie "The Corporation". You'll like it.
I'm sure that even *pretending* to plan a terrorist attack is freakishly illegal now, and might have been before. Obviously if I post here saying:
"I want some people to help me bomb the Acme widget factory in Nowheresville, USA, for the glory of Bob Dobbs. Please e-mail me if you're interested."
I am unlikely to arouse any serious suspicion that I'm an actual terrorist. However, going so far as to design an actual plan, featuring real dates, times and places, will make you indistinguishable from an actual terrorist. At which point you are seriously f*cked, and will have zero human rights, possibly for a long long time.
Yeah, he was a Vietnam War hero, and when he came back, he protested side-by-side, at Jane "Hanoi Jane" Fonda's protests - he'd become a pacifist and has remainded one ever since, including now.
I find it amazing how America is STILL fighting that damn jungle war, thirty years later. Those little men in black pyjamas not only kicked the U.S. out of Vietnam, they chased it all the way back across the ocean and have been a major force in every Presidential election since...
one commentator put it "Imagine if the Nazis upon invading France had pulled down every church except Norte Dame, and burned and looted every museum except the Louvre. That's what China did in Tibet."
He forgot "forcibly sterilized", "imprisoned & tortured clergy", etc. but I guess the guy didn't have a spare half hour to extend his analogy. The Chinese gov't = teh suck. Evil, hypocritical old men. Thank god they're our allies (mostly).
"their collective heads will explode. "
Want to help me set up a collection to mail approx. 1 pound of cardboard and game pieces to China? >:-D
I thought you were going to say it would be a sad day for the clown community as a whole.
Are you kidding? Do you know how many down-and-out clowns knowingly buy cheap stolen unicycles?
I have a couple of pairs of speakers that really showcase the audio improvement the broadcast flag generates. They're left over from an installation we did at this club and we need to get rid of them before the boss finds out we screwed up the purchase order. You can have them for $100 a pair if you like... genuine Sorny brand too.
the younger generation doesn't think twice about obtaining copies of the music they want, despite what legislation you buy.
I dunno, the lawsuits make me pretty wary of sharing music online, since I would be financially gutted if I had to settle out of court with these mafiosi (it's not like they have to prove anything *in* court after all, since mounting a defense would bankrupt me too). If they can delay the inevitable for a couple of years, and permanently skew the terms of the copyright/P2P debate, their $ and efforts will be well-spent (by their standards)
What if you get sex for bartering computer skills? Would that be prostitution?
Technically yes, but you can answer "no" when the blood bank ask you if you've ever "paid money or drugs for sex".
If only there were something like a communicator. That would be cool. A handheld walkie talkie-like thing only able to talk to almost anybody on the planet.
"I can't contact them, Captain. There must not be any cell phone towers on that primitive planet." - see my point?
Because part of being a geek is to climb mountains "because they are there". OK, not mountains but seemingly pointless but technically-demanding tasks. It's an offshoot of the fact that many of us spend our days accomplishing *useful*, technically-demanding tasks. A little challenging pointlessness is a great stress relief without the mind-numbing effects of say, watching NASCAR.
Don't insult the legitimate porn industry by linking them with spammers.
It shows how awful spam is, when an industry which generates pictures of women (and men I suppose) with two penises simultaneously crammed into their rectums, or drenched in semen, can be insulted by a comparison to them.
I gonna go out on a limb and say... they made a funny?
In Canada you pay a tax on blank media, the assumption being you are going to use it to break somebody's copyright.
Yeah, but in return, I feel zero guilt about using the blank media to violate copyright. I give away at least one copy of nearly every CD I buy now, to friends who might be interested. The blank media levy "pays for it", and the band gets two more ears they didn't have before. I know my logic is screwed up but that $.25/disc is paid on every disc, and I only use about 1/4 of them for music.
Most people are profoundly uneducated about science because most good science is very difficult. Most science can't be 'popularised' because it takes years of education to understand.
I think most people are uneducated about science because it's taught poorly, and not emphasized as important. I think that if science and logical thinking were taught well at the grade school and high school level, and you had to take them until grade 12, people would at least have the basic mental tools to be more skeptical than they are.
It's true that a lot of science is cryptic, obscure and takes years of education to understand. But even the incredibly important discoveries and theories are freakishly misreported in the popular media (because of news agencies who assign a spare sports reporter to science stories, and don't care about the result) and are thus impossible to really understand correctly if that's your only source of science information...
I think pseudoscience meshes better with many people's worldview than actual science does. It's hard for laypeople to understand the terminology and goals of real science, and the language is often couched in ambiguity and qualification (because scientists don't want to make unsupported statements). "Pseudoscientists" on the other hand, can say whatever they want, because their only concern is attracting eyeballs and therefore either religious converts (in the case of "Creation Science") or people's dollars (in many other cases). And there are a huge number of people out there who are PROFOUNDLY uneducated about science, and either distrust REAL scientists because they can't understand them, or because they've been taught that nonsense feel-good alternative theories etc. are being "suppressed" by the scientific community.
The scientific community shares some blame as well - "popularizing" science is seen as a vulgar activity by many, when in fact it should be seen as essential as long as the truth is not distorted along the way.
It's probably illegal for an interviewer to ask if somebody's been *investigated* for a crime. After all, a lot of people become suspects in criminal cases. Your wife commits suicide? You're an automatic suspect in her possible murder (however quickly that theory is dropped). You've just been "investigated".
The term you're looking for is "chilling effect". Hostile interrogation (the kind where you ask somebody about ACLU membership or why they wear their hair long, for instance) of people who make FOIA requests... dissuades others from making FOIA requests. Handy, that.