Round trips? I'm not quite certain what you're doing with your other hand, but I'm quite capable of keeping on the arrow keys and one on the mouse. Scroll wheels are just far too slow for moving more than one or two lines at a time.
After playing Super Mario Bros. I spent a significant portion of my childhood running around the house looking for gold coins. These games are teaching our kids to chase money! Don't even get me started on the aftermath of my bananna cannon rampage.
Because using the arrow keys (which, incidentally, can scroll much, much faster when held down for a bit) was such a phenomenal pain. I'm glad that we're past those terrifying days of yore.
Before scroll mice came around I wasn't aware that anyone actually used those little scroll bars. I just use mine to keep track of where I am in a document. The people using the little buttons on the bar quite frankly scare me.
Grr... a shame that they had to use a DVD for this as I don't have a DVD-ROM drive on my computer. Especially when you consider that one of the titles is available free online (America's Army) and another is a monthly-fee MMORPG (Dark Age of Camelot) it's really a waste done just so they can write a lot of masturbatory copy on how great they were to do this. I probably would have considered buying it just for Thief 2 (which for some highly bizarre reason I never bought)... guess it's time to check stores for the price on the Thief 1/2 bundle.
A slightly more telling portion shows up in the second article where it states that the minimums are being moved from 4 hours to 2 hours.
"Often, the state will call a contractor back out onto the roads to do some additional salting, which might take only an hour. Previously the contractor would have to be paid for four hours for one hour's work; now they will be paid a minimum two hours"
So now the plow drivers are being only slightly more overpaid rather than grossly and we'll be able to track them to be certain that they do their job (aside from the other benefits about dispatching and such). Makes sense that a few might be pissed off by it. It doesn't, however, follow that they're in any way correct.
The second article stated that they were being issued the phones. I was under the impression that the state was providing the GPS phones for the contracters.
Perhaps, but the problem has arisen that unions are now monopolies on labor who more often than not have an overwhelming power over those who would hire them.
It's changed from "You'll work for 18 hours a day at $1 hour" to "We'll work 6 hours a day, but you'll pay us as if we worked 10, we'll also be making $20 hour and also provide us with all sorts of other benefits too. If you don't like it, we'll picket and harrass anyone else you do decide to hire and bemoan how much of a bastard you are for not giving in to our demands. If you try to hire someone else who isn't with us we'll walk as well."
Unions were certainly started with the best of intentions and many unions may still operate in that manner, but many have become little more than extortion rackets (mind you, some might be associated with organized crime, but I suspect that this is a very small minority) with more power than the employers.
In the past things may have been much worse for manual laborers, but in part due to unionization things have changed. The unions though, have changed as well and as you stated are using their power to perpeptuate itself well past the time when they were still necessary.
While number portability may be a good thing on the surface I can't see switching unless the service is absolutely terrible at the present. Since phones are not interoperable between carriers I end up getting stuck with an expensive new paperweight while having to pay to get a new phone. Contracts may be bad, but being locked into a provider due to hardware is far worse. We wouldn't tolerate this with computers or land-line phones, why are cellular consumers willing to put up with it?
If real portability existed it would help not only the consumer by allowing them to actually change what company they want, but would allow a greater choice of phones. Instead of the half-dozen that your carrier supports you'd have access to all of the phones on the market. A move that would spur the development of phones further and help to weed out the bad designs even more.
Don't get me wrong, number portability is a nice step, but hardware portability will be the big one.
Hmm... so how do they regulate it exactly? I know with radio and such there is an FCC fine when you violate the established regulations. Yet, I also know that the FCC tends to only step in when there is a complaint.
Do they merely have some sort of regulatory authority over cable, but not often exercise it or what? What about the operation of premium cable channels and their comparative lack of standards compliance (not to mention that HBO is increasingly showing that people greatly prefer not to have dumbed-down censored crap)?
More importantly, where would one go to get further information on this subject?
As for the FCC trying to force the dominance of broadcast... man are they fighting a losing battle. I can't believe how regressive that is. I don't think I've watched any network television other than the Simpsons in years. I mean, Family Guy and Futurama as well, but never any of this prime-time crap.
I think the problem here is a matter of spectrum utilization being mixed up with content regulation. One is sensible enough to be regulated fairly. The other, however, should not be glommed on as well.
Content regulation should, at best, be done by the individual publisher. Sadly, even in those cases you get people afraid to offend anyone with anything and losing precious advertising money.
As for the FCC regulating the airwaves, they've more or less done an adequate job of it. There have been some questionable moves, but they've basically done a pretty good job. Content regulation though is the issue of importance I feel and should be quite clearly be taken away from them.
Yeah, that never made much sense to me either. Although at least watching obscured naked people is a slight increase over listening to naked people on the radio.
Likewise the recent Joe Schmo Show on Spike TV had no end of cheap games involving nudity and at one point tried to get two of the female "contestants" to get topless for the ratings. What's the point? Knowing that someone else is getting to see someone naked? Do people prefer knowing that the nudity they desire is being kept from them? Doesn't make any bit of sense, but I suspect it's still the network's self-imposed standards and the fact that advertisers might actually pull out despite being willing to advertise as long as you're just being teased.
Howso? It had been my understanding that the FCC only had the right to regulate broadcast media that was actually broadcast using the airwaves. Since cable went over cable it was not subject to FCC regulation, but merely the self-regulation of being deathly afraid of offending anyone.
Well, part of the problem involved here is that the FCC is not an elected body subject to civilian oversight. Yes, the judicial system gave them this power, but now they're the ones in control. Much the same as most censorship in America (the MPAA ratings for example) it is carried out by people not accountable to the voters and then later enforced typically by private businesses. Occasionally government will legislate based on these decisions as well.
As for a world without these regulations? Well... look at other forms of media. Actually, let's look at film first. I've noticed the recent trend of Spike tv to show movies uncut (or so they advertise at least) acknowledging that people who want to see the film, want to see it without added censorship. A film starting at 9pm on cable really has no reason to be censored and I suspect that the majority of viewers would prefer that it wasn't.
Anyhow, other media. What about books? Nobody regulates books (which anyone can check out) and whenever someone tries to remove books from libaries or otherwise regulate them they catch seven different styles of hell. Moving out a little bit further let's look at comics. Many comics companies have since thrown off the shackle of the comics code (IIRC DC and Archie are the only companies that still use it, and DC only for some of the DC Universe stuff) and DC's Vertigo imprint in particular has been revolutionary for the production of work for mature readers. By and large almost all mature readers titles are some of the best work coming out (Sandman, Preacher, Transmetropolitan, 100 Bullets, Fables, and Y:The Last Man are all Vertigo titles). It's simply the matter of being able to handle mature themes, have a bit of blood if needed, show a little skin, and let characters speak like normal people.
I think the greatest problem here is that some people want the world walled off into a playground for their children and are not willing to accept that the rest of the world simply are not children and do not wish to behave like them.
The more important issue here though is that the FCC is acting beyond what they probably should. While some of their regulations are reasonable (time alloted for broadcasts of national importance) some other may not be so. The social contract with the FCC you cite might certainly be valid, except it was forced on the population. There is no oversight and no recourse against most of these decisions by the public. We have never given them the right to regulate the airwaves, rather they have taken them and often to use them against our wishes.
Actually the diamonds parody ad was around on the internet. I'm told by friends that it pre-dates Family Guy, but I'm not certain. Anyhow, the Family Guy version was much, much better simply because it was far classier and well... it had sound and motion.
Well, beyond that they have different FCC limitations. For some insane reason it was ruled that the FCC can effectively censor broadcast television. Cable, however, falls outside of these bounds and thus is free to do pretty much whatever they want as far as I'm aware. I may be wrong, but there's nothing stopping a cable channel from showing hardcore fetish porn aside from sponsor and viewer complaints (guess which they care about more).
So basically the problem is that people are spreading rumours using the internet? I, for one, am astounded! Who would ever think to malign the internet so?
Ok, so yes, bullying is a problem and the schools sure as hell aren't doing anything to help with it when kids are there (I think the Onion put it best with "Columbine Jocks Safely Resume Bullying"), but this really isn't anything especially new. It's like claiming the school needs to do something about kids writing notes to each other spreading rumours, or prevent them from phoning each other to spread them.
It doesn't seem that things have quite reached the level of extortion and serious crime and I'm not saying that it's acceptable, but this is something that's going to go on regardles of the medium being used. This is little more than a vague link to the internet used for the hell of it. I expected this crap back in '97 but not now. I mean, really, "Cyber-bullying"? Who in their right mind would ever use that?
I'm not going to go out and buy anything because I plan on sleeping til noon and then sitting around the house all afternoon. Why would I particularly want to go shopping anyway? I mean, from what I've heard it's apparently a terrible day to go shopping filled with vast herds of people out shopping and very little parking. Never saw what the point was myself.
The question is why one would buy cds there anyway. I mean, the selection and prices are both terrible. I live in a town without an actual music store or Best Buy or much else really. There's an overpriced Musicland or Sam Goody or whatever at the mall, the always disturbing Hastings, and a used cd place... the independent music store closed 3 years ago (oddly enough this a college town). With such complete lack of choice I still wouldn't ever consider Wal-Mart. I just buy online (none of this digital crap for me, I want a nice usable, highly physical cd) and try to avoid getting screwed by shipping.
No way! There are actually consequences to breaking the law? I mean, yeah, sure I knew that trading movies online was illegal and all, but I just thought it was kinda like speeding. Something that everyone does but only a few people ever get caught for with a slap on the wrist for punishment. Man... this is pretty bad since I still want to download movies for free instead of paying for them. I mean, they suck and totally aren't worth paying for at all, but I'll gladly spend my time breaking the law to see them.
This could be bad news, I'd better whine about it a lot and hope it goes away. Just not breaking the law because I'm not willing to suffer the consequences of my actions is too much to ask.
I've never been a fan of the books. Maybe it someone other than Tolkein had written them and they didn't have those horrible, horrible, horrible hobbits in them, but no. As they exist I can barely tolerate them. I do enjoy the movies though. Yet still I'm pissed about this, I'm pissed about the wargs, the elves, Arwen... all of it.
I'm especially pissed about this though.
I think the best thing I've read about it is that Saruman is sort of like Vader in these movies to the casual viewer. Yeah, Sauron is out there, but he's just a big flaming eye. Sort of like the Emperor. He may be the guy behind the scenes, but he's never any immediate threat. Saruman, however, is out there fielding armies, causing trouble. He's right in the thick of things and the primary villian at present. To not resolve that. To just make people assume that maybe he died off-screen or has otherwise been de-fanged is cheap.
As for the Palintir, well... they've established that Sauruman has it and that Gandalf knows he has it as early as the first film. That they manage to go find it is just sloppy filmmaking. As is all of this. It's putting the burden on the audience to fill in stuff that the director doesn't want to do. As for the argument that it functions to wrap things up from the previous film? Well... he tossed the beginning of Two Towers into Fellowship and then continued the search rather abruptly in Two Towers so he doesn't quite have the track record to back it up. Throwing in the scene of Gandalf confronting Saruman would have been an excellent way to get Return of the King underway.
I recall when eSheep posted the new installment of Apocamon there was some small fee to access it tied to BitPass. The problem was that the cost to access the material was rather small, about $0.25 (a bit large for something I'll only have limited, temporary access to, but that's not the point here) however the user was required to make a minimum purchase of a $3 "virtual cash-card" from BitPass just to be able to spend that $0.25. Rather than functioning like PayPal where any amount can be sent and pulled back to your bank account BitPass requires you to toss in a set amount. Can't find someplace else to spend you $2.75? Well, looks like you just paid $3.00 (The current going rate for a comic book with 22 pages of story) for an online comic you have no physical access to and will lose the ability to read after 666 times or 30 days, whichever comes first.
The way that BitPass operates is thus the biggest problem here. As much as I chafe at having to purchase the latest installment (great, get me hooked on something free then wait forever to continue it and start charging) and the micropayments idea in general having my money locked up by one company is a problem. Even if there were multiple places accepting BitPass it would still be a bad idea unless they had a clear monopoly. Regardless of whether micropayments are good or bad, BitPass is a terrible implementation.
I don't jog at all, but I've had terrible problems with skipping. My typical way to use my iPod (2nd gen 20 Gig) is to stash it in a cargo pocket and then run the wired remote out and up to my headphones. Just walking around campus at a slow amble is more than enough to create a problem for the iPod. Sure, it works well enough when I just want to keep listening (most of the time) but as soon as I want to change the volume or change more than a track or two I start getting long waits that are alleviated once I stand still for a second. Occasionally the iPod will lock up and require a reboot. Yes it's getting jiggled a bit, but nowhere near enough that this should be such a common problem. I can toss it into one of my front pockets, but then the wallet or keys or something has to be unpleasantly displaced.
I really do love my iPod a great deal, but it has some serious problems with skipping as well as battery (put it on random and skip a song or two every couple of songs and you get closer to 4-5 hours of battery use, if that). It is one of the best players on the market, but it does have a large share of flaws. I suggest anyone considering getting an iPod to head over to the support forums and poke around a bit, you'll hear no end of problems with the iPod and be much better able to make an informed decision. Oh and a personal plug, ditch MusicMatch, use ephPod. It's absolutely wonderful software.
Underground? I remember the opening night being sold out back in '99 when I went and was thoroughly unimpressed (it's taken time, but I've slowly come around to realize how much it kicks ass).
I'm aware of that, however unless I'm totally and utterly mistaken there was a pretty good deal of CGI in the film. Some of it was filters and rotoscoping, yes, but not all.
Slashdot Mirror
Round trips? I'm not quite certain what you're doing with your other hand, but I'm quite capable of keeping on the arrow keys and one on the mouse. Scroll wheels are just far too slow for moving more than one or two lines at a time.
After playing Super Mario Bros. I spent a significant portion of my childhood running around the house looking for gold coins. These games are teaching our kids to chase money! Don't even get me started on the aftermath of my bananna cannon rampage.
Because using the arrow keys (which, incidentally, can scroll much, much faster when held down for a bit) was such a phenomenal pain. I'm glad that we're past those terrifying days of yore.
Before scroll mice came around I wasn't aware that anyone actually used those little scroll bars. I just use mine to keep track of where I am in a document. The people using the little buttons on the bar quite frankly scare me.
Grr... a shame that they had to use a DVD for this as I don't have a DVD-ROM drive on my computer. Especially when you consider that one of the titles is available free online (America's Army) and another is a monthly-fee MMORPG (Dark Age of Camelot) it's really a waste done just so they can write a lot of masturbatory copy on how great they were to do this. I probably would have considered buying it just for Thief 2 (which for some highly bizarre reason I never bought)... guess it's time to check stores for the price on the Thief 1/2 bundle.
The second article stated that they were being issued the phones. I was under the impression that the state was providing the GPS phones for the contracters.
Perhaps, but the problem has arisen that unions are now monopolies on labor who more often than not have an overwhelming power over those who would hire them.
It's changed from "You'll work for 18 hours a day at $1 hour" to "We'll work 6 hours a day, but you'll pay us as if we worked 10, we'll also be making $20 hour and also provide us with all sorts of other benefits too. If you don't like it, we'll picket and harrass anyone else you do decide to hire and bemoan how much of a bastard you are for not giving in to our demands. If you try to hire someone else who isn't with us we'll walk as well."
Unions were certainly started with the best of intentions and many unions may still operate in that manner, but many have become little more than extortion rackets (mind you, some might be associated with organized crime, but I suspect that this is a very small minority) with more power than the employers.
In the past things may have been much worse for manual laborers, but in part due to unionization things have changed. The unions though, have changed as well and as you stated are using their power to perpeptuate itself well past the time when they were still necessary.
While number portability may be a good thing on the surface I can't see switching unless the service is absolutely terrible at the present. Since phones are not interoperable between carriers I end up getting stuck with an expensive new paperweight while having to pay to get a new phone. Contracts may be bad, but being locked into a provider due to hardware is far worse. We wouldn't tolerate this with computers or land-line phones, why are cellular consumers willing to put up with it?
If real portability existed it would help not only the consumer by allowing them to actually change what company they want, but would allow a greater choice of phones. Instead of the half-dozen that your carrier supports you'd have access to all of the phones on the market. A move that would spur the development of phones further and help to weed out the bad designs even more.
Don't get me wrong, number portability is a nice step, but hardware portability will be the big one.
Hmm... so how do they regulate it exactly? I know with radio and such there is an FCC fine when you violate the established regulations. Yet, I also know that the FCC tends to only step in when there is a complaint.
Do they merely have some sort of regulatory authority over cable, but not often exercise it or what? What about the operation of premium cable channels and their comparative lack of standards compliance (not to mention that HBO is increasingly showing that people greatly prefer not to have dumbed-down censored crap)?
More importantly, where would one go to get further information on this subject?
As for the FCC trying to force the dominance of broadcast... man are they fighting a losing battle. I can't believe how regressive that is. I don't think I've watched any network television other than the Simpsons in years. I mean, Family Guy and Futurama as well, but never any of this prime-time crap.
I think the problem here is a matter of spectrum utilization being mixed up with content regulation. One is sensible enough to be regulated fairly. The other, however, should not be glommed on as well.
Content regulation should, at best, be done by the individual publisher. Sadly, even in those cases you get people afraid to offend anyone with anything and losing precious advertising money.
As for the FCC regulating the airwaves, they've more or less done an adequate job of it. There have been some questionable moves, but they've basically done a pretty good job. Content regulation though is the issue of importance I feel and should be quite clearly be taken away from them.
Yeah, that never made much sense to me either. Although at least watching obscured naked people is a slight increase over listening to naked people on the radio.
Likewise the recent Joe Schmo Show on Spike TV had no end of cheap games involving nudity and at one point tried to get two of the female "contestants" to get topless for the ratings. What's the point? Knowing that someone else is getting to see someone naked? Do people prefer knowing that the nudity they desire is being kept from them? Doesn't make any bit of sense, but I suspect it's still the network's self-imposed standards and the fact that advertisers might actually pull out despite being willing to advertise as long as you're just being teased.
Howso? It had been my understanding that the FCC only had the right to regulate broadcast media that was actually broadcast using the airwaves. Since cable went over cable it was not subject to FCC regulation, but merely the self-regulation of being deathly afraid of offending anyone.
Well, part of the problem involved here is that the FCC is not an elected body subject to civilian oversight. Yes, the judicial system gave them this power, but now they're the ones in control. Much the same as most censorship in America (the MPAA ratings for example) it is carried out by people not accountable to the voters and then later enforced typically by private businesses. Occasionally government will legislate based on these decisions as well.
As for a world without these regulations? Well... look at other forms of media. Actually, let's look at film first. I've noticed the recent trend of Spike tv to show movies uncut (or so they advertise at least) acknowledging that people who want to see the film, want to see it without added censorship. A film starting at 9pm on cable really has no reason to be censored and I suspect that the majority of viewers would prefer that it wasn't.
Anyhow, other media. What about books? Nobody regulates books (which anyone can check out) and whenever someone tries to remove books from libaries or otherwise regulate them they catch seven different styles of hell. Moving out a little bit further let's look at comics. Many comics companies have since thrown off the shackle of the comics code (IIRC DC and Archie are the only companies that still use it, and DC only for some of the DC Universe stuff) and DC's Vertigo imprint in particular has been revolutionary for the production of work for mature readers. By and large almost all mature readers titles are some of the best work coming out (Sandman, Preacher, Transmetropolitan, 100 Bullets, Fables, and Y:The Last Man are all Vertigo titles). It's simply the matter of being able to handle mature themes, have a bit of blood if needed, show a little skin, and let characters speak like normal people.
I think the greatest problem here is that some people want the world walled off into a playground for their children and are not willing to accept that the rest of the world simply are not children and do not wish to behave like them.
The more important issue here though is that the FCC is acting beyond what they probably should. While some of their regulations are reasonable (time alloted for broadcasts of national importance) some other may not be so. The social contract with the FCC you cite might certainly be valid, except it was forced on the population. There is no oversight and no recourse against most of these decisions by the public. We have never given them the right to regulate the airwaves, rather they have taken them and often to use them against our wishes.
Actually the diamonds parody ad was around on the internet. I'm told by friends that it pre-dates Family Guy, but I'm not certain. Anyhow, the Family Guy version was much, much better simply because it was far classier and well... it had sound and motion.
Well, beyond that they have different FCC limitations. For some insane reason it was ruled that the FCC can effectively censor broadcast television. Cable, however, falls outside of these bounds and thus is free to do pretty much whatever they want as far as I'm aware. I may be wrong, but there's nothing stopping a cable channel from showing hardcore fetish porn aside from sponsor and viewer complaints (guess which they care about more).
So basically the problem is that people are spreading rumours using the internet? I, for one, am astounded! Who would ever think to malign the internet so?
Ok, so yes, bullying is a problem and the schools sure as hell aren't doing anything to help with it when kids are there (I think the Onion put it best with "Columbine Jocks Safely Resume Bullying"), but this really isn't anything especially new. It's like claiming the school needs to do something about kids writing notes to each other spreading rumours, or prevent them from phoning each other to spread them.
It doesn't seem that things have quite reached the level of extortion and serious crime and I'm not saying that it's acceptable, but this is something that's going to go on regardles of the medium being used. This is little more than a vague link to the internet used for the hell of it. I expected this crap back in '97 but not now. I mean, really, "Cyber-bullying"? Who in their right mind would ever use that?
I'm not going to go out and buy anything because I plan on sleeping til noon and then sitting around the house all afternoon. Why would I particularly want to go shopping anyway? I mean, from what I've heard it's apparently a terrible day to go shopping filled with vast herds of people out shopping and very little parking. Never saw what the point was myself.
The question is why one would buy cds there anyway. I mean, the selection and prices are both terrible. I live in a town without an actual music store or Best Buy or much else really. There's an overpriced Musicland or Sam Goody or whatever at the mall, the always disturbing Hastings, and a used cd place... the independent music store closed 3 years ago (oddly enough this a college town). With such complete lack of choice I still wouldn't ever consider Wal-Mart. I just buy online (none of this digital crap for me, I want a nice usable, highly physical cd) and try to avoid getting screwed by shipping.
No way! There are actually consequences to breaking the law? I mean, yeah, sure I knew that trading movies online was illegal and all, but I just thought it was kinda like speeding. Something that everyone does but only a few people ever get caught for with a slap on the wrist for punishment. Man... this is pretty bad since I still want to download movies for free instead of paying for them. I mean, they suck and totally aren't worth paying for at all, but I'll gladly spend my time breaking the law to see them.
This could be bad news, I'd better whine about it a lot and hope it goes away. Just not breaking the law because I'm not willing to suffer the consequences of my actions is too much to ask.
I've never been a fan of the books. Maybe it someone other than Tolkein had written them and they didn't have those horrible, horrible, horrible hobbits in them, but no. As they exist I can barely tolerate them. I do enjoy the movies though. Yet still I'm pissed about this, I'm pissed about the wargs, the elves, Arwen... all of it.
I'm especially pissed about this though.
I think the best thing I've read about it is that Saruman is sort of like Vader in these movies to the casual viewer. Yeah, Sauron is out there, but he's just a big flaming eye. Sort of like the Emperor. He may be the guy behind the scenes, but he's never any immediate threat. Saruman, however, is out there fielding armies, causing trouble. He's right in the thick of things and the primary villian at present. To not resolve that. To just make people assume that maybe he died off-screen or has otherwise been de-fanged is cheap.
As for the Palintir, well... they've established that Sauruman has it and that Gandalf knows he has it as early as the first film. That they manage to go find it is just sloppy filmmaking. As is all of this. It's putting the burden on the audience to fill in stuff that the director doesn't want to do. As for the argument that it functions to wrap things up from the previous film? Well... he tossed the beginning of Two Towers into Fellowship and then continued the search rather abruptly in Two Towers so he doesn't quite have the track record to back it up. Throwing in the scene of Gandalf confronting Saruman would have been an excellent way to get Return of the King underway.
I recall when eSheep posted the new installment of Apocamon there was some small fee to access it tied to BitPass. The problem was that the cost to access the material was rather small, about $0.25 (a bit large for something I'll only have limited, temporary access to, but that's not the point here) however the user was required to make a minimum purchase of a $3 "virtual cash-card" from BitPass just to be able to spend that $0.25. Rather than functioning like PayPal where any amount can be sent and pulled back to your bank account BitPass requires you to toss in a set amount. Can't find someplace else to spend you $2.75? Well, looks like you just paid $3.00 (The current going rate for a comic book with 22 pages of story) for an online comic you have no physical access to and will lose the ability to read after 666 times or 30 days, whichever comes first.
The way that BitPass operates is thus the biggest problem here. As much as I chafe at having to purchase the latest installment (great, get me hooked on something free then wait forever to continue it and start charging) and the micropayments idea in general having my money locked up by one company is a problem. Even if there were multiple places accepting BitPass it would still be a bad idea unless they had a clear monopoly. Regardless of whether micropayments are good or bad, BitPass is a terrible implementation.
I don't jog at all, but I've had terrible problems with skipping. My typical way to use my iPod (2nd gen 20 Gig) is to stash it in a cargo pocket and then run the wired remote out and up to my headphones. Just walking around campus at a slow amble is more than enough to create a problem for the iPod. Sure, it works well enough when I just want to keep listening (most of the time) but as soon as I want to change the volume or change more than a track or two I start getting long waits that are alleviated once I stand still for a second. Occasionally the iPod will lock up and require a reboot. Yes it's getting jiggled a bit, but nowhere near enough that this should be such a common problem. I can toss it into one of my front pockets, but then the wallet or keys or something has to be unpleasantly displaced.
I really do love my iPod a great deal, but it has some serious problems with skipping as well as battery (put it on random and skip a song or two every couple of songs and you get closer to 4-5 hours of battery use, if that). It is one of the best players on the market, but it does have a large share of flaws. I suggest anyone considering getting an iPod to head over to the support forums and poke around a bit, you'll hear no end of problems with the iPod and be much better able to make an informed decision. Oh and a personal plug, ditch MusicMatch, use ephPod. It's absolutely wonderful software.
Underground? I remember the opening night being sold out back in '99 when I went and was thoroughly unimpressed (it's taken time, but I've slowly come around to realize how much it kicks ass).
I'm aware of that, however unless I'm totally and utterly mistaken there was a pretty good deal of CGI in the film. Some of it was filters and rotoscoping, yes, but not all.
Bah! CGI animation was put on the map by the one and only TRON! Toy Story was just playing catch up. :)