With the empire destroyed, Luke runs for President with his loyal Chief of Staff, Han Solo, Communications Director, Chewbacca, and Press Secretary CJ Cregg.
Star Wars, Episode VIII: Return of the Omnibus Spending Resolution
I hear they're bringing in Aaron Sorkin to write it.
He should have named that site jewishconspiracypenpal.com. He's got a pretty strong anti-Jew thing happening in more than a few of the articles on the site.
I actually submitted a genuine Ask Slashdot this morning having to do with business and the web and working with clients. I can see that the front page is far too packed with important news for my story.
You don't know what you are talking about. The chemicals to process black and white film are generally fairly benign. The worst for the environment are the insoluable metals (e.g. silver) disolved in used fixer.
Not using fixer when you process black and white film is like not using fire in an internal combustion engine. The reaction is short-lived and not all that useful.
"sorry but your digital photos do not have the color depth of film. however, this is not a reflection of your skills as a photographer"
I guess that depends on how you define "color depth." but more important is the medium on which you observe the image. You looked at my pictures on your monitor, which is an RBG device displaying 72 dpi. If you compare a print from color film (slide or negative) next to a print from a digital SLR, each one can be tweaked so that the prints look nearly indistinguishable*.
Two things I've noticed about the D60 that could stand to be improved are that photos are generally overexposed by about a half stop, and reds tend to get blown out (endemic to the CMOS sensor, I once read).
* Assumes the same lens or comparable lenses were used for each shot.
IAAPP (I Am A Professional Photographer), and have been shooting almost exclusively digital for almost a year now. I have a Canon D60, which gives me about 6.1 megapixels, a 1 gig IBM microdrive, and two Lexar 256 meg CF cards. The microdrive must have bad sectors or something, because the write speed after a year is abysmal. The Lexar cards still work perfectly.
On a related topic, every so often someone will tell me that the digital SLRs don't give you a qualitatively "better" image than a point-and-shoot. Judge for yourself: fotki gallery.
"Have you *EVER* tried to load a different OS (as in what did not come originally on the system) nto a Sony Notebook?? You will tear your hair and generally feel like throwing out the notebook... ou will find no drivers or support on their site or it, and contacting Sony will give you a response of "It did not come with that OS so we do ot support it""
I hate to post a me-too, but.. umm... ME TOO. I have a Vaio FX300 which came with XP Home, which sucks. I don't think I've ever used any of the preloaded apps (the preloaded Photoshop Limited Ed. install doesn't even work.. keeps asking for a serial number that Sony didn't give me). The first week I had it, I tried installing 2000 Professional on it. I tried using the Sony-supplied driver packages for similar models, and even hardware vendor-supplied drivers. It f*@king never worked right, and I ended up restoring from the CDs that came with the unit.
Also, the CD drive seems to be stuck on single speed (150kb/s) which makes it really hard to watch video files burned to CD or copy large amounts of data. I'm a photographer, and I do a lot of digital work, and that drives me crazy. I have absolutely no idea how to fix this.
Those complaints aside, I do like the machine. The screen is the best I've ever owned on a laptop. I don't think it competes favorably to the newest Dell or Powerbooks, but for the photography work I do, it definitely works well enough (after being properly calibrated).
A note on PC vs. Mac: I've been using PCs running Windows and occasionally Linux for years, but in January bought a Powermac G4-733 with a DVD burner so I could make movies shot on MiniDV. I'd like to echo a sentiment expressed many times before this, which is "the right tool for the job." I dig Final Cut Pro in a big way, and OSX is pretty neat. I always get the feeling that user input is the lowest priority for the system, but months after I made my last movie, the Mac is still my primary machine.
I saw the Sony TR1 on www.kemplar.com a few weeks ago, but it was apparantly the "Japanese Wi-Fi edition" or something. Whatever. I'm glad to see such a cool-ass machine make its way to the states. I just hope Apple doesn't sue over the similarites in the case to the Mac notebooks.
fm6 wrote: And no competent journalist will let the subject of an interview have editorial input.
That isn't necessarily correct. There are often times that a source wishes to remain anonymous. For example, the identity of Woodward and Bernstein's "deep throat" was kept secret when they broke the Watergate scandal.
For a journalist, cultivating sources means cultivating trust. In many instances, people are dying to talk, to get their name in the press (for example, Linda Tripp). In many other instances, people with valuable information may need to be assured of a certain level of control with regard to the information they divulge. A journalist who expects to do more than one story with a source that trusts them absolutely must respect boundaries.
I'm no scientist, but I am a geek with way too much time on my hands. So here's my comparison of Slashdot and Twizzlers Strawberry Twists.
1. Construction
Twizzlers are soft and yielding to the touch, and taste pleasant. Slashdot is hard and smells like burning plastic and all I can taste at the moment is gauze. Both are low fat.
Twizzlers 1 Slashdot 0
2. Information Value
The Twizzlers package informs me that the Strawberry Twists contained therein are not a significant source of dietary fiber or vitamins. Slashdot keeps me up to date on the latest linux kernel and how many bunny rabbits the RIAA has killed.
Twizzlers 0 Slashdot 1
3. Interface
Each Strawberry Twist is hollow and can be used as a straw. They also make excellent micro-whips and coffee stirrers. Slashdot's color scheme isn't as pretty as Twizzlers'.
Twizzlers 1 Slashdot 0
Total scores: Twizzlers 2 (winner) Slashdot 1
Sorry Slashdot. You can't compete with chewy candy goodness.
"Are you fucking stupid? If you are getting money from it that is because you were ripped off. And you'll probably get much less than you were ripped off for."
No, actually I'm not fucking stupid. But that clever rejoinder does give me an idea about what we can expect out of you.
"Ripped off" is a pretty subjective phrase. If a particular CD was worth a certain amount of money to me, then I was not ripped off. The unfair thing that this lawsuit addressed was price fixing. But that kind of violation does not automatically mean that anyone who was affected by it was ripped off.
"Yes, fuck the lawyers who get millions while we get either jack shit or twenty fucking bucks. Fuck the judge that allowed a settlement in which consumers get a tiny fraction of the price-fixing harm, while the attorneys (let me remind you!) get millions.
Earned it? The only work they did was get RIAA member companies to pay them a small amount relative to the total harm to get them off the hook. It sounds much more like collusion than anything else."
Here comes another huge surprise: the lawyers who worked on this aren't taking home a percentage of the settlement. This suit was brought by the Attorneys General of Florida and New York and a whole bunch of other states. The individual lawyers probably got paid thier usual salaries.
So, feel free to fucking complain all you want, but (let me remind you) all you've done is complain. If you feel this strongly, why not do something other than bitch about the people who tried to help you?
To answer the inevitable: no, I am not a lawyer. My folks are, and I get tired of hearing how evil they are. Sheesh, you'd think they handed out pitchforks and goatees with Juris Doctorates.
Note: I don't read Japanese, so my question might actually be answered somewhere on the page.
Why is it necessary to burn a copy of an album on demand? Are the customers requesting out-of-print albums? What would they be buying that the stores wouldn't have in stock, or be able to order a regular pressed copy?
That said, this is pretty cool. There are CDs that I bought years ago and scratched into unplayability that I would still listen to, but can't find another copy to buy.
"And if I hear another MPAA or RIAA exec trying to justify the prices as being necessary to cover the costs of producing the "failures", I think I'm going to puke. No other industry I know of tries to justify their costs by pointing to perpetual mis-management, poor marketing, and poor salary negotiation skills. It's called "ROI" people, and if you can't grasp that basic concept and deal with it you should be out of business!"
It seems to me that research and development in most industries is like this. That is, the profit from the few successes pays for the R&D on everything else.
I disagree with your statement that the film industry is bad at marketing. I think they're really really good at marketing, even for crappy products.
Also, it seems to me that MPAA and RIAA employees don't make films or records. I'm guessing you meant movie studio and record company executives, in which case I must point out that I've never ever heard any of those people refer to any of their products as failures.
"machines are too easy to deploy in large numbers to stop simple violations (speeding, jaywalking, stop sign rolling, etc)." and "I am COMPLETELY against automated traffic control (red-light monitors and the like). If the cop isn't there to see it then tough noogies for them. I got away w/a minor violation."
Just because you broke the law when nobody was looking doesn't mean you didn't break the law. Are you also against cameras in banks/grocery stores/gas stations that record robberies?
If you're against a law and believe that a certain action should not be illegal, then do something about it. Write your congressman. Petition. Demonstrate. Or even -- gasp -- run for office yourself. But don't say its okay to break a law just because no one is looking.
Don't confuse this with a news story about IP law or anything else: its an editorial by Glenn Reynolds, who also runs www.instapundit.com, a Republican blog. I'm not disagreeing with his point in the article, but be sure to take it with a grain of salt.
Note to slashdot editors: It would be super if you could post these stories with some mention that it is an editorial.
"You worked at a service department? Then you should know that the European version launches at 3500rpm. Right? Well you can enter a sequence of inputs and get the launch rpm to 5000. Yes, that is an Easter Egg."
I worked at a service department in New York. Why would I know where the Euro version drops the clutch?
I used to work at a BMW dealership in the service department. When the first M3 with SMG arrived last winter, there was actually a button just aft of the shifter labelled "LAUNCH." How is this an Easter Egg?
"You can't concetrate on the social implications of progress without first having progress."
I definitely disagree. I would say that science fiction is very often about examining the social implications of progressing to a very advanced stage of technology.
For example, there is a movie coming out called "Minority Report" based on a book by Philip K. Dick (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?). The short summary is that the government can predict crimes before the occur and thus stop them from occuring at all.
On slashdot, we've discussed many times the implications of a fully deployed facial recognition system.
"Given the amazing special effects and storyline I expect the MPAA will be able to use the profits to buy off 2-3 more congressmen and take away computers just a little bit faster. It's a good thing that just about everybody on/. is a hypocrite because on Monday we can all come back here and bitch about how the **AA has too much money and how they're trying to take away freedom after we just spent a weekend gorging ourselves on the latest crap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us. Well folx. if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers. Have a nice day."
This may come as a shock to you, but not everybody hates the MPAA and the RIAA with a passion. I'm not particularly a fan, but I don't stop myself from paying for music and movies because a little bit of my money will end up in thier pockets.
You ranted a bit there about freedom and, in particular, the **AA trying to take away our computers. I wish you had been more specific. I can't relate this to anything I remember reading about the MPAA or RIAA, so please feel free to elaborate.
Towards the end of the post you made a statement about slashdot readers bitching about how the **AA has too much money... gorging ourselves on the latest cvrap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us. I'm not sure if you know how much time, money, and effort go into the process of making movies, but suffice it to say that the real crap never makes it past a screenplay. If you're really that upset about it, why not try ignoring it instead of being morally outraged that somebody had the chutzpah to make a bad movie and then fling it in your direction? They don't do it to personally upset you.
I, for one, really like going to see movies. Even bad movies usually have a redeeming factor somewhere. I'm a photographer, and I really enjoy seeing what kind of images moviemakers come up with. If you remember Armageddon starring Bruce Willis and a bunch of other random people, you probably remember that it was a pretty terrible movie. It still had some pretty neat CG and cinematography.
I know I quoted this already, but it bears repeating. You posted "if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers." I think you may need to reexamine your perspective if you really believe this.
"And yes I *DO* have a lot of karma to burn, and no I *DON'T* care so mod me down you little hypocrite for hitting a little too close to home. You know I'm right."
This brings up an interesting question. Who modded this post up to 4? And why? What content was so good in this post that four separate people felt it was worth making more noticable?
If it were otherwise, someone can explain to me why a ten year old F150 supercab with a 2.5 ton truck 4 speed and a carbuerated 351 gets better MPG than a standard cab F150 with a 5 speed with overdrive and fuel injection and a 302? New ain't always better.
That's a pretty good question, and since I'm a spaz for minor details, I went looking for the answer at Edmunds.com. According to them:
I was able to get mileage data for the 1991 model year, and it was 16/20 city/highway for the 4.9L 6-cyl. So, given those numbers, newer is better.
As for the new 7-series, I like it. Even the wierd rear end is growing on me. I had the opportunity to take a ride in one back in January, and I was pretty impressed. Regardless of the gadgets and gizmos, I don't think another sedan in the class can touch it in terms of driving fun.
According to the Uniform Commercial Code - I forget which part - a third party beneficiary is not entitled to pretty much anything.
An analogy that my professor used was if a municipality is paving an off-ramp from a highway, and somebody decides to build a restaurant at the end of it. If, for some reason, the off-ramp is canceled, the restaurant owner can't win any damages.
On a more Spider-Man related note, I've been collecting these comics since I was about 12 years old. At first, I wasn't sure that Tobey Maguire would be able to pull off a convincing Peter Parker. Anyone see the movie and have an opinion on this?
Of course you need lots of film for that too. Pretty much standard is 100ft (30.5m) or 55ft (17m) rolls (with these you can fill standard 36 exposure canisters). That is enough for about 800 exposures.
You're a little bit off there. A 100 foot roll of bulk load film is good for about 18 rolls, 36 exposures each. 36*18 = 648 exposures, not 800.
Also, the equipment you linked to doesn't appear to work with any autofocus Nikon bodies, something that I think would be pretty vital in this situation.
On that note, I would use a Canon body. The optics are nearly as good as Nikon, and the autofocus system is much faster, and in my experience, more reliably hits the objects you really wanted.
We learn that they're suing to, among other things, keep the products that were sent to them at AOL's expense.
According to article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, if any party sends another party unsolicited goods, the recieving party is entitled to keep them. They don't even have to sue for that.
The original poster, technode, seems to have the same assumption that most of the slashdot readership tends to, which is that there isn't any reason that Linux shouldn't be a desktop OS. I disagree with that.
Linux is a Unix clone, right? At this point, I don't think anyone disputes that Unix is a server OS, not a desktop OS. It does a great job at doing all those complicated server things (too many to enumerate here).
In big business, in America, Linux has done best as a server OS. OEM vendors who sell machines with Linux preinstalled do so with their server lineup. For example, IBM.
I'm a firm believer in using the right tool for the job. As such, it makes perfect sense to me that video production houses use Avids instead of IBM Thinkpads. And that most businesses put Windows or Macs on the desktop and Unix (or some kind of server OS) in the air conditioned rooms.
My point is simply that Linux excels at being a really fast, stable server OS. Benchmarks have shown over and over that it can do it faster than a Windows server. Why would you need an office productivity suite on your server?
(If I don't instantly get modded down to -1 Troll, please try to reply in a polite fashion. I'm more likely to read and reply if you leave out comments about my mother.)
Slashdot Mirror
With the empire destroyed, Luke runs for President with his loyal Chief of Staff, Han Solo, Communications Director, Chewbacca, and Press Secretary CJ Cregg.
Star Wars, Episode VIII: Return of the Omnibus Spending Resolution
I hear they're bringing in Aaron Sorkin to write it.
He should have named that site jewishconspiracypenpal.com. He's got a pretty strong anti-Jew thing happening in more than a few of the articles on the site.
Thanks, editors! You guys are aw3s0m3!
Not using fixer when you process black and white film is like not using fire in an internal combustion engine. The reaction is short-lived and not all that useful.
"sorry but your digital photos do not have the color depth of film. however, this is not a reflection of your skills as a photographer"
I guess that depends on how you define "color depth." but more important is the medium on which you observe the image. You looked at my pictures on your monitor, which is an RBG device displaying 72 dpi. If you compare a print from color film (slide or negative) next to a print from a digital SLR, each one can be tweaked so that the prints look nearly indistinguishable*.
Two things I've noticed about the D60 that could stand to be improved are that photos are generally overexposed by about a half stop, and reds tend to get blown out (endemic to the CMOS sensor, I once read).
* Assumes the same lens or comparable lenses were used for each shot.
Excellent point.
IAAPP (I Am A Professional Photographer), and have been shooting almost exclusively digital for almost a year now. I have a Canon D60, which gives me about 6.1 megapixels, a 1 gig IBM microdrive, and two Lexar 256 meg CF cards. The microdrive must have bad sectors or something, because the write speed after a year is abysmal. The Lexar cards still work perfectly.
On a related topic, every so often someone will tell me that the digital SLRs don't give you a qualitatively "better" image than a point-and-shoot. Judge for yourself: fotki gallery.
"Have you *EVER* tried to load a different OS (as in what did not come originally on the system) nto a Sony Notebook?? You will tear your hair and generally feel like throwing out the notebook... ou will find no drivers or support on their site or it, and contacting Sony will give you a response of "It did not come with that OS so we do ot support it""
I hate to post a me-too, but.. umm... ME TOO. I have a Vaio FX300 which came with XP Home, which sucks. I don't think I've ever used any of the preloaded apps (the preloaded Photoshop Limited Ed. install doesn't even work.. keeps asking for a serial number that Sony didn't give me). The first week I had it, I tried installing 2000 Professional on it. I tried using the Sony-supplied driver packages for similar models, and even hardware vendor-supplied drivers. It f*@king never worked right, and I ended up restoring from the CDs that came with the unit.
Also, the CD drive seems to be stuck on single speed (150kb/s) which makes it really hard to watch video files burned to CD or copy large amounts of data. I'm a photographer, and I do a lot of digital work, and that drives me crazy. I have absolutely no idea how to fix this.
Those complaints aside, I do like the machine. The screen is the best I've ever owned on a laptop. I don't think it competes favorably to the newest Dell or Powerbooks, but for the photography work I do, it definitely works well enough (after being properly calibrated).
A note on PC vs. Mac: I've been using PCs running Windows and occasionally Linux for years, but in January bought a Powermac G4-733 with a DVD burner so I could make movies shot on MiniDV. I'd like to echo a sentiment expressed many times before this, which is "the right tool for the job." I dig Final Cut Pro in a big way, and OSX is pretty neat. I always get the feeling that user input is the lowest priority for the system, but months after I made my last movie, the Mac is still my primary machine.
I saw the Sony TR1 on www.kemplar.com a few weeks ago, but it was apparantly the "Japanese Wi-Fi edition" or something. Whatever. I'm glad to see such a cool-ass machine make its way to the states. I just hope Apple doesn't sue over the similarites in the case to the Mac notebooks.
That isn't necessarily correct. There are often times that a source wishes to remain anonymous. For example, the identity of Woodward and Bernstein's "deep throat" was kept secret when they broke the Watergate scandal.
For a journalist, cultivating sources means cultivating trust. In many instances, people are dying to talk, to get their name in the press (for example, Linda Tripp). In many other instances, people with valuable information may need to be assured of a certain level of control with regard to the information they divulge. A journalist who expects to do more than one story with a source that trusts them absolutely must respect boundaries.
I'm no scientist, but I am a geek with way too much time on my hands. So here's my comparison of Slashdot and Twizzlers Strawberry Twists.
1. Construction
Twizzlers are soft and yielding to the touch, and taste pleasant. Slashdot is hard and smells like burning plastic and all I can taste at the moment is gauze. Both are low fat.
Twizzlers 1
Slashdot 0
2. Information Value
The Twizzlers package informs me that the Strawberry Twists contained therein are not a significant source of dietary fiber or vitamins. Slashdot keeps me up to date on the latest linux kernel and how many bunny rabbits the RIAA has killed.
Twizzlers 0
Slashdot 1
3. Interface
Each Strawberry Twist is hollow and can be used as a straw. They also make excellent micro-whips and coffee stirrers. Slashdot's color scheme isn't as pretty as Twizzlers'.
Twizzlers 1
Slashdot 0
Total scores:
Twizzlers 2 (winner)
Slashdot 1
Sorry Slashdot. You can't compete with chewy candy goodness.
"Are you fucking stupid? If you are getting money from it that is because you were ripped off. And you'll probably get much less than you were ripped off for."
No, actually I'm not fucking stupid. But that clever rejoinder does give me an idea about what we can expect out of you.
"Ripped off" is a pretty subjective phrase. If a particular CD was worth a certain amount of money to me, then I was not ripped off. The unfair thing that this lawsuit addressed was price fixing. But that kind of violation does not automatically mean that anyone who was affected by it was ripped off.
"Yes, fuck the lawyers who get millions while we get either jack shit or twenty fucking bucks.
Fuck the judge that allowed a settlement in which consumers get a tiny fraction of the price-fixing harm, while the attorneys (let me remind you!) get millions.
Earned it? The only work they did was get RIAA member companies to pay them a small amount relative to the total harm to get them off the hook. It sounds much more like collusion than anything else."
Here comes another huge surprise: the lawyers who worked on this aren't taking home a percentage of the settlement. This suit was brought by the Attorneys General of Florida and New York and a whole bunch of other states. The individual lawyers probably got paid thier usual salaries.
So, feel free to fucking complain all you want, but (let me remind you) all you've done is complain. If you feel this strongly, why not do something other than bitch about the people who tried to help you?
To answer the inevitable: no, I am not a lawyer. My folks are, and I get tired of hearing how evil they are. Sheesh, you'd think they handed out pitchforks and goatees with Juris Doctorates.
"As usual, the lawyers win a lot more than you will, but the ..."
This may come as a huge surprise, but the lawyers actually earned that money. All you had to do was fill out a form on the web.
Note: I don't read Japanese, so my question might actually be answered somewhere on the page.
Why is it necessary to burn a copy of an album on demand? Are the customers requesting out-of-print albums? What would they be buying that the stores wouldn't have in stock, or be able to order a regular pressed copy?
That said, this is pretty cool. There are CDs that I bought years ago and scratched into unplayability that I would still listen to, but can't find another copy to buy.
"And if I hear another MPAA or RIAA exec trying to justify the prices as being necessary to cover the costs of producing the "failures", I think I'm going to puke. No other industry I know of tries to justify their costs by pointing to perpetual mis-management, poor marketing, and poor salary negotiation skills. It's called "ROI" people, and if you can't grasp that basic concept and deal with it you should be out of business!"
It seems to me that research and development in most industries is like this. That is, the profit from the few successes pays for the R&D on everything else.
I disagree with your statement that the film industry is bad at marketing. I think they're really really good at marketing, even for crappy products.
Also, it seems to me that MPAA and RIAA employees don't make films or records. I'm guessing you meant movie studio and record company executives, in which case I must point out that I've never ever heard any of those people refer to any of their products as failures.
"machines are too easy to deploy in large numbers to stop simple violations (speeding, jaywalking, stop sign rolling, etc)."
and
"I am COMPLETELY against automated traffic control (red-light monitors and the like). If the cop isn't there to see it then tough noogies for them. I got away w/a minor violation."
Just because you broke the law when nobody was looking doesn't mean you didn't break the law. Are you also against cameras in banks/grocery stores/gas stations that record robberies?
If you're against a law and believe that a certain action should not be illegal, then do something about it. Write your congressman. Petition. Demonstrate. Or even -- gasp -- run for office yourself. But don't say its okay to break a law just because no one is looking.
Don't confuse this with a news story about IP law or anything else: its an editorial by Glenn Reynolds, who also runs www.instapundit.com, a Republican blog. I'm not disagreeing with his point in the article, but be sure to take it with a grain of salt.
Note to slashdot editors: It would be super if you could post these stories with some mention that it is an editorial.
"You worked at a service department? Then you should know that the European version launches at 3500rpm. Right? Well you can enter a sequence of inputs and get the launch rpm to 5000. Yes, that is an Easter Egg."
I worked at a service department in New York. Why would I know where the Euro version drops the clutch?
I used to work at a BMW dealership in the service department. When the first M3 with SMG arrived last winter, there was actually a button just aft of the shifter labelled "LAUNCH." How is this an Easter Egg?
"You can't concetrate on the social implications of progress without first having progress."
I definitely disagree. I would say that science fiction is very often about examining the social implications of progressing to a very advanced stage of technology.
For example, there is a movie coming out called "Minority Report" based on a book by Philip K. Dick (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?). The short summary is that the government can predict crimes before the occur and thus stop them from occuring at all.
On slashdot, we've discussed many times the implications of a fully deployed facial recognition system.
"Given the amazing special effects and storyline I expect the MPAA will be able to use the profits to buy off 2-3 more congressmen and take away computers just a little bit faster. It's a good thing that just about everybody on /. is a hypocrite because on Monday we can all come back here and bitch about how the **AA has too much money and how they're trying to take away freedom after we just spent a weekend gorging ourselves on the latest crap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us. Well folx. if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers. Have a nice day."
... gorging ourselves on the latest cvrap they flung up against the wall to squeeze a little more money out of us. I'm not sure if you know how much time, money, and effort go into the process of making movies, but suffice it to say that the real crap never makes it past a screenplay. If you're really that upset about it, why not try ignoring it instead of being morally outraged that somebody had the chutzpah to make a bad movie and then fling it in your direction? They don't do it to personally upset you.
This may come as a shock to you, but not everybody hates the MPAA and the RIAA with a passion. I'm not particularly a fan, but I don't stop myself from paying for music and movies because a little bit of my money will end up in thier pockets.
You ranted a bit there about freedom and, in particular, the **AA trying to take away our computers. I wish you had been more specific. I can't relate this to anything I remember reading about the MPAA or RIAA, so please feel free to elaborate.
Towards the end of the post you made a statement about slashdot readers bitching about how the **AA has too much money
I, for one, really like going to see movies. Even bad movies usually have a redeeming factor somewhere. I'm a photographer, and I really enjoy seeing what kind of images moviemakers come up with. If you remember Armageddon starring Bruce Willis and a bunch of other random people, you probably remember that it was a pretty terrible movie. It still had some pretty neat CG and cinematography.
I know I quoted this already, but it bears repeating. You posted "if you see this movie, you deserve to not have any computers." I think you may need to reexamine your perspective if you really believe this.
"And yes I *DO* have a lot of karma to burn, and no I *DON'T* care so mod me down you little hypocrite for hitting a little too close to home. You know I'm right."
This brings up an interesting question. Who modded this post up to 4? And why? What content was so good in this post that four separate people felt it was worth making more noticable?
That's a pretty good question, and since I'm a spaz for minor details, I went looking for the answer at Edmunds.com. According to them:
2002 Ford F-150 Fullsize Crew Cab Truck
4.6L V8
231 hp @ 4750
293 ft-lbs. @ 3500 rpm
Estimated milegage (city/highway) 16/20 mpg (with automatic transmission)
Source: http://www.edmunds.com/new/2002/ford/f150/4drsupe
1992 Ford F-150 Fullsize Extended Cab Truck
(I couldn't find "supercab," I figured this would be close enough)
4.9L straight 6
145 hp @ 3400 rpm
265ft-lbs. @ 2000 rpm
No mileage data posted here
Source: http://www.edmunds.com/used/1992/ford/f150/2drxlt
I was able to get mileage data for the 1991 model year, and it was 16/20 city/highway for the 4.9L 6-cyl. So, given those numbers, newer is better.
As for the new 7-series, I like it. Even the wierd rear end is growing on me. I had the opportunity to take a ride in one back in January, and I was pretty impressed. Regardless of the gadgets and gizmos, I don't think another sedan in the class can touch it in terms of driving fun.
An analogy that my professor used was if a municipality is paving an off-ramp from a highway, and somebody decides to build a restaurant at the end of it. If, for some reason, the off-ramp is canceled, the restaurant owner can't win any damages.
On a more Spider-Man related note, I've been collecting these comics since I was about 12 years old. At first, I wasn't sure that Tobey Maguire would be able to pull off a convincing Peter Parker. Anyone see the movie and have an opinion on this?
You're a little bit off there. A 100 foot roll of bulk load film is good for about 18 rolls, 36 exposures each. 36*18 = 648 exposures, not 800.
Also, the equipment you linked to doesn't appear to work with any autofocus Nikon bodies, something that I think would be pretty vital in this situation.
On that note, I would use a Canon body. The optics are nearly as good as Nikon, and the autofocus system is much faster, and in my experience, more reliably hits the objects you really wanted.
According to article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, if any party sends another party unsolicited goods, the recieving party is entitled to keep them. They don't even have to sue for that.
The original poster, technode, seems to have the same assumption that most of the slashdot readership tends to, which is that there isn't any reason that Linux shouldn't be a desktop OS. I disagree with that.
Linux is a Unix clone, right? At this point, I don't think anyone disputes that Unix is a server OS, not a desktop OS. It does a great job at doing all those complicated server things (too many to enumerate here).
In big business, in America, Linux has done best as a server OS. OEM vendors who sell machines with Linux preinstalled do so with their server lineup. For example, IBM.
I'm a firm believer in using the right tool for the job. As such, it makes perfect sense to me that video production houses use Avids instead of IBM Thinkpads. And that most businesses put Windows or Macs on the desktop and Unix (or some kind of server OS) in the air conditioned rooms.
My point is simply that Linux excels at being a really fast, stable server OS. Benchmarks have shown over and over that it can do it faster than a Windows server. Why would you need an office productivity suite on your server?
(If I don't instantly get modded down to -1 Troll, please try to reply in a polite fashion. I'm more likely to read and reply if you leave out comments about my mother.)