The purpose of the TV medium is to park your eyeballs on commercials so that you will buy the products. From the pov of the TV folks, the shows are incidental.
Unfortunately, you the viewer have demonstrated an unfortunate reluctance to immerse yourself in 30-120 minute blocks of advertisements.
Until such time as TV producers find a way to convince you to do that, you can expect them to do as much as is technically possible to add commercials until you get frustrated and stop watching TV.
The networks don't care whether you like the content of the programs. They only care whether you will watch the programs enough that a certain percentage of you see and or hear the advertisements.
People have gifts that they don't even know. People have options. People make choices and those choices mean that some doors are opened, and others are closed by those choices.
Clearly single moms have limited opportunities. Some of that is a result of their choices. Some things are beyond their control.
"Bet you never thought about a woman's opportunities in IT - did ya?"
In fact, I have. I have some good friends that are single moms and they do have some limits.
Also, I work for a major company that is aggressively promoting women. While many of our female employees are smart and hard working, a disproportionate number are being promoted to high positions. Many of them are getting bumped up through the ranks at double or triple the speed of most men in the company.
It's a fact of life in many big companies that women are more likely to get promoted than men.
Not enough room in the high positions?
We make our choices, and we have the chance to make room for ourselves. If there's no room, you can make your own company and have lots of opportunities.
I disagree with that assertion. My dad was in his 40's when he went through school. He waited until his kids were in college and then he went back. Age discrimination? Work as a self-employed contractor was available to him, and he was comfortable with it.
While I'm on the subject, I don't think that Ray Croc or Col. Harlan Sanders was stopped by age discrimination, and you've probably eaten at McDonalds AND KFC (if you live in the US, that is)
Both started their companies after they were past 40.
My family lived in a fairly low cost city in a state with high unemployment (WV) and we were able to swing it.
If all you're qualified to do is minimum-wage work, then moving to someplace with a lower cost of living just makes sense.
I didn't grow up in a "'burb with good schools." We make our opportunities, as well as our choices.
BTW - Ray and Harlan had plenty of $$ when they died.
With all due respect, I'm no superman, and you wouldn't have to be superman to do it either.
I went to school with some brilliant people, but I also went to school with some folks who weren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, either.
For example, my senior year I was in an all-out run for head of one class against a man who was a laid-off coal miner.
Nice guy, but on his best day, he had an average IQ. On his BEST day. One thing this guy had was a work ethic. He put in more hours than could be counted to make up for his lack of mental capacity, and it paid off in spades! This guy was the top of his classes because of the sweat equity.
If Carl could succeed in school, anyone could. He was a hard worker with a family. Certainly he and his family made huge sacrifices to get him through college, but that was his choice, too.
I've heard that Henry Ford said something to the effect of "If you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right."
Let's inspire people to achieve rather than focus on limitations. Let's help people choose to make a better way for themselves rather than stay stuck in the mire.
Low wage jobs can be unpleasant. The managers there frequently have no training in how to work with people. Production oriented jobs like the one described in the article are often focused on keeping the line moving.
And yet, these people choose to work there for $8 an hour. This is their choice. They also opt to live in one of the most expensive places in the world. This too is a choice.
Before you pound on me for being heartless, it may be important to note that I have passed through that place, as well. I come from a poor family in an economically depressed area.
I have worked as a laborer doing back-breaking work by the sweat of my brow. I have also worked in mall jobs that were production oriented. "No talking! You're here to work, not have fun!" I have worked in food service as a busboy and waiter for long hours and late nights.
It was my experience in those places that motivated me to get my education. Without those jobs, I would not have chosen to finish school.
People can go to school, even while working a low-wage job. I did it, my parents did it in their 40's, and YOU can do it, too.
If it's too expensive where you live, MOVE to somewhere cheaper. Don't want to move? Be creative, find a way to make it work. Don't want to do that? Then accept the fact that you will work that kind of job for the rest of your days.
The future is in your hands. Repeat after me: "If it's to be, it's up to me. If it's to be, it's up to me. If it's to be....."
I can't believe the comment about our opressive government! Obviously you people have not studied oppression in history!
Clearly we must be vigilant in our maintenance of our freedoms, but to compare China with the US in terms of controlling information is simply demonstrating a lack of education.
Have you looked into what China did to US reporters during the Tiananmen square uprising? Contrast that with the US media in President Clinton's face demanding to know what exactly he had or had not done with "That woman, Miss Lewinsky."
The government having the capacity to screen emails at ISPs may be unpleasant to you. If so, encrypt your email. Carnivore _may_ be something that we need to stop, but it is NOTHING like the opression suffered by the people of the PRC.
Get off your self-righteous horse, and live under martial law at the hands of a despotic dictator for a while. Then come whining to me about "oppression" in the US.
It is practical when you think in terms of the cost of ownership. PC's cost a bunch of money to support. Sure, the one that you have is reliable and seems to work well, but you're a technically capable maintainer.
The appeal of this sort of device is that it has no moving parts to break, and it's vey difficult to corrupt the system. When one fails, the user can be back up an running by pulling the spare unit out of the closet and plugging it in.
The reliability of a green-screen, with the features of a GUI terminal. Very cool...and it runs Linux, and works perfectly with Citrix boxes. We've recently evaluated these units and plan to add them to out environment.
[from SF fandom via Usenet; abbreviation for `In My Humble Opinion'] "IMHO, mixed-case C names should be avoided, as mistyping something in the wrong case can cause hard-to-detect errors -- and they look too Pascalish anyhow." Also seen in variant forms such as IMNSHO (In My Not-So-Humble Opinion) and IMAO (In My Arrogant Opinion).
Anomaly
PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you. If you'd like to know more, please email me directly.
IANANPPW (Nobel Peace Prize Winner) but is occurs to me that the chances of eliminating war are somewhat less than the chances of me winning the lottery.
The issue is one of world view. The folks that bombed the US earnestly believed that they were doing the right thing. Their world view teaches that elimination of those who refuse to adopt their world view is appropriate.
You could then argue that the problem is one of religion - merely eliminate religion and the problem is resolved.
However, if one chooses an atheistic world view, it is not illogical to act in one's perceived best interest to the detriment of others.
I'm not accusing atheists of selfishly abusing others, I'm just suggesting that behavior of that sort is not entirely inconsistent with the lack of objective measurements of right and wrong.
And finally, the existance of playground bullies tells us that there will be those who choose force to accomplish their goals regardless of whether it can be morally justified.
Sometimes force is the only way to stop people bent on forcing their world view on others. Neville Chamberlain believed that peace could be accomplished through appeasement. He was wrong.
Today we have Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and dozens of others whose lusts will not be satisfied through negotiations. Tomorrow there will be more.
If you are a materialist - which I presume based on your "invisible superheroes" comment - you have the challenge of explaining the material universe not having turned all of the kinetic energy into heat an eternity ago.
I think that the "invisible superhero" makes a bit of sense given that you may need to bend the known rules of physics to allow for eternally existent matter.
It's one thing to say that there are variations within a kind, but there are substantive issues with suggesting that the same process can explain the existance of the great diversity of species.
I don't argue that species features are observed to change. That is objectively measureable.
Of course scientists speculate, but there's a difference between speculations that can be tested and those that cannot.
Those that can be tested are called hypothesis - after testing they are called theories.
Those that cannot be tested are appropriately called speculation, or beliefs. They are not science, and shold not be called that.
If you mean evolution in terms of adaptation based on traits that make the species more hearty, that is scientific and observable.
Extension of that pattern to explain origin of species is not scientific in nature. It is merely conjecture. When you speak of origin of all species, you move past the scientific method. Since it's not a theory that can be tested, it can't be called science.
Evolutionists and creationists have the same data, we just have different explanations of the cause of that data.
Your belief that it is explainable by survival of the fittest, time and chance may be the "only game in town that makes sense" to you, but having a creator who intelligently designed the basic species and allowed them to adapt from there seems to me to fit the evidence more accurately.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you. If you want to know more about this, please contact me at tom_cooper@bigfoot.com
Thanks. You helped make my point with great clarity. I fully understand (intellectually) that chemical addiction can easily be outside the ability of the addict to overcome without outside intervention.
Non-chemical so-called addiction is merely excuse-making.
Besides, a tendency toward addictive behaviors is a symptom of other issues. If the other issues can be addressed (and the physical compulsion for the chemical can be overcome) the problem is unlikely to recur.
It's not that I'm heartless, but it seems disingenuous to claim that choosing to back away from the keyboard is outside the control of the "addict."
It frustrates me greatly that people try to claim victim status when they are victimized only by their choices.
According to the listed standard, I think I could be described as sleep addicted, food addicted, air addicted, and for that matter addicted to converstations with my wife and playing with my kids!
I enjoy computer games. I know what it's like to drag my butt in to the office and lack productvity all day because I was up until the wee hours of the morning playing video games.
My point is this. We make many choices which reflect a person's values and priorities. When I watch the movie or stay up late playing RTCW, I pay the consequences. As a result, I choose not to do that very often! When I choose to do that, I blame myself, not some psychological condition.
Choosing to value the wrong things is simply a lack of discipline. Lack of discipline is a character problem, not an addiction over which the person has no control.
The problem is a lack of will, and the consequences are simply the results of bad choices.
Take control of your life by taking responsibility for your choices, values and character! Choose to put down the controller, or even to get rid of the console.
Get involved with people. It's harder, and hurts more, but is far more rewarding than having the perfect score in Pitfall!
FYI - While I have been a linux user since '94, and all but one of my PCs is running Linux today, Jesus is far more popular with _this_ computer geek than is a free operating system and applications.:)
I generally don't respond to trolls or ACs, but it's late (for me) and I'm foolishly willing to invest the time.
Please note that I said I acquired it, not that I bought it. When someone is giving away free hardware, the driver compatibility is less of a concern than the cost.
BTW - I was able to make the camera work for my purposes both under Win'98 and Linux, so I'm satisfied with the outcome.
Wrong. It boils down to a few people making heavy-handed decisions about distribution. Sorry, but if something gets an NC-17, that means Blockbuster and Hollywood won't carry it, as well as most major theater chains. That cuts out at least 80% of a potential audience for a movie, especially in rural areas.
Why won't the theater owners and the video chains carry these products? Could it be because people simply don't buy them often enough to justify the time and expense to bring them to the marketplace?
More movies equals more chances for failure
Let me put it this way. If you had the opportunity to invest in a mutual fund that represented the most common companies in the US, or a mutual fund that represented a minority of companies which over a 10 year timeframe consistently produced 78% higher results, which fund would you want your money in?
they usually have tons of merchandise to help the make the big bucks. The study didn't count merchandising in the revenues generated by the film, just ticket sales and rental revenues.
Disney? I don't do business with them. I find them offensive.
Ratings are not necessary anymore. They help me weed out the vast majority of films. I know that it's the very rare "R" film that is worth my time. I generally don't have to consider those at all. I appreciate the ratings.
American obsession with...[breasts and sexual settings]...religious people hyping this stuff over the content of the movie are to blame, what do you think? I think that it's simply easier to appeal to man's more base desires than it is to be genuinely creative in our artistic expression. It's not that Carlin, Murphy, and Pryor were funnier - it's that we'd never been shocked like that before. Really creative storytellers don't need to rely on nudity and flames to get the attention of the audience. Most of the films produced are low on entertainment value, and not content-rich any way.
WRT quality of films, I didn't address that at all. I was speaking in terms of what the market seems to want to buy. I don't patronize the pokemon films, or other banal so-called entertainment.
As an adult, who is competent to choose what things I want to put in my head, I appreciate a ratings system which helps me make an informed decision about what movies are possibles, which ones are likely viewable, and which ones are completely off the radar screen.
All of the things that we watch and listen to shape us, even if that shaping is in a very very minor way. They affect the way that we perceive the world around us, and the way that we make decisions. This is the origin of the idea of the "important film."
I choose not to be shaped by violence, drugs and rampant sexual permissiveness. This is part of my freedom. The movie makers are free to make whatever films they want, and we are free to patronize them or not. I respect your right in the US to make and watch films which are focused on ideas and world views that are in conflict with my world view. I'm glad you have that right.
WRT to the issue of movies being edited so that they meet some criteria in a raings system, I believe that the digitization of movies will allow much greater freedom in the area of "director's releases." This should do a great deal to alleviate your concerns about having someone else's world view shape your choices.
On the topic of the financial death sentence of the NC-17 rating - it boils down to what the customer wants.
Interestingly, the American public is apparently less interested in movies with "R" content than those with "G" content. This report shows that "G" rated movies make a 78% better ROI than "R" movies.
Hollywood is more interested in doing a poor job of telling a story and livening up the movie with explosions, guns, and of course, bare breasts in sexual settings, than it is in making money. These things lead to pats on the back from their "artistic peers" and statistically this must be more important than making $$
After using the ratings system to assist with the triage process, I then choose to refer to information-based websites like Screenit which give me a tremendous amount of information about the movie's contents and lets me make an informed decision about whether I want to see what the director wanted to say.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Regards, Anomaly
PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you. If you would like to know more about this, please contact me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com.
I can give two recent examples:
1. I recently upgraded vmware on Linux, which required me to change my video driver, because the vmware code for the video adapter changed. (Please note that this example works just as well when you upgrade video cards.) When I rebooted with the upgraded video device, my machine would hang. Apparently it's critically important to first tell Windows (98) that the video device is 640x480 standard VGA. It took several reboots to remove the offending adapter driver and get the machine working again.
(BTW - on RH Linux, when I install a new video adapter, the on-boot hardware detection routine notices and asks me to configure it. One boot cycle to fully functional X windows. If I didn't need to power down to install the card, it would have required 0 boot cycles!)
2. I recently acquired a Kensington USB video camera. Kensington no longer manufactures such devices, and has produced drivers for '95&'98 only. Users with 2000 or XP are simply out of luck. While I have a '98 machine on which I can use the camera, if I want to "upgrade" to a later version of windows, I'll need to buy new hardware.
(BTW - Interestingly, on RH Linux I was able to get the camera working just fine with xawtv. Here a device is not supported by the manufacturer, no Linux drivers have been produced, and the free software geeks reverse engineered the functionality and produced drivers, then gave them away!)
Don't even get me started on how dang complex all of this stuff is! My sister just got a cable modem and wants to set up a network so her kids can share the internet connection with her. She needs a firewall, proxy server/NAT solution, LAN adapters, cabling, ad nauseum! None of that is trifling, regardless of OS. (For her I'm recommending a dedicated device for firewall and a local consultant to assist with configuration.)
WRT your problems, have you had the opportunity to seek assistance from any newsgroups/mailing lists? I'm not sure that I can be of great assistance, but I'm willing to try. Please email me if you are interested.
Interesting.sig I've only seen that quote one other place. I'd like to know how you picked it.
If you care to, please email me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com.
I can see how the type of content to which you are responding might cause you to disbelieve, but what is portrayed by the poster is not consistent with what the Bible says.
I believe that the existence of God gives a foundation of reason on which we can stand when investigating the universe through the scientific method.
If you have any level of interest in pursuing this discussion, please contact me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com.
God loves you and longs for relationship with you.
I sincerely hope that I can provide my kids an opportunity to spend four years naked, vomiting and not giving a damn.
I'm saddened to think that this is what you hope to offer your kids. There's so much more to life than hedonism.
I hope you find better dreams for the next generation.
Regards,
Anomaly PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you. If you would like to know more about this, please email me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com
Slashdot Mirror
The purpose of the TV medium is to park your eyeballs on commercials so that you will buy the products. From the pov of the TV folks, the shows are incidental.
Unfortunately, you the viewer have demonstrated an unfortunate reluctance to immerse yourself in 30-120 minute blocks of advertisements.
Until such time as TV producers find a way to convince you to do that, you can expect them to do as much as is technically possible to add commercials until you get frustrated and stop watching TV.
The networks don't care whether you like the content of the programs. They only care whether you will watch the programs enough that a certain percentage of you see and or hear the advertisements.
People have gifts that they don't even know. People have options. People make choices and those choices mean that some doors are opened, and others are closed by those choices.
Clearly single moms have limited opportunities. Some of that is a result of their choices. Some things are beyond their control.
"Bet you never thought about a woman's opportunities in IT - did ya?"
In fact, I have. I have some good friends that are single moms and they do have some limits.
Also, I work for a major company that is aggressively promoting women. While many of our female employees are smart and hard working, a disproportionate number are being promoted to high positions. Many of them are getting bumped up through the ranks at double or triple the speed of most men in the company.
It's a fact of life in many big companies that women are more likely to get promoted than men.
Not enough room in the high positions?
We make our choices, and we have the chance to make room for ourselves. If there's no room, you can make your own company and have lots of opportunities.
Whoops! That's Ray Kroc, not Croc.
I disagree with that assertion. My dad was in his 40's when he went through school. He waited until his kids were in college and then he went back. Age discrimination? Work as a self-employed contractor was available to him, and he was comfortable with it.
While I'm on the subject, I don't think that Ray Croc or Col. Harlan Sanders was stopped by age discrimination, and you've probably eaten at McDonalds AND KFC (if you live in the US, that is)
Both started their companies after they were past 40.
My family lived in a fairly low cost city in a state with high unemployment (WV) and we were able to swing it.
If all you're qualified to do is minimum-wage work, then moving to someplace with a lower cost of living just makes sense.
I didn't grow up in a "'burb with good schools." We make our opportunities, as well as our choices.
BTW - Ray and Harlan had plenty of $$ when they died.
With all due respect, I'm no superman, and you wouldn't have to be superman to do it either.
I went to school with some brilliant people, but I also went to school with some folks who weren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, either.
For example, my senior year I was in an all-out run for head of one class against a man who was a laid-off coal miner.
Nice guy, but on his best day, he had an average IQ. On his BEST day. One thing this guy had was a work ethic. He put in more hours than could be counted to make up for his lack of mental capacity, and it paid off in spades! This guy was the top of his classes because of the sweat equity.
If Carl could succeed in school, anyone could. He was a hard worker with a family. Certainly he and his family made huge sacrifices to get him through college, but that was his choice, too.
I've heard that Henry Ford said something to the effect of "If you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right."
Let's inspire people to achieve rather than focus on limitations. Let's help people choose to make a better way for themselves rather than stay stuck in the mire.
Low wage jobs can be unpleasant. The managers there frequently have no training in how to work with people. Production oriented jobs like the one described in the article are often focused on keeping the line moving.
And yet, these people choose to work there for $8 an hour. This is their choice. They also opt to live in one of the most expensive places in the world. This too is a choice.
Before you pound on me for being heartless, it may be important to note that I have passed through that place, as well. I come from a poor family in an economically depressed area.
I have worked as a laborer doing back-breaking work by the sweat of my brow. I have also worked in mall jobs that were production oriented. "No talking! You're here to work, not have fun!" I have worked in food service as a busboy and waiter for long hours and late nights.
It was my experience in those places that motivated me to get my education. Without those jobs, I would not have chosen to finish school.
People can go to school, even while working a low-wage job. I did it, my parents did it in their 40's, and YOU can do it, too.
If it's too expensive where you live, MOVE to somewhere cheaper. Don't want to move? Be creative, find a way to make it work. Don't want to do that? Then accept the fact that you will work that kind of job for the rest of your days.
The future is in your hands. Repeat after me: "If it's to be, it's up to me. If it's to be, it's up to me. If it's to be....."
I can't believe the comment about our opressive government! Obviously you people have not studied oppression in history!
Clearly we must be vigilant in our maintenance of our freedoms, but to compare China with the US in terms of controlling information is simply demonstrating a lack of education.
Have you looked into what China did to US reporters during the Tiananmen square uprising? Contrast that with the US media in President Clinton's face demanding to know what exactly he had or had not done with "That woman, Miss Lewinsky."
The government having the capacity to screen emails at ISPs may be unpleasant to you. If so, encrypt your email. Carnivore _may_ be something that we need to stop, but it is NOTHING like the opression suffered by the people of the PRC.
Get off your self-righteous horse, and live under martial law at the hands of a despotic dictator for a while. Then come whining to me about "oppression" in the US.
It is practical when you think in terms of the cost of ownership. PC's cost a bunch of money to support. Sure, the one that you have is reliable and seems to work well, but you're a technically capable maintainer.
The appeal of this sort of device is that it has no moving parts to break, and it's vey difficult to corrupt the system. When one fails, the user can be back up an running by pulling the spare unit out of the closet and plugging it in.
The reliability of a green-screen, with the features of a GUI terminal. Very cool...and it runs Linux, and works perfectly with Citrix boxes. We've recently evaluated these units and plan to add them to out environment.
When you're looking for information, check out The Jargon File
// abbrev.
IMHO
[from SF fandom via Usenet; abbreviation for `In
My Humble Opinion'] "IMHO, mixed-case C names should be avoided, as mistyping something in the wrong case can cause hard-to-detect errors -- and they look too Pascalish anyhow." Also seen in variant forms such as IMNSHO (In My Not-So-Humble Opinion) and IMAO (In My Arrogant Opinion).
Anomaly
PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you. If you'd like to know more, please email me directly.
IANANPPW (Nobel Peace Prize Winner) but is occurs to me that the chances of eliminating war are somewhat less than the chances of me winning the lottery.
The issue is one of world view. The folks that bombed the US earnestly believed that they were doing the right thing. Their world view teaches that elimination of those who refuse to adopt their world view is appropriate.
You could then argue that the problem is one of religion - merely eliminate religion and the problem is resolved.
However, if one chooses an atheistic world view, it is not illogical to act in one's perceived best interest to the detriment of others.
I'm not accusing atheists of selfishly abusing others, I'm just suggesting that behavior of that sort is not entirely inconsistent with the lack of objective measurements of right and wrong.
And finally, the existance of playground bullies tells us that there will be those who choose force to accomplish their goals regardless of whether it can be morally justified.
Sometimes force is the only way to stop people bent on forcing their world view on others. Neville Chamberlain believed that peace could be accomplished through appeasement. He was wrong.
Today we have Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and dozens of others whose lusts will not be satisfied through negotiations. Tomorrow there will be more.
BTW - I don't buy lottery tickets
If you are a materialist - which I presume based on your "invisible superheroes" comment - you have the challenge of explaining the material universe not having turned all of the kinetic energy into heat an eternity ago.
I think that the "invisible superhero" makes a bit of sense given that you may need to bend the known rules of physics to allow for eternally existent matter.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
I thinkg we agree more than we disagree.
It's one thing to say that there are variations within a kind, but there are substantive issues with suggesting that the same process can explain the existance of the great diversity of species.
I don't argue that species features are observed to change. That is objectively measureable.
Of course scientists speculate, but there's a difference between speculations that can be tested and those that cannot.
Those that can be tested are called hypothesis - after testing they are called theories.
Those that cannot be tested are appropriately called speculation, or beliefs. They are not science, and shold not be called that.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
I think I need some clarification.
If you mean evolution in terms of adaptation based on traits that make the species more hearty, that is scientific and observable.
Extension of that pattern to explain origin of species is not scientific in nature. It is merely conjecture. When you speak of origin of all species, you move past the scientific method. Since it's not a theory that can be tested, it can't be called science.
Evolutionists and creationists have the same data, we just have different explanations of the cause of that data.
Your belief that it is explainable by survival of the fittest, time and chance may be the "only game in town that makes sense" to you, but having a creator who intelligently designed the basic species and allowed them to adapt from there seems to me to fit the evidence more accurately.
Respectfully,
Anomaly
PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you. If you want to know more about this, please contact me at tom_cooper@bigfoot.com
Thanks. You helped make my point with great clarity. I fully understand (intellectually) that chemical addiction can easily be outside the ability of the addict to overcome without outside intervention.
Non-chemical so-called addiction is merely excuse-making.
Besides, a tendency toward addictive behaviors is a symptom of other issues. If the other issues can be addressed (and the physical compulsion for the chemical can be overcome) the problem is unlikely to recur.
It's not that I'm heartless, but it seems disingenuous to claim that choosing to back away from the keyboard is outside the control of the "addict."
LOL!
Good one
It frustrates me greatly that people try to claim victim status when they are victimized only by their choices.
According to the listed standard, I think I could be described as sleep addicted, food addicted, air addicted, and for that matter addicted to converstations with my wife and playing with my kids!
I enjoy computer games. I know what it's like to drag my butt in to the office and lack productvity all day because I was up until the wee hours of the morning playing video games.
My point is this. We make many choices which reflect a person's values and priorities. When I watch the movie or stay up late playing RTCW, I pay the consequences. As a result, I choose not to do that very often! When I choose to do that, I blame myself, not some psychological condition.
Choosing to value the wrong things is simply a lack of discipline. Lack of discipline is a character problem, not an addiction over which the person has no control.
The problem is a lack of will, and the consequences are simply the results of bad choices.
Take control of your life by taking responsibility for your choices, values and character! Choose to put down the controller, or even to get rid of the console.
Get involved with people. It's harder, and hurts more, but is far more rewarding than having the perfect score in Pitfall!
FYI - While I have been a linux user since '94, and all but one of my PCs is running Linux today, Jesus is far more popular with _this_ computer geek than is a free operating system and applications. :)
I generally don't respond to trolls or ACs, but it's late (for me) and I'm foolishly willing to invest the time.
Please note that I said I acquired it, not that I bought it. When someone is giving away free hardware, the driver compatibility is less of a concern than the cost.
BTW - I was able to make the camera work for my purposes both under Win'98 and Linux, so I'm satisfied with the outcome.
Still feeling smug?
Wrong. It boils down to a few people making heavy-handed decisions about distribution. Sorry, but if something gets an NC-17, that means Blockbuster and Hollywood won't carry it, as well as most major theater chains. That cuts out at least 80% of a potential audience for a movie, especially in rural areas.
Why won't the theater owners and the video chains carry these products? Could it be because people simply don't buy them often enough to justify the time and expense to bring them to the marketplace?
More movies equals more chances for failure
Let me put it this way. If you had the opportunity to invest in a mutual fund that represented the most common companies in the US, or a mutual fund that represented a minority of companies which over a 10 year timeframe consistently produced 78% higher results, which fund would you want your money in?
they usually have tons of merchandise to help the make the big bucks.
The study didn't count merchandising in the revenues generated by the film, just ticket sales and rental revenues.
Disney?
I don't do business with them. I find them offensive.
Ratings are not necessary anymore.
They help me weed out the vast majority of films. I know that it's the very rare "R" film that is worth my time. I generally don't have to consider those at all. I appreciate the ratings.
American obsession with...[breasts and sexual settings]...religious people hyping this stuff over the content of the movie are to blame, what do you think?
I think that it's simply easier to appeal to man's more base desires than it is to be genuinely creative in our artistic expression. It's not that Carlin, Murphy, and Pryor were funnier - it's that we'd never been shocked like that before. Really creative storytellers don't need to rely on nudity and flames to get the attention of the audience. Most of the films produced are low on entertainment value, and not content-rich any way.
WRT quality of films, I didn't address that at all. I was speaking in terms of what the market seems to want to buy. I don't patronize the pokemon films, or other banal so-called entertainment.
As an adult, who is competent to choose what things I want to put in my head, I appreciate a ratings system which helps me make an informed decision about what movies are possibles, which ones are likely viewable, and which ones are completely off the radar screen.
All of the things that we watch and listen to shape us, even if that shaping is in a very very minor way. They affect the way that we perceive the world around us, and the way that we make decisions. This is the origin of the idea of the "important film."
I choose not to be shaped by violence, drugs and rampant sexual permissiveness. This is part of my freedom. The movie makers are free to make whatever films they want, and we are free to patronize them or not. I respect your right in the US to make and watch films which are focused on ideas and world views that are in conflict with my world view. I'm glad you have that right.
WRT to the issue of movies being edited so that they meet some criteria in a raings system, I believe that the digitization of movies will allow much greater freedom in the area of "director's releases." This should do a great deal to alleviate your concerns about having someone else's world view shape your choices.
On the topic of the financial death sentence of the NC-17 rating - it boils down to what the customer wants.
Interestingly, the American public is apparently less interested in movies with "R" content than those with "G" content. This report shows that "G" rated movies make a 78% better ROI than "R" movies.
Hollywood is more interested in doing a poor job of telling a story and livening up the movie with explosions, guns, and of course, bare breasts in sexual settings, than it is in making money. These things lead to pats on the back from their "artistic peers" and statistically this must be more important than making $$
After using the ratings system to assist with the triage process, I then choose to refer to information-based websites like Screenit which give me a tremendous amount of information about the movie's contents and lets me make an informed decision about whether I want to see what the director wanted to say.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Regards,
Anomaly
PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you.
If you would like to know more about this, please contact me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com.
I can give two recent examples:
1. I recently upgraded vmware on Linux, which required me to change my video driver, because the vmware code for the video adapter changed. (Please note that this example works just as well when you upgrade video cards.) When I rebooted with the upgraded video device, my machine would hang. Apparently it's critically important to first tell Windows (98) that the video device is 640x480 standard VGA. It took several reboots to remove the offending adapter driver and get the machine working again.
(BTW - on RH Linux, when I install a new video adapter, the on-boot hardware detection routine notices and asks me to configure it. One boot cycle to fully functional X windows. If I didn't need to power down to install the card, it would have required 0 boot cycles!)
2. I recently acquired a Kensington USB video camera. Kensington no longer manufactures such devices, and has produced drivers for '95&'98 only. Users with 2000 or XP are simply out of luck. While I have a '98 machine on which I can use the camera, if I want to "upgrade" to a later version of windows, I'll need to buy new hardware.
(BTW - Interestingly, on RH Linux I was able to get the camera working just fine with xawtv. Here a device is not supported by the manufacturer, no Linux drivers have been produced, and the free software geeks reverse engineered the functionality and produced drivers, then gave them away!)
Don't even get me started on how dang complex all of this stuff is! My sister just got a cable modem and wants to set up a network so her kids can share the internet connection with her. She needs a firewall, proxy server/NAT solution, LAN adapters, cabling, ad nauseum! None of that is trifling, regardless of OS. (For her I'm recommending a dedicated device for firewall and a local consultant to assist with configuration.)
WRT your problems, have you had the opportunity to seek assistance from any newsgroups/mailing lists? I'm not sure that I can be of great assistance, but I'm willing to try. Please email me if you are interested.
Interesting .sig I've only seen that quote one other place. I'd like to know how you picked it.
If you care to, please email me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com.
I can see how the type of content to which you are responding might cause you to disbelieve, but what is portrayed by the poster is not consistent with what the Bible says.
I believe that the existence of God gives a foundation of reason on which we can stand when investigating the universe through the scientific method.
If you have any level of interest in pursuing this discussion, please contact me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com.
God loves you and longs for relationship with you.
With all due respect, doesn't it seem a bit odd that a person demanding ASCII format would have a .sig that's an ideogram?
I sincerely hope that I can provide my kids an opportunity to spend four years naked, vomiting and not giving a damn.
I'm saddened to think that this is what you hope to offer your kids. There's so much more to life than hedonism.
I hope you find better dreams for the next generation.
Regards,
Anomaly
PS - God loves you and longs for relationship with you. If you would like to know more about this, please email me at tom_cooper at bigfoot dot com