often a single syllable catchy name is all it takes:).
Not according to your examples - every one is multisyllabic...
Of course, your main point is dead on. I suspect the problem with thematically-related site names is built-in. Take books - you'd remember "related name", then would try book, bookstore, library, text, novel, etc., rarely if ever going back to the right site.* The fact that "Amazon" wasn't one of the taken-for-granted synonyms for book meant that people had to make the unlikely mental connection, which then stood out because it wasn't an existing association. I think that applies to HoTMaiL, too - I bet the vast majority of its users have never noticed the HTML buried in the name.
* Lots of people (including me) forget to bookmark something until they've visited a number of times.
The quote from Brooks is extracted from an interview about The Producers movie. He says he won't be in The Producers, but that he's writing himself into the script for Spaceballs 2. IF it's not an off-hand joke (doesn't sound that way to me, FWIW), he's doing some writing while working on The Producers (the latter's probably taking the majority of his time).
I thought the first Spaceballs pretty much sucked (tho there were a few good gags mixed among the obvious and/or ancient and/or unfunny ones). And I liked the first (well, fourth, I guess) Star Wars, and SW was relatively unpretentious. So, my first reaction to this is a groan.
However...
A big chunk of the problem was that Spaceballs came out nearly a decade after the (good) flick it was lampooning. But this one'll follow three big, sucking, black holes of craptacular filmmaking - and at worst, be only a year afterward. Mel will have bloated budgets, ridiculous self-importance, insipid dialog, wooden acting, and lots of other DESERVING targets of parody (Jar Jar, anyone?).
So, Spaceballs 2 could be the only redeeming reason for SW 1-3. At worst, it can't be much worse than the first...
That power corrupts is the entire point of libertarianism. The only way government differs from a big corporation is that it granted the right to initiate force. A corrupt person in any other group can be bypassed (or at least, has to moderate his/her apparent greediness to attract attention/money/power). But the government has a meddling hand in EVERYTHING - and the "right" to take funds by force (taxation). That means there's only one goal for the worst, least scrupulous bastards - to be in charge of the government. Where else can he control others and benefit himself more?
Don't forget the rest of that thought. Yes, power corrupts...and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Government concentrates it all together, making it a miracle when someone with decent intent gets into office (at which time, power corrupts 'em).
Um...how in hell does this post deserve moderation as "Offtopic"?
OT (BushRant): Re:Space Tubes
on
Space-Age Houses
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
1. This was a reply to a comment since modded troll, taking exception to the grandparent poster's sig.
2. I gunked it up in editing -
Not to mention it's very arguable who the terrorists would prefer. The Bush White House's squandering of world goodwill after 9/11 (even assuming they were right about the reasons for invading Iraq) has meant a recruiting and fundraising bonanza for terrorists. I'd bet a significant fraction of 'em (if not 100%) want to have Bush stick around another 4 years...
Not to mention it's very arguable who the terrorists would prefer. The Bush White House's squandering of world goodwill after 9/11 (even assuming they were right about the reasons for invading Iraq) has meant a recruiting and I'd bet a significant fraction of 'em (if not 100%) want to have Bush stick around another 4 years...
Same reason newspapers are full of awful events - that's what's interesting, and what stands in contrast to the "mundane" workaday world of our own lives. Plus, SF dystopias are cautionary - they're waving red flags about present or incipient problems and rabble-rousing to try to inspire corrective action. The only world in which forward-looking, concerned people aren't presented with doomsday scenarios...is the happy-face worlds depicted BY those scenarios (no dark dystopian visions would be allowed/distributed by The Feed, for example).
POTUS appears unfocused and uneducated
on
Feed
·
· Score: 1
I saw a "Greatest Game Show Bloopers" or some such on VH1 about 8mon-1year ago. Eubanks hosted it, and he admitted it was real and played the clip (bleeped, of course). It's not just an urban legend.
The distinction that matters, IMHO, is the one between common law and statute law. The former is an evolving set of practical decisions (initially local respected arbitrators, eventually lower-level courts). It grows from the ground-up and is firmly based on real-world feelings of fairness and justice. Statute law is imposed from above, are rarely effective at their stated goals (very frequently are counterproductive, or have nasty unintended results), and get co-opted to serve the interests of the powerful. There are certainly schools of anarchist thought that are anti-property, but I'm with the group that embraces common law and wants to eliminate statute law.
haven't you heard of extreme bible thumping?
Isn't Xtreme Bible Thumping (XBT) where pairs of bible-thumpers work together to get the thumping done more quickly? They subsist on Mountain Dew and Snickers bars? I think there's an O'Reilly book or two on it...
I certainly feel like you're right (that religious fundamentalism doesn't mix well with education) but al Qaeda members defy that image:
Most Arab terrorists he studied were well-educated, married men from middle- or upper-class families, in their mid-20s and psychologically stable, said Sageman, a psychiatrist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Many of them knew several languages and traveled widely.
Fewer than 1/5 lacked a high school education, seventy percent had some college.
Assuming that exponential self-replication is possible, imposing programmed controls won't be the answer. That'll be fine for researchers/engineers who are responsible enough to include controls, but certainly won't stop anyone whose goal is destruction.
When and how do you think you'll ever get government regulations that aren't captive of the industries they purport to control? As P.J. O'Rourke summed it up, "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are regulators."
Fireproofing - protecting against a fire happening.
Waterproofing - making sure water can't get in.
Spamhaus is a GoodThing (TM) - is futureproofing it a good idea?
Slashdot Mirror
Not according to your examples - every one is multisyllabic...
Of course, your main point is dead on. I suspect the problem with thematically-related site names is built-in. Take books - you'd remember "related name", then would try book, bookstore, library, text, novel, etc., rarely if ever going back to the right site.* The fact that "Amazon" wasn't one of the taken-for-granted synonyms for book meant that people had to make the unlikely mental connection, which then stood out because it wasn't an existing association. I think that applies to HoTMaiL, too - I bet the vast majority of its users have never noticed the HTML buried in the name.
* Lots of people (including me) forget to bookmark something until they've visited a number of times.
cough...cough...
Er, slightly more on-topic, I'd be interested in this for Stern and NPR. I love the Canadian proximity more for CBC-TV and Canadian comedy.
The quote from Brooks is extracted from an interview about The Producers movie. He says he won't be in The Producers, but that he's writing himself into the script for Spaceballs 2. IF it's not an off-hand joke (doesn't sound that way to me, FWIW), he's doing some writing while working on The Producers (the latter's probably taking the majority of his time).
However...
A big chunk of the problem was that Spaceballs came out nearly a decade after the (good) flick it was lampooning. But this one'll follow three big, sucking, black holes of craptacular filmmaking - and at worst, be only a year afterward. Mel will have bloated budgets, ridiculous self-importance, insipid dialog, wooden acting, and lots of other DESERVING targets of parody (Jar Jar, anyone?).
So, Spaceballs 2 could be the only redeeming reason for SW 1-3. At worst, it can't be much worse than the first...
Hear, hear. I've always been adamant against the "wasted vote" argument. This year, though, I'll hold my nose and vote for non-Bush. It's urgent.
Don't forget the rest of that thought. Yes, power corrupts...and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Government concentrates it all together, making it a miracle when someone with decent intent gets into office (at which time, power corrupts 'em).
something just about but not completely unlike tea
Um...how in hell does this post deserve moderation as "Offtopic"?
1. This was a reply to a comment since modded troll, taking exception to the grandparent poster's sig. 2. I gunked it up in editing -
Not to mention it's very arguable who the terrorists would prefer. The Bush White House's squandering of world goodwill after 9/11 (even assuming they were right about the reasons for invading Iraq) has meant a recruiting and fundraising bonanza for terrorists. I'd bet a significant fraction of 'em (if not 100%) want to have Bush stick around another 4 years...
Not to mention it's very arguable who the terrorists would prefer. The Bush White House's squandering of world goodwill after 9/11 (even assuming they were right about the reasons for invading Iraq) has meant a recruiting and I'd bet a significant fraction of 'em (if not 100%) want to have Bush stick around another 4 years...
If you're not protecting yourself against Trojans, for God's sake please watch out for backdoors....
And it should have been "to whom".
I wouldn't mind being entramped a little, even if I had to pay more for my insurance...<G>
Same reason newspapers are full of awful events - that's what's interesting, and what stands in contrast to the "mundane" workaday world of our own lives. Plus, SF dystopias are cautionary - they're waving red flags about present or incipient problems and rabble-rousing to try to inspire corrective action. The only world in which forward-looking, concerned people aren't presented with doomsday scenarios...is the happy-face worlds depicted BY those scenarios (no dark dystopian visions would be allowed/distributed by The Feed, for example).
Wha...I thought this was a futuristic story!
I saw a "Greatest Game Show Bloopers" or some such on VH1 about 8mon-1year ago. Eubanks hosted it, and he admitted it was real and played the clip (bleeped, of course). It's not just an urban legend.
The distinction that matters, IMHO, is the one between common law and statute law. The former is an evolving set of practical decisions (initially local respected arbitrators, eventually lower-level courts). It grows from the ground-up and is firmly based on real-world feelings of fairness and justice. Statute law is imposed from above, are rarely effective at their stated goals (very frequently are counterproductive, or have nasty unintended results), and get co-opted to serve the interests of the powerful. There are certainly schools of anarchist thought that are anti-property, but I'm with the group that embraces common law and wants to eliminate statute law.
haven't you heard of extreme bible thumping?
Isn't Xtreme Bible Thumping (XBT) where pairs of bible-thumpers work together to get the thumping done more quickly? They subsist on Mountain Dew and Snickers bars? I think there's an O'Reilly book or two on it...
from Stereotype doesn't fit al Qaeda (Detroit Free Press)
The enemy here is VERY different than we'd expect.
Evidently parent's humor is too subtle for the moderators....
Almost certainly. So?
In this thread on the article's BBC website, the Responsible Parties strongly hint that they're working on a similar contest open to all.
Assuming that exponential self-replication is possible, imposing programmed controls won't be the answer. That'll be fine for researchers/engineers who are responsible enough to include controls, but certainly won't stop anyone whose goal is destruction.
When and how do you think you'll ever get government regulations that aren't captive of the industries they purport to control? As P.J. O'Rourke summed it up, "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are regulators."
Fireproofing - protecting against a fire happening.
Waterproofing - making sure water can't get in.
Spamhaus is a GoodThing (TM) - is futureproofing it a good idea?