Bright and Warcraft had extensive fantasy world-building, and it's just not something that appeals to everyone. My wife walked in the room while I was watching Warcraft and rolled her eyes so hard I was afraid she'd faint. BUT THAT'S OKAY. Not every movie is for everyone, something that gets lost when comparing critic reviews to audiences.
I think what really bothers me is that fantasy movies are given a pass on being "good" movies, because they "appeal to the niche". Like, why can't we have world building AND a logical story line? I appreciate fantasy worlds, but I also appreciate good stories. I want both. And maybe fantasy movies would attract more people (at the very least, the partners of the fantasy nerds) if they didn't ignore the other aspects of a well-rounded movie.
I guess I’m part of the great unwashed masses, because I enjoyed Bright quite a bit. Perhaps because I didn’t view it as a standalone movie, but the introduction of a fantasy series.
I think mostly because it was an absolutely terrible introduction to a fantasy series. No one had believable motives (the bad guys are doing bad things... just because; orc dude was gaga over elf girl... just because). There were tons of allusions to past events, but not enough information to form any sort of opinion on those events. The racial premises were interesting, but then ultimately were dealt with in a ham-fisted manner. And then at the very last minute "Will Smith is a Bright! But this will have zero implications for the rest of the movie and he'll just kind of shrug it off."
It was a movie that had the promise of kicking off a really interesting fantasy series, but then fell totally flat on that promise. Don't get me wrong, I was mildly entertain for an evening, but a good movie it was not.
I'd say the Transformer movies proved this long ago.
But both parties are not wrong. Bright was, objectively, a crappy movie. The visuals and costumes were really well done, but the story was a hot mess. At the same time, it made for a mildly entertaining (albeit mindless) evening and I can see how that would absolutely make it "good enough" in most viewer's minds.
So does that mean EV's (which have a screen and being for sale to consumers) will have to have user replaceable LiPo battery packs?
No, there's a later exemption for automobiles. And even if it didn't have that exemption, it doesn't say it has to be user replaceable, just "reasonably" replaceable. And given the rest of the text of the bill, that suggests reasonably replaceable by an independent repair shop.
In addition, all it does is require manufacturers to make available manuals, parts, etc. to independent repairers for the same price as made available to its own outlets. What prevents the manufacturer from charging $1M for the manual?
Nothing? Except Apple (e.g.) would also have to charge "Apple-authoried repair shops" $1M for the manual.
pacemakers? You really want to replace the battery in that? Yourself?
The definition of "Electronic Device" in the bill includes having a screen, and being for sale to the general consumer. I know of zero pacemakers that meet that definition.
Oh, *NOW* you want replaceable batteries when your precious iphone craps out. Where was this bill when the save files in my SNES cartridges started vanishing?!
I know this was intended as a bit of a joke post, but SNES cart batteries are actually reasonably replaceable. They're just normal coin cells in a holder. Though to be fair the battery is typically soldered to the holder. But the holder is not near any critical components or pathways, so unless you have terrible hand tremors it's not hard to remove with low risk. Source: I have replaced them using my rudimentary electronics skills. The most annoying part of it is having to order a special screwdriver bit to open the carts.
The bill is barely about how things have to be designed. That just happens to be the one very small part of the bill that TFA picked up on. Mainly the bill is about not allowing OEMs to shut out independent repair shops by hoarding parts and repair manuals. I.e. the bill is mostly about compelling OEMs to share info and parts with independent shops at a reasonable cost.
Try easily replacing the battery in an iPhone, iPad, Kindle, MacBook, etc.
I don't think it will affect tech design tooooo much. While TFA picked up on the battery part, the thrust of the bill is more about compelling OEMs to supply the necessary information and parts to enable independent repair shops to fix things. I.e. to not exclude competition by hoarding information and parts. So I think the test of "reasonableness" of repair would really be framed in the context of, "is it designed such that it is reasonable for a trained, professional, and informed private repair shop to do the work?"
2) "Digital electronic product" means a handheld or portable electronic device containing a microprocessor and flat panel computer monitor originally manufactured for distribution and sale in the United States for general consumer purchase. Digital electronic product includes but is not limited to smartphones, electronic reading devices, laptop computers, and tablets.
So no, it will not outlaw musical greeting cards... unless they come with a flat panel monitor. It seems like it will also not outlaw medical or industrial devices, as it says "for general consumer purchase".
Their parent company touts a 48% increase of revenue over the last 5 years.
I wouldn't be surprised if that has more to do with financial markets than premiums. Insurance companies are highly invested in securities. Five years ago happens to be the end of the Great Recession.
How far are you willing to let them go to tie your wallet to their risk? If they determined that sexual orientation was a risk factor, should they be allowed to charge more for the LGBTQ+ crowd? How about eye color? DNA screening? Discrimination, or merely risk mitigation?
I think it's entirely possible to draw a line in the sand where it makes sense for costs to be spread around collectively. Drawing the line at protected groups seems like a pretty good place to start. No need to invoke the slippery slope argument.
As an aside, my province banned the use of gender (and maybe age, I can't remember, but I'm pretty sure) in setting insurance rates. It was great for me at the time (a 17-year-old male), but in general it sucked for everyone else because their premiums went up to compensate.
Can't believe this isn't illegal. This is like a gas station charging red cars 10 cents more per gallon.
No it's not. An insurance company's costs are tied to risk. Higher risk customers cost them more. So either they run the numbers and charge people based on their risk, or they don't run the numbers and charge everyone equivalently and the low-risk people are subsidizing the high-risk people. They've run the numbers, and it's come out that Hotmail users are higher risk.
A gas station's costs are in no way tied to the colour of a car, and would be no basis upon which to charge different prices.
So your logic is that if you have to walk 20 feet, you might as well walk 20 feet, get in your car, drive for 10 minutes, walk another 20 feet, wait around for them to bring the pizza out, walk another 20 feet back to your car, drive another 10 minutes, and then walk another 20 feet?
Quick, someone call the CEO of the pizza chain with 11,000 stores and tell him he's making a huge mistake! He needs to see OP's post ASAP so that he can take its lesson on pizza economics to heart and avoid making a grave mistake on his company's future.
Santana, Eric Clapton, Fleetwood Mac, Boston, Led Zeppelin, Van Morrison, among many others.
Nothing. But we've only retroactively defined them as pop music. Take a look at the Top 100 list for 1975. None of them are on there. Some of that list has survived the test of time, but a lot of it has been forgotten for the mindless pop it was.
Whilst I find it somewhat interesting that music is more egocentric now than before, the declining quality of pop music is of no concern to me at all. I don't even need to listen to anything new. As the article states, it's now possible to listen to whatever you like on the internet and there's more excellent music already recorded than I will ever have a chance to hear. So I don't really understand why people complain that modern pop music is crap. If it's crap then just don't listen to it.
This. Plus, there's probably more good music being made now than ever before. Sure, it's not getting played on the radio in your car (that crap is getting worse, as the article points out), but it's out there. Thanks to the internet it's a lot easier for the small guys to make music without having to convince a big-time label that they fit the narrow band of what a producer thinks is marketable. As a consumer, it does mean more to sift through to find the gems, but at the same time the internet has also given us a lot of tools to do just that. Find a music blog of someone who shares your tastes and you're golden. Or use the recommendation features of all the big streaming services.
And it has many uses other than just transportation.
Though 71% of the oil use in the US is for transportation. That's a pretty huge drop in demand if you convert even a portion of the transportations sector to electricity. It won't eliminate demand for oil, but it will but pretty strong downward pressure on the price.
Slashdot Mirror
Bright and Warcraft had extensive fantasy world-building, and it's just not something that appeals to everyone. My wife walked in the room while I was watching Warcraft and rolled her eyes so hard I was afraid she'd faint. BUT THAT'S OKAY. Not every movie is for everyone, something that gets lost when comparing critic reviews to audiences.
I think what really bothers me is that fantasy movies are given a pass on being "good" movies, because they "appeal to the niche". Like, why can't we have world building AND a logical story line? I appreciate fantasy worlds, but I also appreciate good stories. I want both. And maybe fantasy movies would attract more people (at the very least, the partners of the fantasy nerds) if they didn't ignore the other aspects of a well-rounded movie.
I guess I’m part of the great unwashed masses, because I enjoyed Bright quite a bit. Perhaps because I didn’t view it as a standalone movie, but the introduction of a fantasy series.
I think mostly because it was an absolutely terrible introduction to a fantasy series. No one had believable motives (the bad guys are doing bad things... just because; orc dude was gaga over elf girl... just because). There were tons of allusions to past events, but not enough information to form any sort of opinion on those events. The racial premises were interesting, but then ultimately were dealt with in a ham-fisted manner. And then at the very last minute "Will Smith is a Bright! But this will have zero implications for the rest of the movie and he'll just kind of shrug it off."
It was a movie that had the promise of kicking off a really interesting fantasy series, but then fell totally flat on that promise. Don't get me wrong, I was mildly entertain for an evening, but a good movie it was not.
I'd say the Transformer movies proved this long ago.
But both parties are not wrong. Bright was, objectively, a crappy movie. The visuals and costumes were really well done, but the story was a hot mess. At the same time, it made for a mildly entertaining (albeit mindless) evening and I can see how that would absolutely make it "good enough" in most viewer's minds.
So does that mean EV's (which have a screen and being for sale to consumers) will have to have user replaceable LiPo battery packs?
No, there's a later exemption for automobiles. And even if it didn't have that exemption, it doesn't say it has to be user replaceable, just "reasonably" replaceable. And given the rest of the text of the bill, that suggests reasonably replaceable by an independent repair shop.
Will that be covered under the bill?
Only if it has a flat panel display included, as that's part of the bill's definition of "electronic device".
Cars and dealer only software what will this bill do to that?
Nothing. There's a specific line in the bill exempting automobiles from these rules.
Shall we make it illegal to create a printer that detects third party or refilled cartridges and refuses to use them?
That would be awesome.
In addition, all it does is require manufacturers to make available manuals, parts, etc. to independent repairers for the same price as made available to its own outlets. What prevents the manufacturer from charging $1M for the manual?
Nothing? Except Apple (e.g.) would also have to charge "Apple-authoried repair shops" $1M for the manual.
Righhhht. Like how bad repairs at independent car repair shops have totally ruined the reputation of manufacturers... /sarcasm
pacemakers? You really want to replace the battery in that? Yourself?
The definition of "Electronic Device" in the bill includes having a screen, and being for sale to the general consumer. I know of zero pacemakers that meet that definition.
Oh, *NOW* you want replaceable batteries when your precious iphone craps out. Where was this bill when the save files in my SNES cartridges started vanishing?!
I know this was intended as a bit of a joke post, but SNES cart batteries are actually reasonably replaceable. They're just normal coin cells in a holder. Though to be fair the battery is typically soldered to the holder. But the holder is not near any critical components or pathways, so unless you have terrible hand tremors it's not hard to remove with low risk. Source: I have replaced them using my rudimentary electronics skills. The most annoying part of it is having to order a special screwdriver bit to open the carts.
The bill is barely about how things have to be designed. That just happens to be the one very small part of the bill that TFA picked up on. Mainly the bill is about not allowing OEMs to shut out independent repair shops by hoarding parts and repair manuals. I.e. the bill is mostly about compelling OEMs to share info and parts with independent shops at a reasonable cost.
Try easily replacing the battery in an iPhone, iPad, Kindle, MacBook, etc.
I don't think it will affect tech design tooooo much. While TFA picked up on the battery part, the thrust of the bill is more about compelling OEMs to supply the necessary information and parts to enable independent repair shops to fix things. I.e. to not exclude competition by hoarding information and parts. So I think the test of "reasonableness" of repair would really be framed in the context of, "is it designed such that it is reasonable for a trained, professional, and informed private repair shop to do the work?"
FTB (from the Bill):
2) "Digital electronic product" means a handheld or portable electronic device containing a microprocessor and flat panel computer monitor originally manufactured for distribution and sale in the United States for general consumer purchase. Digital electronic product includes but is not limited to smartphones, electronic reading devices, laptop computers, and tablets.
So no, it will not outlaw musical greeting cards... unless they come with a flat panel monitor. It seems like it will also not outlaw medical or industrial devices, as it says "for general consumer purchase".
You, hipp5, have been uncharacteristically vocal and very defensive in this thread. Do you work for Domino's?
Not in the least. Nor do I own any Domino's stock. I'm just tired of the neckbeard blustering and nerd rage on Slashdot.
Their parent company touts a 48% increase of revenue over the last 5 years.
I wouldn't be surprised if that has more to do with financial markets than premiums. Insurance companies are highly invested in securities. Five years ago happens to be the end of the Great Recession.
How far are you willing to let them go to tie your wallet to their risk? If they determined that sexual orientation was a risk factor, should they be allowed to charge more for the LGBTQ+ crowd? How about eye color? DNA screening? Discrimination, or merely risk mitigation?
I think it's entirely possible to draw a line in the sand where it makes sense for costs to be spread around collectively. Drawing the line at protected groups seems like a pretty good place to start. No need to invoke the slippery slope argument.
As an aside, my province banned the use of gender (and maybe age, I can't remember, but I'm pretty sure) in setting insurance rates. It was great for me at the time (a 17-year-old male), but in general it sucked for everyone else because their premiums went up to compensate.
Can't believe this isn't illegal. This is like a gas station charging red cars 10 cents more per gallon.
No it's not. An insurance company's costs are tied to risk. Higher risk customers cost them more. So either they run the numbers and charge people based on their risk, or they don't run the numbers and charge everyone equivalently and the low-risk people are subsidizing the high-risk people. They've run the numbers, and it's come out that Hotmail users are higher risk.
A gas station's costs are in no way tied to the colour of a car, and would be no basis upon which to charge different prices.
Sorry, if I'm not making my own pizza, I'm going to order from someone who makes good pizza.
And Domino's ain't that.
Given that Domino's revenue was almost $2.5 billion in 2016, it seems like many people don't agree with you, or they do and just don't care.
So your logic is that if you have to walk 20 feet, you might as well walk 20 feet, get in your car, drive for 10 minutes, walk another 20 feet, wait around for them to bring the pizza out, walk another 20 feet back to your car, drive another 10 minutes, and then walk another 20 feet?
Quick, someone call the CEO of the pizza chain with 11,000 stores and tell him he's making a huge mistake! He needs to see OP's post ASAP so that he can take its lesson on pizza economics to heart and avoid making a grave mistake on his company's future.
Santana, Eric Clapton, Fleetwood Mac, Boston, Led Zeppelin, Van Morrison, among many others.
Nothing. But we've only retroactively defined them as pop music. Take a look at the Top 100 list for 1975. None of them are on there. Some of that list has survived the test of time, but a lot of it has been forgotten for the mindless pop it was.
Yes. Survivor bias. Applies to so many things. Architecture, movies, books, music, cars, etc. etc.
Whilst I find it somewhat interesting that music is more egocentric now than before, the declining quality of pop music is of no concern to me at all. I don't even need to listen to anything new. As the article states, it's now possible to listen to whatever you like on the internet and there's more excellent music already recorded than I will ever have a chance to hear. So I don't really understand why people complain that modern pop music is crap. If it's crap then just don't listen to it.
This. Plus, there's probably more good music being made now than ever before. Sure, it's not getting played on the radio in your car (that crap is getting worse, as the article points out), but it's out there. Thanks to the internet it's a lot easier for the small guys to make music without having to convince a big-time label that they fit the narrow band of what a producer thinks is marketable. As a consumer, it does mean more to sift through to find the gems, but at the same time the internet has also given us a lot of tools to do just that. Find a music blog of someone who shares your tastes and you're golden. Or use the recommendation features of all the big streaming services.
And it has many uses other than just transportation.
Though 71% of the oil use in the US is for transportation. That's a pretty huge drop in demand if you convert even a portion of the transportations sector to electricity. It won't eliminate demand for oil, but it will but pretty strong downward pressure on the price.