Fahrenheit 9/11 uses several psychological techniques commonly used in propoganda
True, but this is not the whole story. You need another sentence where you replace "Fahrenheit 9/11" with "The Bush Administration", just to be fair and balanced.
You would think Sony would have learned from their MiniDisc to avoid proprietary media with Draconian restrictions. Not that MD has been a total flop, but, you know, neither was BetaMax. Still doesn't make it a success.
Then again it's not like they can make a portable gaming system capable of playing DVDs (unless you consider an etch-a-sketch sized machine "portable").
But I do agree with you totally; I have no desire to re-buy my movie collection for such limited use.
Here's my suggestion: First off, let me start by saying I thought the idea of divx (the circuit city one, not the avi one) was quite stupid. Couldn't see any use for it. But....what if there was a similar divx-type UMD disc (it plays for, say, a week then dies)? EA could pack in a free week's worth of LOTR for a PSP Rings game. Or Blockbuster could offer a $1 UMD add-on to any game rental. THEN I think I'd find ways to watch movies on the PSP.
Otherwise, it looks like one of those features I'd never use.
Normally I frown upon voting for the lesser of two evils, but that's what I'm doing this year. I'm counting on the unproven fellow not being able to fuck up as bad as the guy we've seen slowly flush the country down the toilet these past 4 years.
I think something like this has actually happened, but I can't be bothered looking it up. Something like someone was trying to present a "composition" of silence (different time frame) and Cage's estate said no. Either that or I hallucinated it, so you can just ignore me.
Anybody looking for mod points wanna post the info?
Look. Fox News Channel broadcasts 24/7. Unless they put up a static image for the next 2 months, I can't see how airing a far-left movie before an election is any different than Murdoch spreading far-right lies day in and day out. Yes, Moore can spin biased views with the best of them, but have you ever watched, for example, Sean Hannity?
And not airing this movie will certainly not prevent spin wars. In case you haven't noticed, the people in America (where I live) are too stupid to elect a legit leader; they'd rather pick someone who can make a lot of nice sounding empty promises that (surprise!) never see the light of day. It's been that way for decades. Without spin what do presidential candidates have going for them?
See, the fact that they haven't commented on this issue in the 3 weeks since they were supposedly notified by Security.org is a bit fishy, and I'm never one to defend big companies and their underhanded anti-consumer practices......But I can't help the feeling that there's a lot of overreaction going on here over something which Kensington hasn't even had a chance to explain yet. If they never knew of such a method to open the lock - which wouldn't leave any damage - don't you think they'd be suspicious of someone sending in what appears to be a perfectly good, working lock and saying "gimme $1500"? If they're smart (and if Serucity.org's not full of shit; I'll believe this story when I see the MacGuyver method in action) they'll recall these locks and maintain their warranty as-is, or start to pony up cash for any locks with some ink on 'em.
The whole thing's a mess anyway. I'm sure there are plenty of fraudsters out there willing to smash their lock and file a false claim. I can't imagine how they could confirm or refute somebody's claim, and when I try to come up with ideas, I keep thinking of Double Indemnity, and look at the mess that insurance-fraud checking led to!
Any amateur fraud investigators with any useful "IANAFI" info?
I find that most people who like Apple only do so due to their marketing department. I work at a university, and I can tell you that most Apple users love their pretty colors and rounded mice.
I haven't seen an article so obviously biased and moronic on/. in quite some time. And considering some of the drivel that gets through, that's saying something.
I guess the question I have for Mattcelt is how much protection he needs (he uses the words "stumble onto", which to me implies he wants something hidden, but maybe not too involved)
As such, if you use Mozilla Thunderbird (great client, better every month) you can put the following line in your user.js file (check the mozilla site for how-to)
which will hide all e-mail (except for a folder list) until you enter a password.
Obviously this is very low security, but if these roomies really are trustworthy it might do the trick; they won't see the classified project header or read your sappy love poems while you're gone. Plus I don't think we're dealing with computer-saavy roommates here (using a borrowed win98 pc?)
I have Dish and am willing to do without Viacom , if it means making stand against a media monopoly's bullying tactics.
How exactly does Viacom qualify as a monopoly? They're the only content provider for TV stations? WTF? And exactly where do you get the idea that Dish Network is benevolent and Viacom evil? Typical knee-jerk/. reaction.
The fact is, they both suck, and they're being petty, and the consumer will in fact suffer as a result. All these posts about how the consumer will "benefit" here strike me as moronic: don't make the assumption that prices will go down if these channels are removed, I've seen nothing to indicate this nor can I ever remember a time in the history of pay TV (cable, satellite) where prices went down for any reason. Just doesn't happen. In fact IIRC, the scrolling message in question mentions something about continuing to receive channels "that you pay for", which implies exactly my point.
I've found that there are very few original thoughts or ideas, and very few people who come up with them
Only stupid people who can't think for themselves ever say this.
Ironically, you're just repeating some idiotic, untrue idea that many people before you have stated. Falsely.
Now, in terms of bloggers I might have to agree with you, as really anybody with important and/or exciting ideas will undoubtedly find a better forum than a blog to share his/her ideas.
I figure after the site gets hammered, and before someone posts a mirror for the PDF, or just as a preview, or if you don't wanna read the whole thing, or if you're a robot whose job it is to read/., here's the "Summary" section of the report (I apologize for the K-whoring):
----- In a national phone survey between March 12 and May 20, 2003, the Pew Internet & American Life Project found that more than 53 million American adults have used the Internet to publish their thoughts, respond to others, post pictures, share files and otherwise contribute to the explosion of content available online. Some 44% of the nation's adult Internet users (those 18 and over) have done at least one of the following:
21% of Internet users say they have posted photographs to Web sites.
20% say they have allowed others to download music or video files from their computers.
17% have posted written material on Web sites.
13% maintain their own Web sites.
10% have posted comments to an online newsgroup. A small fraction of them have posted files to a newsgroup such as video, audio, or photo files.
8% have contributed material to Web sites run by their businesses.
7% have contributed material to Web sites run by organizations to which they belong such as church or professional groups.
7% have Web cams running on their computers that allow other Internet users to see live pictures of them and their surroundings.
6% have posted artwork on Web sites.
5% have contributed audio files to Web sites.
4% have contributed material to Web sites created for their families.
3% have contributed video files to Web sites.
44% of Internet users have created content for the online world through building or posting to Web sites, creating blogs, and sharing files Content Creation Online
2% maintain Web diaries or Web blogs, according to respondents to this phone survey. In other phone surveys prior to this one, and one more recently fielded in early 2004, we have heard that between 2% and 7% of adult Internet users have created diaries or blogs. In this survey we found that 11% of Internet users have read the blogs or diaries of other Internet users. About a third of these blog visitors have posted material to the blog. Most of those who do contribute material are not constantly updating or freshening content. Rather, they occasionally add to the material they have posted, created, or shared. For instance, more than two thirds of those who have their own Web sites add new content only every few weeks or less often than that. There is a similar story related to the small proportion of Americans who have blogs.
The most eager and productive content creators break into three distinct groups:
Power creators are the Internet users who are most enthusiastic about contentcreating activities. They are young - their average age is 25 - and they are more likely than other kinds of creators do things like use instant messaging, play games, and download music. And they are the most likely group to be blogging.
Older creators have an average age of 58 and are experienced Internet users. They are highly educated, like sharing pictures, and are the most likely of the creator groups to have built their own Web sites. They are also the most likely to have used the Internet for genealogical research.
Content omnivores are among the heaviest overall users of the Internet. Most are employed. Most log on frequently and spend considerable time online doing a variety of activities. They are likely to have broadband connections at home. The average age of this group is 40. ----
I think Eminem's main concern here goes one step farther. He may not want his songs used in commercials without permission, but imagine the look on his face when he realized he was being outrapped by an 8 year old with an iPod!
Alright, I didn't see any posts on this and I know I was wondering:
I know it'd be damn near impossible to find someone who'd qualify for all of these, but nevertheless the total I came up with was $277.60 for the various types of info. And I'd imagine most of us could get at least $100 (SSN, Cell #, DOB, etc. all add up).
Now, I didn't see this on any of the sites but is this a one-time lifetime-rights-sold deal or maybe... a monthly gig? Could I supplement my income at the expense of marketing scum?
The thing that's always bugged me about batteries is the price of the damn things, and I don't recall any big price drops in the last 20 years. That's the thing with batteries: you can either suck it up and cough up a ridiculous amount of cash for them (I mean, some of these batteries retail for arouns $2 PER AA battery! And that lasts, what, 10 hours?) or, uh, not use your electronic device (and no, AC's not a real option for portables). Anyway my real point is the fear I have of fuel cell batteries or any other new battery tech making this crap even worse. Ignoring for now safety/environmental concerns and whatnot, can't you just see a $150 battery coming down the line for high end portables? Sure, only rich crazy bastards will buy it at the beginning, but what about when the Sony PSP3 won't run without one?
It's a funny thing, this battery business - battery companies try to make their product more appealing to consumers by giving increased performance for the same (never less!) price, while keeping them just inefficient enough to require monthly battery purchases (or in the case of laptops, multiple batteries! Yay!)
AFAIK, most people caught on to the fact that it was just entertainment, especially considering that the show was prefaced as being a halloween joke. But of course there were a few people who called in to complain that they'd been had. That's why the FCC got involved.
There's a fantastic video clip (I originally saw it in an Orson Welles film class, so I have no idea where to find it) of Welles before a panel, FCC I think, where they ask him about what he did and whether he intended to fool and scare people (which he obviously did mean to do). Anyhoo, basically he sits there with the most obviously fake incredulous look on his face, speaking very apologetically and pretty much hamming it up. In fact, at one point he looks at the camera and flashes a sort of half-grin. Classic stuff.
Actually I doubt an unedited version "exists", simply because the point of the short is to be censored for a TV audience (I haven't watched it in forever, but the last MTV LOTR parody w/ Jack Black I believe contained some bleeps, which carried over to the FOTR extended DVD).
Plus, sometimes vulgarity's funnier when it's just a string of bleeps. It highlights it more. And like you said, it's not like we don't know what he's saying anyway.
Maybe it's just me, but I always thought the old N64 Goldeneye method of getting rid of mines would be far easier; you know, there's a mine on the ground, you don't know where it is, so throw a grenade/remote mine/etc in its vicinity and it will blow up with the ensuing blast. Now I know it's a silly videogame idea but it just seems so much more intuitive than this. The specs on this thing (from Zeus' site) say it can hit a target from 25 to 250 meters. You wanna be the one aiming that far? Throw another bomb, it's a hell of a lot easier! Takes care of the under-the-surface ones as well. Of course, the area would have to be rather deserted, but no more than it would take to detonate a surface mine in the first place.
Just my wacky $0.02
Oh, and keep in mind that my tongue is planted firmly within the warm crevace of my cheek.
Interesting point, and I agree for the most part, but go read Irvine Welsh's Trainspotting and see Danny Boyle's almost ridiculously faithful film adaptation. The two are strikingly similar in so many ways, yet both are great pieces of entertainment. (see also kesey's/forman's cuckoo's nest). Good books don't have to turn into crappy movies, it just so happens that a good 90% of Hollywood movies suck ass, and a significant portion of those happen to be based on books.
Slashdot Mirror
You would think Sony would have learned from their MiniDisc to avoid proprietary media with Draconian restrictions. Not that MD has been a total flop, but, you know, neither was BetaMax. Still doesn't make it a success.
Then again it's not like they can make a portable gaming system capable of playing DVDs (unless you consider an etch-a-sketch sized machine "portable").
But I do agree with you totally; I have no desire to re-buy my movie collection for such limited use.
Here's my suggestion:
First off, let me start by saying I thought the idea of divx (the circuit city one, not the avi one) was quite stupid. Couldn't see any use for it. But....what if there was a similar divx-type UMD disc (it plays for, say, a week then dies)? EA could pack in a free week's worth of LOTR for a PSP Rings game. Or Blockbuster could offer a $1 UMD add-on to any game rental. THEN I think I'd find ways to watch movies on the PSP.
Otherwise, it looks like one of those features I'd never use.
Normally I frown upon voting for the lesser of two evils, but that's what I'm doing this year. I'm counting on the unproven fellow not being able to fuck up as bad as the guy we've seen slowly flush the country down the toilet these past 4 years.
I think something like this has actually happened, but I can't be bothered looking it up. Something like someone was trying to present a "composition" of silence (different time frame) and Cage's estate said no. Either that or I hallucinated it, so you can just ignore me.
Anybody looking for mod points wanna post the info?
Look. Fox News Channel broadcasts 24/7. Unless they put up a static image for the next 2 months, I can't see how airing a far-left movie before an election is any different than Murdoch spreading far-right lies day in and day out. Yes, Moore can spin biased views with the best of them, but have you ever watched, for example, Sean Hannity?
And not airing this movie will certainly not prevent spin wars. In case you haven't noticed, the people in America (where I live) are too stupid to elect a legit leader; they'd rather pick someone who can make a lot of nice sounding empty promises that (surprise!) never see the light of day. It's been that way for decades. Without spin what do presidential candidates have going for them?
Score:5, Insightful? Where's the proof? How is this not a troll? I say, sir, that you are full of shit.
Metamoderators Assemble!
See, the fact that they haven't commented on this issue in the 3 weeks since they were supposedly notified by Security.org is a bit fishy, and I'm never one to defend big companies and their underhanded anti-consumer practices... ...But I can't help the feeling that there's a lot of overreaction going on here over something which Kensington hasn't even had a chance to explain yet. If they never knew of such a method to open the lock - which wouldn't leave any damage - don't you think they'd be suspicious of someone sending in what appears to be a perfectly good, working lock and saying "gimme $1500"? If they're smart (and if Serucity.org's not full of shit; I'll believe this story when I see the MacGuyver method in action) they'll recall these locks and maintain their warranty as-is, or start to pony up cash for any locks with some ink on 'em.
The whole thing's a mess anyway. I'm sure there are plenty of fraudsters out there willing to smash their lock and file a false claim. I can't imagine how they could confirm or refute somebody's claim, and when I try to come up with ideas, I keep thinking of Double Indemnity, and look at the mess that insurance-fraud checking led to!
Any amateur fraud investigators with any useful "IANAFI" info?
I find that most people who like Apple only do so due to their marketing department. I work at a university, and I can tell you that most Apple users love their pretty colors and rounded mice.
/. in quite some time. And considering some of the drivel that gets through, that's saying something.
I haven't seen an article so obviously biased and moronic on
I guess the question I have for Mattcelt is how much protection he needs (he uses the words "stumble onto", which to me implies he wants something hidden, but maybe not too involved)
As such, if you use Mozilla Thunderbird (great client, better every month) you can put the following line in your user.js file (check the mozilla site for how-to)
user_pref("mail.password_protect_local_cache", true);
which will hide all e-mail (except for a folder list) until you enter a password.
Obviously this is very low security, but if these roomies really are trustworthy it might do the trick; they won't see the classified project header or read your sappy love poems while you're gone. Plus I don't think we're dealing with computer-saavy roommates here (using a borrowed win98 pc?)
The fact is, they both suck, and they're being petty, and the consumer will in fact suffer as a result. All these posts about how the consumer will "benefit" here strike me as moronic: don't make the assumption that prices will go down if these channels are removed, I've seen nothing to indicate this nor can I ever remember a time in the history of pay TV (cable, satellite) where prices went down for any reason. Just doesn't happen. In fact IIRC, the scrolling message in question mentions something about continuing to receive channels "that you pay for", which implies exactly my point.
Only stupid people who can't think for themselves ever say this.
Ironically, you're just repeating some idiotic, untrue idea that many people before you have stated. Falsely.
Now, in terms of bloggers I might have to agree with you, as really anybody with important and/or exciting ideas will undoubtedly find a better forum than a blog to share his/her ideas.
Like
IANABanker, but I think you need the serial number intact as well as at least 50% complete.
-----
In a national phone survey between March 12 and May 20, 2003, the Pew Internet &
American Life Project found that more than 53 million American adults have used the
Internet to publish their thoughts, respond to others, post pictures, share files and
otherwise contribute to the explosion of content available online. Some 44% of the
nation's adult Internet users (those 18 and over) have done at least one of the following:
21% of Internet users say they have posted photographs to Web sites.
20% say they have allowed others to download music or video files from their
computers.
17% have posted written material on Web sites.
13% maintain their own Web sites.
10% have posted comments to an online newsgroup. A small fraction of them have
posted files to a newsgroup such as video, audio, or photo files.
8% have contributed material to Web sites run by their businesses.
7% have contributed material to Web sites run by organizations to which they belong
such as church or professional groups.
7% have Web cams running on their computers that allow other Internet users to see
live pictures of them and their surroundings.
6% have posted artwork on Web sites.
5% have contributed audio files to Web sites.
4% have contributed material to Web sites created for their families.
3% have contributed video files to Web sites.
44% of Internet users have created content for the online world through
building or posting to Web sites, creating blogs, and sharing files
Content Creation Online
2% maintain Web diaries or Web blogs, according to respondents to this phone
survey. In other phone surveys prior to this one, and one more recently fielded in
early 2004, we have heard that between 2% and 7% of adult Internet users have
created diaries or blogs. In this survey we found that 11% of Internet users have read
the blogs or diaries of other Internet users. About a third of these blog visitors have
posted material to the blog.
Most of those who do contribute material are not constantly updating or freshening
content. Rather, they occasionally add to the material they have posted, created, or
shared. For instance, more than two thirds of those who have their own Web sites add
new content only every few weeks or less often than that. There is a similar story related
to the small proportion of Americans who have blogs.
The most eager and productive content creators break into three distinct groups:
Power creators are the Internet users who are most enthusiastic about contentcreating
activities. They are young - their average age is 25 - and they are more
likely than other kinds of creators do things like use instant messaging, play games,
and download music. And they are the most likely group to be blogging.
Older creators have an average age of 58 and are experienced Internet users. They
are highly educated, like sharing pictures, and are the most likely of the creator
groups to have built their own Web sites. They are also the most likely to have used
the Internet for genealogical research.
Content omnivores are among the heaviest overall users of the Internet. Most are
employed. Most log on frequently and spend considerable time online doing a
variety of activities. They are likely to have broadband connections at home. The
average age of this group is 40.
----
I think Eminem's main concern here goes one step farther. He may not want his songs used in commercials without permission, but imagine the look on his face when he realized he was being outrapped by an 8 year old with an iPod!
Alright, I didn't see any posts on this and I know I was wondering:
... a monthly gig? Could I supplement my income at the expense of marketing scum?
I know it'd be damn near impossible to find someone who'd qualify for all of these, but nevertheless the total I came up with was $277.60 for the various types of info. And I'd imagine most of us could get at least $100 (SSN, Cell #, DOB, etc. all add up).
Now, I didn't see this on any of the sites but is this a one-time lifetime-rights-sold deal or maybe
Join the revolution
I can't remember the last time a slashdot title made me do a triple-take. Haha.
Have to admit I was a little disappointed as I read on.
Again sorry, but you know it's funny.
Bullshit. They're simply moving towards SCO's business model.
The thing that's always bugged me about batteries is the price of the damn things, and I don't recall any big price drops in the last 20 years. That's the thing with batteries: you can either suck it up and cough up a ridiculous amount of cash for them (I mean, some of these batteries retail for arouns $2 PER AA battery! And that lasts, what, 10 hours?) or, uh, not use your electronic device (and no, AC's not a real option for portables). Anyway my real point is the fear I have of fuel cell batteries or any other new battery tech making this crap even worse. Ignoring for now safety/environmental concerns and whatnot, can't you just see a $150 battery coming down the line for high end portables? Sure, only rich crazy bastards will buy it at the beginning, but what about when the Sony PSP3 won't run without one?
It's a funny thing, this battery business - battery companies try to make their product more appealing to consumers by giving increased performance for the same (never less!) price, while keeping them just inefficient enough to require monthly battery purchases (or in the case of laptops, multiple batteries! Yay!)
Ah well, still beats winding the gears yourself.
AFAIK, most people caught on to the fact that it was just entertainment, especially considering that the show was prefaced as being a halloween joke. But of course there were a few people who called in to complain that they'd been had. That's why the FCC got involved. There's a fantastic video clip (I originally saw it in an Orson Welles film class, so I have no idea where to find it) of Welles before a panel, FCC I think, where they ask him about what he did and whether he intended to fool and scare people (which he obviously did mean to do). Anyhoo, basically he sits there with the most obviously fake incredulous look on his face, speaking very apologetically and pretty much hamming it up. In fact, at one point he looks at the camera and flashes a sort of half-grin. Classic stuff.
Actually I doubt an unedited version "exists", simply because the point of the short is to be censored for a TV audience (I haven't watched it in forever, but the last MTV LOTR parody w/ Jack Black I believe contained some bleeps, which carried over to the FOTR extended DVD).
Plus, sometimes vulgarity's funnier when it's just a string of bleeps. It highlights it more. And like you said, it's not like we don't know what he's saying anyway.
Maybe it's just me, but I always thought the old N64 Goldeneye method of getting rid of mines would be far easier; you know, there's a mine on the ground, you don't know where it is, so throw a grenade/remote mine/etc in its vicinity and it will blow up with the ensuing blast. Now I know it's a silly videogame idea but it just seems so much more intuitive than this. The specs on this thing (from Zeus' site) say it can hit a target from 25 to 250 meters. You wanna be the one aiming that far? Throw another bomb, it's a hell of a lot easier! Takes care of the under-the-surface ones as well. Of course, the area would have to be rather deserted, but no more than it would take to detonate a surface mine in the first place.
Just my wacky $0.02
Oh, and keep in mind that my tongue is planted firmly within the warm crevace of my cheek.
Interesting point, and I agree for the most part, but go read Irvine Welsh's Trainspotting and see Danny Boyle's almost ridiculously faithful film adaptation. The two are strikingly similar in so many ways, yet both are great pieces of entertainment. (see also kesey's/forman's cuckoo's nest). Good books don't have to turn into crappy movies, it just so happens that a good 90% of Hollywood movies suck ass, and a significant portion of those happen to be based on books.
Slashdot math: AC + elitist cynicism + missing the point = score 4 funny. go figure.
jackass.