But, I disagree with your contention that bad experiences are why people shy away from it. I think for more people, it's the nastiness of the stateless addresses.
Nah, frankly, most people shy away from it because they just don't see the benefit that makes the trouble with it. And I'm one of them. I could, this weekend, get myself an ipv6 allocation from hurricane or a similar provider, configure my firewall appropriately, reconfig the few boxes on my network, and voila, have ipv6 deployed. But then what? What would that get me? "No NAT!" you say. Sure, great. Except any time I'd want remote access to my machines (say, at work), ipv6 is unavailable. So what was the point, again?
It's fundamentally a chicken-and-egg problem. Until ipv6 starts getting deployed, it's useless. But until ipv6 appears useful, it won't get deployed. It sucks, but that's the simple reality of the situation.
Obviously not over the main speakers. But for all you know, some deaf guy in the audience may have been listening to descriptive narration through an earpiece.
and what do you mean can't view 3d content? close one eye and there you go, you're back to 2d. quit complaining
Ah, I see, you're just being an asshole for kicks. Nevermind, then.
BTW, for non-assholes reading, the obvious solution would be for the theatres to provide glasses where both lenses are polarized the same way. At least then you would have the option to enjoy the film in 2D.
Depends on how you define "near". If you mean a store within a hundred miles will have on display, then yes. If you mean inside my house, not only no but hell no. I've got better things to waste my money on than the latest fad electronics.
I never said you should buy it. The OP asked where 3D was available. I told him. If you don't want it, bully for you (I don't, either, BTW).
Frankly, I'm not even sure who you're arguing with...
Whether you are joking or not, I wish people constantly complaining of nausea and headaches would just stop. I do not get headaches and nausea from viewing 3-D movies, nor does anyone I know.
Congratulations! I envy you!
Yes, it may affect you, but quite complaining.
Umm... fuck you.:) The first few weeks of Avatar's release, I was excluded because I can't view 3D content. Basically, the studios and the theatres have decided to give me and anyone else who dislikes 3D content the middle finger, all so they can use their fancy new gimmick to wow audiences so they don't notice the shitty plot that underpins their pretty new movie.
There are people born, or inflicted, everyday with multiple kinds of disabilities that preclude them from doing numerous tasks, such as driving, flying an airplane, etc. If you get headaches, or have some ocular disability That prevents you from viewing 3-D tv, I'm sorry to hear that, but shut it.
I'm sorry, what? Are you saying blind people should refrain from complaining if a movie or TV studio refuses to broadcast with descriptive video? That deaf people should refrain from complaining because they refuse to broadcast subtitles?
It's coming to a TV near you in the next year or so (3D-capable TVs are the new hotness now that HDTVs have becoming commonplace in the market). Samsung, in particular, has announced models that will use RealD technology (ie, the same thing used in movie theatres) to display 3D on your TV using standard circularly polarized glasses. In fact, the technology itself is pretty straight forward, you just need a TV capable of a relatively high frame rate (RealD is 144hz) combined with a polarizing overlay which switches at the same rate.
Now not only can our relatives bore us with their hours-long videos of their cruise, but they can also leave us with (worse) headaches and intense nausea! Now that's what I call progress!
Well, sure, but anything *could* bring a plane down. Hell, a flock of geese flying into the engines *could* a the plane down. The question is, what are the odds? 50/50? Ten-to-one? Because there's an *awful* lot of freaking out going on over an event that would be *trivial* to duplicate by the attacker simply hiding the explosives in a body cavity, instead of his underwear. So it's important to ask the question, what is the real risk here? That's all I'm asking.
Link, please? The last update I heard on this topic was that the TSA (or some other three-letter agency) ran a test and discovered it was enough to blow a hole in the side of the plane, which would result in decompression, yes, but wouldn't necessarily bring down the plane.
Try and get your learn on before making yourself sound like a jackass:
The findings revealed increased activity in the frontal lobe, where working memory is centered, and the anterior cingulum, which controls attention, in volunteers after consuming 100 milligrams of caffeine, the equivalent of about two cups of coffee. These areas showed no increased activity when the subjects drank the same fluid without caffeine in it.
"The increased activity means you are more able to focus," Koppelstaetter said. "You have more attention and your task management is better."
That there were no dead bodies or a mile-wide debris trail in downtown Detroit is trivial -- because there COULD have been.
Could there? Has this actually been looked at? Because this guy wasn't carrying that much explosive. It may be that the worst case is a few people die and the cabin decompresses.
On the flipside, caffeine, in moderate doses, enhances mental focus, and for developers, that can be a real boon (I work just fine without caffeine, but if I have to buckle down for an intense coding session, a little caffeine and a pair of isolating headphones is, hands down, the best way for me to get in the flow and stay there for a prolonged period of time).
lewl, fair enough. Perhaps Dune is a better example (I'm actually surprised more people haven't caught on to the similarities between Avatar and Dune).:)
I'm the same way. Just watch it in 2D, it still looks visually stunning (even if the plot is deeply unoriginal).
As for the brightness, that'd be because RealD uses a pair of oppositely circularly polarized lenses in order to deliver different images to each eye. The result is that half the light from the screen is blocked to each eye (the same effect is used when making polarized sunglasses).
Avatar is to Dances with Wolves as The Matrix is to Neuromancer, several Philip K. Dick stories, The Sleeping Man, Dark City, Life is a Dream, Snow Crash. You really think the "machine invasion" motif is original to sci-fi as well?
ROFL, that's not at all the same. Avatar is literally the *exact same plot* as DwW. The Matrix has no such direct analog. It is at best deeply inspired by the movies/books you cite. But it's hardly a carbon copy, as is the case with Avatar.
Where were all the people like you hiding on Slashdot when The Matrix and sequels came out? Everyone who mentioned that The Matrix story was just a derivative of Kant philosophy and Buddhism but with guns and special effects got modded troll or flame bait.
Oh, I'm sorry, there was other movies or books that contained the exact same narrative as The Matrix?
Hint: Just because a movie espouses an established philosophy, doesn't mean it's unoriginal. Avatar is unoriginal because it *lifts it's entire storyline from another movie*.
Personally, I'd like a movie to have both visual appeal and a great story, but that's me.
I'd like that too, but you have to realize that it's extremely difficult to pull off.
Uh... why? Are you saying a good plot and incredible special effects are somehow antithetical?
Panning something that has a certain aspect that is above and beyond anything done before just because it has other aspects that are below average is practically the definition of snobbery.
Bullshit. What is the purpose of a movie? It's to deliver a narrative. Period. That's its job. And if the narrative sucks? Then the movie deserves to be panned, as it's failed to achieve its core purpose.
Or, perhaps, you believe that it's snobbery to criticize a book that tells a crappy story, but is printed on really really nice paper?
WTF are you talking about? The script is an expression of the story. The message is embedded in the script. It makes no sense to separate those things because they're one and the same.
There's not that many basic stories out there (really!) but that's been true for thousands of years. Stop whining about it.
And again, you're missing the point. Dune is unquestionably a great book. It's an effective parable of the relationship between the west and the middle east. It's an exploration of a science fiction concept (the spice) and it's greater effect on society. It's a depiction of a deeply detailed society and how their environment shaped their culture. It is, in short, a great book.
But at it's core, it's just a messiah story. However, it's far from unoriginal.
But Avatar? Avatar is also a messiah story. But it's so generic, so trite, so incredibly shallow that it brings nothing new to the table. It is, in it's entirety, unoriginal.
I've been hearing a lot of people making comments that the story in Avatar is not a new story
Any literature teacher will tell you there are no new stories and haven't been for centuries.
Bah, that's a bullshit excuse. While there are "no new stories", people seem to have no trouble taking a story and creating a new spin, investigating new ideas, or otherwise adding their own unique twist. Not so for Avatar. Avatar isn't just "not a new story". It's a completely fucking ripoff of Dune, Dances with Wolves, and any other "noble savage" tale you've ever come across. As for the message, Cameron just took the Gaia concept and dressed it up with a little science fiction technobabble. It's utterly derivative. The only thing unique about it is the visual effects. That's it.
No, Avatar is an incredibly average-to-below-average story that's been dressed up so it's nice and pretty. That's it, that's all.
A *bit* predictable? Seriously? Dude, within 15 minutes, if you hadn't figured out the basic plotting for the entire movie, you either weren't paying attention or you're too dumb to breath.
I disagree with the "not science fiction" thing
Yeah, me too. Of course it was science fiction. After all, it's a note-for-note rip-off of Dune, cleverly disguised by using a lush, green world instead of a sandy desert, then gutted to remove any of the bits that actually make Dune an interesting novel: evil corporation stealing, literally, unobtainium from savages who are "in touch" with their environment in ways the evil corporates can't understand. Character from evil corporation changes sides and becomes messiah figure. Character falls in love with savage. Messiah figure leads savages to victory. Heck, they even have ornithopter-like flying machines. Now just throw in a thinking forest composed of the thoughts of the dead, ala Orson Scott Card's "Children of the Mind". Oh, plus some Mechs ala every random anime you've ever seen.
No, it's absolutely science fiction. Horribly derivative, unoriginal science fiction. But, hey, at least he picked a good book to rip off, amiright?
Actually, the GP is right. Neoliberalism, the driving force behind modern conservative economics that has swept the United States and Canada (and probably other nations), includes, among its components, tax reform, trade liberalization, privatization, and deregulation.
Slashdot Mirror
But, I disagree with your contention that bad experiences are why people shy away from it. I think for more people, it's the nastiness of the stateless addresses.
Nah, frankly, most people shy away from it because they just don't see the benefit that makes the trouble with it. And I'm one of them. I could, this weekend, get myself an ipv6 allocation from hurricane or a similar provider, configure my firewall appropriately, reconfig the few boxes on my network, and voila, have ipv6 deployed. But then what? What would that get me? "No NAT!" you say. Sure, great. Except any time I'd want remote access to my machines (say, at work), ipv6 is unavailable. So what was the point, again?
It's fundamentally a chicken-and-egg problem. Until ipv6 starts getting deployed, it's useless. But until ipv6 appears useful, it won't get deployed. It sucks, but that's the simple reality of the situation.
I was merely countering your original complaint that 3D films shouldnt be allowed as a small minority is sensitive to the product.
Uh... I never once, at any time, said that, did I?
have you ever been to a movie where they have subtitles in the same language as the audio?
Educate yourself. There are a a number of options available for movie theatre captioning. Heck, if Rear Window Captioning was being used, you may have never even noticed.
or where the audio track describes the video?
Obviously not over the main speakers. But for all you know, some deaf guy in the audience may have been listening to descriptive narration through an earpiece.
and what do you mean can't view 3d content? close one eye and there you go, you're back to 2d. quit complaining
Ah, I see, you're just being an asshole for kicks. Nevermind, then.
BTW, for non-assholes reading, the obvious solution would be for the theatres to provide glasses where both lenses are polarized the same way. At least then you would have the option to enjoy the film in 2D.
Depends on how you define "near". If you mean a store within a hundred miles will have on display, then yes. If you mean inside my house, not only no but hell no. I've got better things to waste my money on than the latest fad electronics.
I never said you should buy it. The OP asked where 3D was available. I told him. If you don't want it, bully for you (I don't, either, BTW).
Frankly, I'm not even sure who you're arguing with...
Whether you are joking or not, I wish people constantly complaining of nausea and headaches would just stop. I do not get headaches and nausea from viewing 3-D movies, nor does anyone I know.
Congratulations! I envy you!
Yes, it may affect you, but quite complaining.
Umm... fuck you. :) The first few weeks of Avatar's release, I was excluded because I can't view 3D content. Basically, the studios and the theatres have decided to give me and anyone else who dislikes 3D content the middle finger, all so they can use their fancy new gimmick to wow audiences so they don't notice the shitty plot that underpins their pretty new movie.
There are people born, or inflicted, everyday with multiple kinds of disabilities that preclude them from doing numerous tasks, such as driving, flying an airplane, etc. If you get headaches, or have some ocular disability That prevents you from viewing 3-D tv, I'm sorry to hear that, but shut it.
I'm sorry, what? Are you saying blind people should refrain from complaining if a movie or TV studio refuses to broadcast with descriptive video? That deaf people should refrain from complaining because they refuse to broadcast subtitles?
Seriously, fuck you, buddy.
It's coming to a TV near you in the next year or so (3D-capable TVs are the new hotness now that HDTVs have becoming commonplace in the market). Samsung, in particular, has announced models that will use RealD technology (ie, the same thing used in movie theatres) to display 3D on your TV using standard circularly polarized glasses. In fact, the technology itself is pretty straight forward, you just need a TV capable of a relatively high frame rate (RealD is 144hz) combined with a polarizing overlay which switches at the same rate.
Now not only can our relatives bore us with their hours-long videos of their cruise, but they can also leave us with (worse) headaches and intense nausea! Now that's what I call progress!
Well, sure, but anything *could* bring a plane down. Hell, a flock of geese flying into the engines *could* a the plane down. The question is, what are the odds? 50/50? Ten-to-one? Because there's an *awful* lot of freaking out going on over an event that would be *trivial* to duplicate by the attacker simply hiding the explosives in a body cavity, instead of his underwear. So it's important to ask the question, what is the real risk here? That's all I'm asking.
Assuming your definition of "good" is an odd combination of chewy and crunchy, with very little actual flavour...
Link, please? The last update I heard on this topic was that the TSA (or some other three-letter agency) ran a test and discovered it was enough to blow a hole in the side of the plane, which would result in decompression, yes, but wouldn't necessarily bring down the plane.
Try and get your learn on before making yourself sound like a jackass:
Dude... he didn't shut down the servers. He reprogrammed the simulation (the shutdown was just a temporary glitch while his modifications loaded).
Now turn in your geek card. ;)
So would 'global warming' have prevented this type of disaster?
Uh, no. Or do you really believe global warming would've magically allowed Mars to hold on to its atmosphere?
That there were no dead bodies or a mile-wide debris trail in downtown Detroit is trivial -- because there COULD have been.
Could there? Has this actually been looked at? Because this guy wasn't carrying that much explosive. It may be that the worst case is a few people die and the cabin decompresses.
On the flipside, caffeine, in moderate doses, enhances mental focus, and for developers, that can be a real boon (I work just fine without caffeine, but if I have to buckle down for an intense coding session, a little caffeine and a pair of isolating headphones is, hands down, the best way for me to get in the flow and stay there for a prolonged period of time).
lewl, fair enough. Perhaps Dune is a better example (I'm actually surprised more people haven't caught on to the similarities between Avatar and Dune). :)
I'm the same way. Just watch it in 2D, it still looks visually stunning (even if the plot is deeply unoriginal).
As for the brightness, that'd be because RealD uses a pair of oppositely circularly polarized lenses in order to deliver different images to each eye. The result is that half the light from the screen is blocked to each eye (the same effect is used when making polarized sunglasses).
Avatar is to Dances with Wolves as The Matrix is to Neuromancer, several Philip K. Dick stories, The Sleeping Man, Dark City, Life is a Dream, Snow Crash. You really think the "machine invasion" motif is original to sci-fi as well?
ROFL, that's not at all the same. Avatar is literally the *exact same plot* as DwW. The Matrix has no such direct analog. It is at best deeply inspired by the movies/books you cite. But it's hardly a carbon copy, as is the case with Avatar.
Where were all the people like you hiding on Slashdot when The Matrix and sequels came out? Everyone who mentioned that The Matrix story was just a derivative of Kant philosophy and Buddhism but with guns and special effects got modded troll or flame bait.
Oh, I'm sorry, there was other movies or books that contained the exact same narrative as The Matrix?
Hint: Just because a movie espouses an established philosophy, doesn't mean it's unoriginal. Avatar is unoriginal because it *lifts it's entire storyline from another movie*.
I'd like that too, but you have to realize that it's extremely difficult to pull off.
Uh... why? Are you saying a good plot and incredible special effects are somehow antithetical?
Panning something that has a certain aspect that is above and beyond anything done before just because it has other aspects that are below average is practically the definition of snobbery.
Bullshit. What is the purpose of a movie? It's to deliver a narrative. Period. That's its job. And if the narrative sucks? Then the movie deserves to be panned, as it's failed to achieve its core purpose.
Or, perhaps, you believe that it's snobbery to criticize a book that tells a crappy story, but is printed on really really nice paper?
Separate "story" and "message" from "script".
WTF are you talking about? The script is an expression of the story. The message is embedded in the script. It makes no sense to separate those things because they're one and the same.
There's not that many basic stories out there (really!) but that's been true for thousands of years. Stop whining about it.
And again, you're missing the point. Dune is unquestionably a great book. It's an effective parable of the relationship between the west and the middle east. It's an exploration of a science fiction concept (the spice) and it's greater effect on society. It's a depiction of a deeply detailed society and how their environment shaped their culture. It is, in short, a great book.
But at it's core, it's just a messiah story. However, it's far from unoriginal.
But Avatar? Avatar is also a messiah story. But it's so generic, so trite, so incredibly shallow that it brings nothing new to the table. It is, in it's entirety, unoriginal.
I've been hearing a lot of people making comments that the story in Avatar is not a new story
Any literature teacher will tell you there are no new stories and haven't been for centuries.
Bah, that's a bullshit excuse. While there are "no new stories", people seem to have no trouble taking a story and creating a new spin, investigating new ideas, or otherwise adding their own unique twist. Not so for Avatar. Avatar isn't just "not a new story". It's a completely fucking ripoff of Dune, Dances with Wolves, and any other "noble savage" tale you've ever come across. As for the message, Cameron just took the Gaia concept and dressed it up with a little science fiction technobabble. It's utterly derivative. The only thing unique about it is the visual effects. That's it.
No, Avatar is an incredibly average-to-below-average story that's been dressed up so it's nice and pretty. That's it, that's all.
Whoops, s/Children of the Mind/Speaker for the Dead/ (well, both count, but the latter is where the idea is first introduced the concept).
The story is a bit predictable
A *bit* predictable? Seriously? Dude, within 15 minutes, if you hadn't figured out the basic plotting for the entire movie, you either weren't paying attention or you're too dumb to breath.
I disagree with the "not science fiction" thing
Yeah, me too. Of course it was science fiction. After all, it's a note-for-note rip-off of Dune, cleverly disguised by using a lush, green world instead of a sandy desert, then gutted to remove any of the bits that actually make Dune an interesting novel: evil corporation stealing, literally, unobtainium from savages who are "in touch" with their environment in ways the evil corporates can't understand. Character from evil corporation changes sides and becomes messiah figure. Character falls in love with savage. Messiah figure leads savages to victory. Heck, they even have ornithopter-like flying machines. Now just throw in a thinking forest composed of the thoughts of the dead, ala Orson Scott Card's "Children of the Mind". Oh, plus some Mechs ala every random anime you've ever seen.
No, it's absolutely science fiction. Horribly derivative, unoriginal science fiction. But, hey, at least he picked a good book to rip off, amiright?
Actually, the GP is right. Neoliberalism, the driving force behind modern conservative economics that has swept the United States and Canada (and probably other nations), includes, among its components, tax reform, trade liberalization, privatization, and deregulation.