I'm probably a statistical anomoly, but I'm a gay star wars fan and I found the pages to be cute (if inconsistent in it's humor).
I'd have prefered that the muscle daddy in black helmet looked more like Vader, but the lack of artistic talent may help the author not get sued for intellectual property infringement.
The Darth Maul and new attack formation panels didn't hit anything funny or offensive to me (just sort of "what?") but for whatever reason I did like the Luke, Stormtrooper, and Tie Fighter panels.
Not great humor, but a cute 15 second micro-laugh.
As far as the "offensiveness" of the pages I'm at a loss to see why I (as a gay person) or anyone else (gay or not) should be offended by it. It seems vaguely in the same vein of humor as the "Pyst" parody (of Myst) a few years ago. Nothing believable (even if you are star wars fanatic sado masochist). It just takes some of the unintentional gay s&m elements from the movie and tries to highlight them a bit. Leather boots, phalic lightsaber, the whole empire:: nazi parallel (which is a s&m fantasy scenario).
Get a grip. Should heterosexual, insecure, women be embarassed or distressed over Ally McBeal? There probably are some, but it's a bit too surreal and implausible to be real. I'm sure that no one could imply that the Darth panels are anywhere near the realm of reality.
I have a handful of CD-ROMs from several years ago that were originally sold with software viruses on them. Had their software licenses been subclasses of DCMA law, I'd have great difficulty in dealing with these disks.
The manufacturers did not see fit to issue new, virus-free CD-ROMs. They sent out a floppy disk with an updater, posted a new install program on their BBS (not website), or (in one egregious case) sent out only a warning and recommended some free virus fighting software to download.
Today, a few things have changed. I've upgraded my system to a machine without a floppy disk drive, the free virus fighting software of that era is no longer compatible with the current OS (though the viruses still are), and most annoying of all is that the ephemeral nature of software updates makes it impossible for me to find the patches which were originally distributed on-line.
My personal solution is that I burn copies of the CD's without the virus (or with the bug fix or new installer or whatever). I'll try to hang on to the original distribution medium in the same way I'll hang on to a "proof of purchase" sticker, but the original software is detrimental to me to even stick it in the my CD-ROM drive (in the case of the auto-play virus).
This isn't a situation that's limited to viruses either. Some companies use special install applications which fail to work on newer operating systems. Since there are several common third party installers that are actively supported, if the software used one of these then in some cases it's possible to (legally) obtain a more recent version of the install program and burn a new CD with the newer installer executable. Is this legal? It certainly doesn't sound like it fits with the letter of the law at all.
Maybe the company who had licensed Microsoft's NTFS code found evidence of borrowing from copyleft sources and threatened to go public unless Microsoft dropped their suit.
Perhaps the undesirable association with "Little Shop of Horrors" was why they delayed the launch of their product until October.
"On the 23rd of September in a decade not too long before our own, the human race suddenly encountered a terrible threat to it's very existence."
Audrey was a mousey young woman who tried to tart herself up to be appealing to men and would inevitably fall victim to their use and abuse.
Audrey II was the name of the carnivorous plant from outer space with ambitions of world domination.
In some ways, I see both of the traits of these characters in Ergo's product. At least it doesn't run a Windows based OS (then it would DEFINITELY be in the carnivorous, world domination category:-)
Superman has "X-ray vision" letting him see through anything that isn't lead lined. Knowing this, all of Superman's foes stupidly stick their most secret items into a lead container to thwart Superman's super-vision. But if most containers in Metropolis aren't lead lined, then the lead boxes conspicuously stand out to Superman because he can't see inside them.
Raw text in messages may help hide dangerous thoughts because of the sheer volume of email on the Internet, but if liberty is in question it would be better if everyone started putting their routine correspondence in lead boxes.
First of all, it is decidedly right handed. Apple has never had a mouse that favors a particular hand even back to the days of the Apple ][.
Second, though AppleInsider is noted for a better "hit" record of its rumor predictions than many of the other mac rumor sites (because they don't publish every bit of wishful thinking that a fanboy comes up with as a 'rumor'), their traditional 'hits' come from screenshots of beta release software or 3rd party hardware that the manufacturer is trying to create a buzz about.
These 3D images scream "wishful fanboy with Lightwave". Note the lack of translucency (which if true would be a bigger story than a change in the mouse). Note the low rendering quality; take a look at the quality of some of the images in the Apple Design book for a taste of what sort of images Apple liked to prototype with in years past.
It IS likely that Apple will have a new mouse form factor.
It IS likely that they will do something to GRAB the attention of the users and reviewers.
It IS likely that these two logical certainties are what made MacAddict post some made up renderings to get their hit count to go up and sell more ad space.
My interest is what I can learn from a gated community. Obviously, int. property restrictions preclude me from copying the material (and in some cases the ideas). But there's still a lot that I can learn from looking at "good" code.
Subtle ideas to optimize the speed. Simple ways to clarify the interface. Slick methods to increase the functionality.
I'm not a student in school anymore and I don't have Professors and TA's looking at my work to tell me that something is sufficient or providing ideas and methods for me to learn how to improve my work.
Community source code projects allow me to watch the development of a project that I'm interested in. A project driven by commercial intersts has the added benefit that there is a paid QA staff and a paying clientele that provides much swifter and uncomprimising evaluation of the worth of the patches and "improvements".
Non-commercial open source is good as well if it's driven and controlled by people whose opinions I respect, but altruism is a less compelling quality motivator than greed.
My main interests in projects is foremost my education, but if I am interested in the project and as a user I find bugs or limitations I will contribute whatever I can (be it code or a bug report or whatever).
I'm probably not the ideal contributor to any community source project (whether gated or open), but my interest is in improving my code and my continuing education. Not profit. Not intellectual property.
I felt disappointed after seeing the movie, but not for the same reasons as Mr. Katz. The fact that Titan A.E. was executed in animation form rather than live action set two expectations of mine:
1. The focus is on effects and action rather than subtle human emotion.
2. Nothing will feel spontaneous; everything will be planned, debated, executed and re-executed to present the story.
While I appreciate a cerebral film, I also get enjoyment from films that are no more intellectual than riding on a roller coaster for an hour and a half. My expectation was that I really expected Titan A.E. to be an engaging, science-fiction, Space-Mountian-like coaster ride akin to Aliens, Terminator II, Star Trek II, or The Last Starfighter.
I can't say that I expected intellectual or emotional stimulation, but as the frames flew before my eyes I really felt that in spite of the fast pace, the exhaustive pre-planning needed for this cartoon had done more to lobotomize, sanitize, and neutralize the "vision" of the film than it had given it extra life.
I didn't find what WAS rendered onscreen to be problematic as what was NOT rendered.
The movie sets up a tale very similar to that of Jesus Christ. A god-like father entrusts his son with a special gift and destiny. The son is cast out of the father's presence and is forced to dwell among men as an outsider. Through the his father's gift and the betrayal of his friends, the son is finally able to fulfill his destiny as the saviour of mankind.
The film has enough similarities to the story of Jesus that it becomes frustrating that certain elements were not addressed. Rather than address the issues that the writers themselves raise, they use their careful construction and planning to avoid generating any controversy or homage to the tale. It was obvious that what WAS presented on screen was very meticulously studied, debated, screened with test audiences, worked and re-worked to come up with an entertaining story, but why use the strong Christ-like story elements and then leave their usage ambiguous and unresolved. Why did the story end where it did? It wasn't clear whether the roller coaster ride was set in a story that was supposed to be a homage to Jesus or to be a Dogma/Good Omens sci-fi romp through religious tales.
I really enjoyed the roller coaster ride of shooting battles and space fights, but because the creators had made so much of a reference to religious issues I kept looking for things to be presented on screen that either never appeared or were so uncontroversialy and blandly presented that there presence was simply boring.
Also on the subject of religion... I was very disappointed that they named they named their movie with a name that's absolutely loaded with mythological significance but never proferred any reason that the characters in the movie would have used the term Titan as they did. A religious term without any real reason for it to be there.
One of the major plot points that was left unexplained in the movie was exactly what it was that humankind did to get the attention of the Drej to start their holocaust against humanity. A friend who saw it with me claimed that it was because mankind built the Titan that the Drej thought they should be eliminated. I find this to be unsatisfying that the Titan was built to save mankind from alien extinction and hence causes the extinction in the first place. I find the circurlar nature of this explanation silly, and long for ANY other rationale. The psuedo-explanation which was given was that the Drej wanted to destroy mankind because of the potential of what mankind was capable of doing.
The psuedo-explanation fits in well with the religious references, i.e. that it is the ineffible nature of original sin that the condemns man to eternal death and it is through the deeds of the son that saves mankind from persecution and death. It's just that as set up as a sci-fi story you long for a more clear cut explanation: mankind breaking the warp barrier, mankind making interstellar contact, mankind gaining control over the transformation of matter and energy (as the Drej clearly have control of).
At the end of the movie, I could see the enormous effort that the creators had put in to make this movie. But it was also clearly evident that their own efforts at self-censorship had lobotomized the film of any interesting or controversial questions.
I went into the movie expecting a nice roller coaster ride. I came out having witnessed a nice roller coaster ride. I saw exactly what I expected I'd see, but I hope that it's clear how the movie had the potential to go further than it did and how it misled my expectations.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd have prefered that the muscle daddy in black helmet looked more like Vader, but the lack of artistic talent may help the author not get sued for intellectual property infringement.
The Darth Maul and new attack formation panels didn't hit anything funny or offensive to me (just sort of "what?") but for whatever reason I did like the Luke, Stormtrooper, and Tie Fighter panels.
Not great humor, but a cute 15 second micro-laugh.
As far as the "offensiveness" of the pages I'm at a loss to see why I (as a gay person) or anyone else (gay or not) should be offended by it. It seems vaguely in the same vein of humor as the "Pyst" parody (of Myst) a few years ago. Nothing believable (even if you are star wars fanatic sado masochist). It just takes some of the unintentional gay s&m elements from the movie and tries to highlight them a bit. Leather boots, phalic lightsaber, the whole empire :: nazi parallel (which is a s&m fantasy scenario).
Get a grip. Should heterosexual, insecure, women be embarassed or distressed over Ally McBeal? There probably are some, but it's a bit too surreal and implausible to be real. I'm sure that no one could imply that the Darth panels are anywhere near the realm of reality.
The manufacturers did not see fit to issue new, virus-free CD-ROMs. They sent out a floppy disk with an updater, posted a new install program on their BBS (not website), or (in one egregious case) sent out only a warning and recommended some free virus fighting software to download.
Today, a few things have changed. I've upgraded my system to a machine without a floppy disk drive, the free virus fighting software of that era is no longer compatible with the current OS (though the viruses still are), and most annoying of all is that the ephemeral nature of software updates makes it impossible for me to find the patches which were originally distributed on-line.
My personal solution is that I burn copies of the CD's without the virus (or with the bug fix or new installer or whatever). I'll try to hang on to the original distribution medium in the same way I'll hang on to a "proof of purchase" sticker, but the original software is detrimental to me to even stick it in the my CD-ROM drive (in the case of the auto-play virus).
This isn't a situation that's limited to viruses either. Some companies use special install applications which fail to work on newer operating systems. Since there are several common third party installers that are actively supported, if the software used one of these then in some cases it's possible to (legally) obtain a more recent version of the install program and burn a new CD with the newer installer executable. Is this legal? It certainly doesn't sound like it fits with the letter of the law at all.
And there are many more of technophobes (of all age groups) than techno-savy voters who understand the concept of free speech on the internet.
His comment probably struck it's intended chord with voters better than I want to give him credit for.
Sweet karmic justice, but highly unlikely.
"On the 23rd of September in a decade not too long before our own, the human race suddenly encountered a terrible threat to it's very existence."
Audrey was a mousey young woman who tried to tart herself up to be appealing to men and would inevitably fall victim to their use and abuse.
Audrey II was the name of the carnivorous plant from outer space with ambitions of world domination.
In some ways, I see both of the traits of these characters in Ergo's product. At least it doesn't run a Windows based OS (then it would DEFINITELY be in the carnivorous, world domination category :-)
Superman has "X-ray vision" letting him see through anything that isn't lead lined. Knowing this, all of Superman's foes stupidly stick their most secret items into a lead container to thwart Superman's super-vision. But if most containers in Metropolis aren't lead lined, then the lead boxes conspicuously stand out to Superman because he can't see inside them. Raw text in messages may help hide dangerous thoughts because of the sheer volume of email on the Internet, but if liberty is in question it would be better if everyone started putting their routine correspondence in lead boxes.
First of all, it is decidedly right handed. Apple has never had a mouse that favors a particular hand even back to the days of the Apple ][.
Second, though AppleInsider is noted for a better "hit" record of its rumor predictions than many of the other mac rumor sites (because they don't publish every bit of wishful thinking that a fanboy comes up with as a 'rumor'), their traditional 'hits' come from screenshots of beta release software or 3rd party hardware that the manufacturer is trying to create a buzz about.
These 3D images scream "wishful fanboy with Lightwave". Note the lack of translucency (which if true would be a bigger story than a change in the mouse). Note the low rendering quality; take a look at the quality of some of the images in the Apple Design book for a taste of what sort of images Apple liked to prototype with in years past.
It IS likely that Apple will have a new mouse form factor.
It IS likely that they will do something to GRAB the attention of the users and reviewers.
It IS likely that these two logical certainties are what made MacAddict post some made up renderings to get their hit count to go up and sell more ad space.
My interest is what I can learn from a gated community. Obviously, int. property restrictions preclude me from copying the material (and in some cases the ideas). But there's still a lot that I can learn from looking at "good" code.
Subtle ideas to optimize the speed.
Simple ways to clarify the interface.
Slick methods to increase the functionality.
I'm not a student in school anymore and I don't have Professors and TA's looking at my work to tell me that something is sufficient or providing ideas and methods for me to learn how to improve my work.
Community source code projects allow me to watch the development of a project that I'm interested in. A project driven by commercial intersts has the added benefit that there is a paid QA staff and a paying clientele that provides much swifter and uncomprimising evaluation of the worth of the patches and "improvements".
Non-commercial open source is good as well if it's driven and controlled by people whose opinions I respect, but altruism is a less compelling quality motivator than greed.
My main interests in projects is foremost my education, but if I am interested in the project and as a user I find bugs or limitations I will contribute whatever I can (be it code or a bug report or whatever).
I'm probably not the ideal contributor to any community source project (whether gated or open), but my interest is in improving my code and my continuing education. Not profit. Not intellectual property.
That's my (limited) perspective anyway.
I felt disappointed after seeing the movie, but not for the same reasons as Mr. Katz. The fact that Titan A.E. was executed in animation form rather than live action set two expectations of mine:
1. The focus is on effects and action rather than subtle human emotion.
2. Nothing will feel spontaneous; everything will be planned, debated, executed and re-executed to present the story.
While I appreciate a cerebral film, I also get enjoyment from films that are no more intellectual than riding on a roller coaster for an hour and a half. My expectation was that I really expected Titan A.E. to be an engaging, science-fiction, Space-Mountian-like coaster ride akin to Aliens, Terminator II, Star Trek II, or The Last Starfighter.
I can't say that I expected intellectual or emotional stimulation, but as the frames flew before my eyes I really felt that in spite of the fast pace, the exhaustive pre-planning needed for this cartoon had done more to lobotomize, sanitize, and neutralize the "vision" of the film than it had given it extra life.
I didn't find what WAS rendered onscreen to be problematic as what was NOT rendered.
The movie sets up a tale very similar to that of Jesus Christ. A god-like father entrusts his son with a special gift and destiny. The son is cast out of the father's presence and is forced to dwell among men as an outsider. Through the his father's gift and the betrayal of his friends, the son is finally able to fulfill his destiny as the saviour of mankind.
The film has enough similarities to the story of Jesus that it becomes frustrating that certain elements were not addressed. Rather than address the issues that the writers themselves raise, they use their careful construction and planning to avoid generating any controversy or homage to the tale. It was obvious that what WAS presented on screen was very meticulously studied, debated, screened with test audiences, worked and re-worked to come up with an entertaining story, but why use the strong Christ-like story elements and then leave their usage ambiguous and unresolved. Why did the story end where it did? It wasn't clear whether the roller coaster ride was set in a story that was supposed to be a homage to Jesus or to be a Dogma/Good Omens sci-fi romp through religious tales.
I really enjoyed the roller coaster ride of shooting battles and space fights, but because the creators had made so much of a reference to religious issues I kept looking for things to be presented on screen that either never appeared or were so uncontroversialy and blandly presented that there presence was simply boring.
Also on the subject of religion... I was very disappointed that they named they named their movie with a name that's absolutely loaded with mythological significance but never proferred any reason that the characters in the movie would have used the term Titan as they did. A religious term without any real reason for it to be there.
One of the major plot points that was left unexplained in the movie was exactly what it was that humankind did to get the attention of the Drej to start their holocaust against humanity. A friend who saw it with me claimed that it was because mankind built the Titan that the Drej thought they should be eliminated. I find this to be unsatisfying that the Titan was built to save mankind from alien extinction and hence causes the extinction in the first place. I find the circurlar nature of this explanation silly, and long for ANY other rationale. The psuedo-explanation which was given was that the Drej wanted to destroy mankind because of the potential of what mankind was capable of doing.
The psuedo-explanation fits in well with the religious references, i.e. that it is the ineffible nature of original sin that the condemns man to eternal death and it is through the deeds of the son that saves mankind from persecution and death. It's just that as set up as a sci-fi story you long for a more clear cut explanation: mankind breaking the warp barrier, mankind making interstellar contact, mankind gaining control over the transformation of matter and energy (as the Drej clearly have control of).
At the end of the movie, I could see the enormous effort that the creators had put in to make this movie. But it was also clearly evident that their own efforts at self-censorship had lobotomized the film of any interesting or controversial questions.
I went into the movie expecting a nice roller coaster ride. I came out having witnessed a nice roller coaster ride. I saw exactly what I expected I'd see, but I hope that it's clear how the movie had the potential to go further than it did and how it misled my expectations.