I disagree because the first computers I used when I was twelve, thirteen, etc, were an HP 3000 (at school -- time share accounts) amd an altos minicomputer, running CP/M.
What they shared, and the basis for my premise, were multi-user, multi-tasking command-line environments that demanded verbal agility and procedural thinking (here, I am *NOT* using procedural as the antonym of object-oriented; I am simply using it in a methodical, incremental context). Both paved the way for my comfort with linux a decade and a half later and predisposed me to prefer *nix operating systems.
It would be a logical fallacy for me to presume my experience and choices would be universal, or that one's childhood OS predetermines one's adult usage, but I think it's fair to say that what one learns at an impressionable age could REASONABLY presage one's choices of computing environment as an adult.
But rather than rubber stamping this comment, let me add that Katrina, 9/11, and the current laws which penalize music sharing, gay marriage, and a woman's right to choose demonstrate a critical and tragic reality of our age. While Leviathan and the Social Contract made perfect sense in Hobbes' time, population density and socioeconomic dynamics of our age have rendered the Social Contract a dinosaur.
The Sovereign Entity to whom we have surrendered our liberties in return for protection against threats both inside and out has proven itself unable and unwilling to protect its own subjects. In bizarre and costly shambles like the wars on Terrorism and Drugs, the government has squandered billions of dollars pursuing the wrong targets, missing the right ones, and neglecting those whom the money could help more effectively.
What's the answer? is it Anarchy? Is it socialism? Is it a more tightly controlled Republic like Ireland? I don't presume to know, but I do know our system is broken and it's going to get a lot worse before we recognize the need and the means to fix it. Getting rid of Bush won't simply solve the problem, nor will four more years of whatever passes for his legacy.
I wish the Senate would question Roberts about RIAA and intellectual property, in addition to the other questions, because I feel certain we'll see these questions come up quite often before the High Court in the near future.
I have used gramofile successfully to record a number of albums of different varieties (Bach, blues, and the soundtrack to "Decline of Western Civilization," to name a few) and I can not recommend gramofile for everything; a swiss army knife for cd --> vinyl it is NOT. I think it's a good learning tool because it makes one with a geeky, tinker's mind examine the mechanics of filtering sound digitally. I far prefer to open two windows and use a horribly convoluted variation on SOX because it saves me the interim step of separating tracks -- alt-tab allows you to start one track and end another seamlessly.
I will concede this is a personal preference on my part, not a dogmatic technical point.
we have plenty of linux. My biggest surprise at both an intellectual and professional level of discovery was that 'just because it's OSS doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job." Now, I had no excuse for this epiphany; I've been using linux since 1994 and my dad's been a gov't contractor since BEFORE I was born (er...more than three decades ago); he's been expressing that very simple thought for nearly a decade, but I was a zealot. I have to admit we mix Irix, solaris, linux, *bsd, dec, and hp somewhat seamlessly.
I think Stallman understands that the very process by which Bush's presidency trampled over rational and justifiable processes in Florida and the courts -- that is, due process perverted for expediency -- can be applied to the hasty deployment of troops to yet ANOTHER territory whose terrain, culture, and worldview the United States refuses to learn. We were robbed of due process in Florida last winter and now an already starving country will be back where it was in 1981. Am I stretching things a bit? If I were confusing correlation with causation (ie, Reagan busting the Air Traffic controllers' union and deregulating the airlines directly contributed to Tuesday's disaster), it would be unreasonable. I'm just agreeing with Stallman that our UNDULY elected buffoon shows a predilection to hasten to war at the expense of careful consideration.
The first batch of responses (of course, I'll check back in a few hours) has contained some useful ideas, not least being the outright negative responses. The points which really hit home with me are the following:
<ul>
<li>going for OSS for OSS' sake is no better than going for Microsoft, just because one is the alternative and the other the giant.
<li>Companies with business clout also have the advantage of having the resources and the history of reliable follow-up -- making them better candidates, in some people's opinions
<li>ironically, M$' antecedent on Antitrust Row, IBM, has turned out to be one of the Alternative's best allies in this effort.
<li>a lesson I seem to have to relearn annually -- initial cost benefit does not guarantee long term cost benefit -- if a charity/501(c)3 gets something for free, but it sits on a shelf and no one uses it, who has gained a thing?
<li>...and finally, if I want to do this as I feel it should be done, I need to invest my own time,know-how, and other resources.</ul>
<p>
As self-evident as these may sound, the fact they got aired by a number of people bodes well for my family's friend...it suggests that where ever she turns if she takes my counsel (which, at this time, will be a mixed bag), she can be assured of people with good sense lurking in every corner. I want to thank those who chimed in rationally and with substantive suggestions.
In my world, the realm of brainiacs, linux, and Slashdot cleave to a particular musical demographic. Although it is often to narrow for my tastes, at least it falls within the natural direction my musical tastes were heading when I first learned about Linux. Do you find that the music you listen to ties in heavily with your coding habits, your view of your efforts and emotional responses to situations? In short, Is music intrinsic to your quality of life?
I hated Kaufman and I still hate Carrey; really, I do. This is not Carrey's movie, it's Forman's and DeVito (who USED to be purely physical but has transcended that for character acting)invests a class and heart. See it against your best judgment. Trust a fellow slashdotter on this, I REALLY hate Carrey, but this is a good movie.
Along this vein, I vote for the teachers in elementary, secondary, and all schools who taught me to read, write, and think in a procedural manner. Their efforts are, to a person, far more valuable than Bezos' ever could be.
Oh, please. The notion that we can't compare people in different realms of achievement amounts to hairline distinctions reeking of sophistry. Remember, we use the verb 'contrast' to describe the act of summing up differences, and 'compare' to sum up similarities.
Indeed, the similarities are overwhelming...aside from the biological aspects, humans tend to share motivations, desires, appetites and an admirable dose of perseverance. To read Plutarch and the middle ages hagiographies leads me to believe a physicist, a chef, an author, and statesman all share the ladership amino acids of charisma, gadly-ism, and perseverance. This was true of Alexander the Great, Cleopatra, Galileo, Napoleon, and even Eric Raymond.
I consider these cross references integral to my thrust...as apples and oranges are fruits and grow on trees, so are humans more similar than disparate. the few we rever, rvile, or otherwise distinguish merit comment because they most effectively use what they share with est us, rather than drawing on some magic ingredients to which we have no access.
of the reason why I read Katz religiously. While negativists neigh about his lack of horse sense, I read valid sociological and historical insights in this article. that;s not to say I agree with all his conclusions, processes, or premises...I just think that articles like this are far more interesting than painfully myopic techno-weenie things like EMACS vs. VI or How-Gateway-Sabotaged-Amiga. This is reporting because it starts with primary source material, expounds upon ae, and delivers conclusions of subjective merit.
I usually enjoy Mr. Katz's columns and this is no exception. For me, the only thing which lived up to the blurb on the poster -- "Scary as Hell!" -- was spending another hour with Heather Donahue. I couldn't wait for her to die!
The articles and the buzz outweigh the actual movie in appeal and interest! For instance, I found Katz's column far more interesting than Heather's whining. For my money, the low budget flick of last summer, PI, beat BWP hands down on every count! It had plot, atmosphere, momentum and power. BWP DRAGGED and rasped on my nerves.
In short, if this is the future of new movies, give me a Busby Berkely or CC DeMille production; I'd rather have the bombastic scale of the old Hollywood...it kept me entertained. BWP did not.
Re:Commercialize, commercialize, commercialize
on
Lo-Tech Cinema
·
· Score: 1
This is an excellent point:
"If hollywood thinks it can just go low tek now, they're missing the point. We want movies by movie makers who want to see their own movies - not movies by producers who want to make a movie people want to see."
but I have some problems with this point:
"When it comes to art, the average consumer doesn't know what he or she wants"
Most people I know have very good ideas what they want, but when they go to see it or praise it, they're told that this director is uncool or that actor has sold out, and they should not watch it. More to the point, what we see is dictated by what the mega-cinema chains will show.
When I was growing up, my city (washington, DC) had many independent movie theaters, many of which showed various movies of questionable commercial appeal. theaters like the Apex, Biograph, Key, and The circle would all show repertory, Anime', off-color drama (Caligula's a perfect example -- not porn, but damned close), and foreign. Most of these places are now gone, some of which have been razed to the ground and replaced by synthetic megaliths of corporate or commercial intent...I think the CVS chain accounts for at least three former movie theaters in town.
My point in this ancient history is that I think many more people know what they want to see, but their vote at the box office is curtailed by major chain theater options and whoever is keeping stats of rentals (and the Monica Lewinsky scandal showed us someone must be) is not correlating them to what should be shown in movie houses.
Doubtless, this has more to do with profit centers than taste. That leads me to wonder...are we perpetually doomed to following the accountants when it comes to what we can see? I liked Pi, but found it difficult. I admire those who make movies on the cheap, but I don't think that should be a criterion for excellence, any more than star name power or special effects.
What kind of suggestins are these? HAH! Wait a few months? NO! I don't like watching movies at home. It sucks. I like REAL movie theaters and I like the procedure of going to the theater. It's an event, an occasion, an outing. That's sacred to me!
I'm not an advocate of pirating artistic endeavor, either, and I'd never want to watch a Kubrick film on my computer monitor...but I do argue with the notion that there are limits to which we should be going. Who gets to set those limits? It's the presence of limits, arbitrarily set, which occasioned and promulgated such tyrannies as Katz is decrying.
Let's breach these limits now before the industry sees we swallow their swill happily and they impose MORE!
I find this a necessary post because not only do I disagree with it, I find it contains the same logical fallacy that created the situation Katz is documenting. Let me start with the endnote about not picking on the specifics because the ehole needs to be defended.
The idea here is that only by swallowing whole a bunch of little problems are we going to find unity. Such thinking allows us to proclaim that our ratings system is worth preserving, despite the discrepancy between tolerance of violence and disgust at the depiction of sexuality onscreen.
I agree that some children are prepared and others aren't and having seen it, I agree that South Park is quite filthy and obscene. I do not believe that either the product or its natural market should be restricted from each other. Further, I do not believe there should be any silly ID-checks and I find the notion of putting teens in charge of policing other teens to be an invitation to the very insanity that breeds columbines. how likely is it that some kid working at the local mall theater will repeated play dirty preferential politics with a lower classmen from his school, only to get gunned down by an enraged junior who's been told he can't see this and he can't see that, but gets a ticket to a violent flick with NO problem? Worst case scenario, I think, but it's the picking and choosing of what a kid can see and putting his peers in charge of policing this that breeds the Columbine, not the open door policy that has ruled supreme ever since the early eighties. Who do you think goes to see these inappropriate movies, anyway? Doesn't anyone remember all the fact-finding that Meese and his anti-porn commission launched? to this day, Susie Bright proclaims the Meese report one of the most effective pieces of erotica she's ever held in her hot hands.
One last paragraph about South Park; I sometimes wonder whether a mediocre piece of animation is the right place to being a morality-jihad. Why not choose lolita or an equally worthy piece of art? But then I think of how I saw it...a free pass for a preview in which at least a couple kids got turned away. A bomb threat turned us all out of doors halfway through. Do I blame Trey Stone and Matt Parker for that? NO! I blame the apparatus that turned away a dumb movie's natural contituency! Further, the movie wasn't all that dumb...it had some cultural allusions and some finishing touches (like the Busby Berkeley synchronized swimming scenes or the b&w movie reels) which may go over the kids' heads, but may make someone ask their mom what those people are doing, swimming like that...
I've often wondered about this, as well; I bought a digital phone with the hopes I'd get privacy, but all my outgoing calls come with a text message and a beep, denying me the possibility of privacy.
That said, I disapprove of such transmissions, but I think that
we should be encrypting everything possble;
we shouldn't be saying anything significant on open channels that can be monitored like this;
and we shouldn't be gabbing on cell phones, anyway...it's rude, dangerous, and expensive
I'm not big on ethical concerns...rape and torture in Kosovo get my dander up, as do mass graves, but cloning human embryos doesn't upset me. I'm a big believer of "if we can, we should" science.
Like many others, I am gleefully awaiting the response of the religious right, but even more so, I'm dying to see what the outer frontiers will be. Practical applications are also beside the point for me...just keep pushing and let's see what we can create! This is exciting new territory!
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree because the first computers I used when I was twelve, thirteen, etc, were an HP 3000 (at school -- time share accounts) amd an altos minicomputer, running CP/M.
What they shared, and the basis for my premise, were multi-user, multi-tasking command-line environments that demanded verbal agility and procedural thinking (here, I am *NOT* using procedural as the antonym of object-oriented; I am simply using it in a methodical, incremental context). Both paved the way for my comfort with linux a decade and a half later and predisposed me to prefer *nix operating systems.
It would be a logical fallacy for me to presume my experience and choices would be universal, or that one's childhood OS predetermines one's adult usage, but I think it's fair to say that what one learns at an impressionable age could REASONABLY presage one's choices of computing environment as an adult.
But rather than rubber stamping this comment, let me add that Katrina, 9/11, and the current laws which penalize music sharing, gay marriage, and a woman's right to choose demonstrate a critical and tragic reality of our age. While Leviathan and the Social Contract made perfect sense in Hobbes' time, population density and socioeconomic dynamics of our age have rendered the Social Contract a dinosaur.
The Sovereign Entity to whom we have surrendered our liberties in return for protection against threats both inside and out has proven itself unable and unwilling to protect its own subjects. In bizarre and costly shambles like the wars on Terrorism and Drugs, the government has squandered billions of dollars pursuing the wrong targets, missing the right ones, and neglecting those whom the money could help more effectively.
What's the answer? is it Anarchy? Is it socialism? Is it a more tightly controlled Republic like Ireland? I don't presume to know, but I do know our system is broken and it's going to get a lot worse before we recognize the need and the means to fix it. Getting rid of Bush won't simply solve the problem, nor will four more years of whatever passes for his legacy.
I wish the Senate would question Roberts about RIAA and intellectual property, in addition to the other questions, because I feel certain we'll see these questions come up quite often before the High Court in the near future.
I have used gramofile successfully to record a number of albums of different varieties (Bach, blues, and the soundtrack to "Decline of Western Civilization," to name a few) and I can not recommend gramofile for everything; a swiss army knife for cd --> vinyl it is NOT. I think it's a good learning tool because it makes one with a geeky, tinker's mind examine the mechanics of filtering sound digitally. I far prefer to open two windows and use a horribly convoluted variation on SOX because it saves me the interim step of separating tracks -- alt-tab allows you to start one track and end another seamlessly.
I will concede this is a personal preference on my part, not a dogmatic technical point.
we have plenty of linux. My biggest surprise at both an intellectual and professional level of discovery was that 'just because it's OSS doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job." Now, I had no excuse for this epiphany; I've been using linux since 1994 and my dad's been a gov't contractor since BEFORE I was born (er...more than three decades ago); he's been expressing that very simple thought for nearly a decade, but I was a zealot. I have to admit we mix Irix, solaris, linux, *bsd, dec, and hp somewhat seamlessly.
I think Stallman understands that the very process by which Bush's presidency trampled over rational and justifiable processes in Florida and the courts -- that is, due process perverted for expediency -- can be applied to the hasty deployment of troops to yet ANOTHER territory whose terrain, culture, and worldview the United States refuses to learn. We were robbed of due process in Florida last winter and now an already starving country will be back where it was in 1981. Am I stretching things a bit? If I were confusing correlation with causation (ie, Reagan busting the Air Traffic controllers' union and deregulating the airlines directly contributed to Tuesday's disaster), it would be unreasonable. I'm just agreeing with Stallman that our UNDULY elected buffoon shows a predilection to hasten to war at the expense of careful consideration.
The first batch of responses (of course, I'll check back in a few hours) has contained some useful ideas, not least being the outright negative responses. The points which really hit home with me are the following:
<ul>
<li>going for OSS for OSS' sake is no better than going for Microsoft, just because one is the alternative and the other the giant.
<li>Companies with business clout also have the advantage of having the resources and the history of reliable follow-up -- making them better candidates, in some people's opinions
<li>ironically, M$' antecedent on Antitrust Row, IBM, has turned out to be one of the Alternative's best allies in this effort.
<li>a lesson I seem to have to relearn annually -- initial cost benefit does not guarantee long term cost benefit -- if a charity/501(c)3 gets something for free, but it sits on a shelf and no one uses it, who has gained a thing?
<li>...and finally, if I want to do this as I feel it should be done, I need to invest my own time,know-how, and other resources.</ul>
<p>
As self-evident as these may sound, the fact they got aired by a number of people bodes well for my family's friend...it suggests that where ever she turns if she takes my counsel (which, at this time, will be a mixed bag), she can be assured of people with good sense lurking in every corner. I want to thank those who chimed in rationally and with substantive suggestions.
For what it's worth, I did ask and FNMA is a huge organization...how specific do you think your knowledge about this is?
In my world, the realm of brainiacs, linux, and Slashdot cleave to a particular musical demographic. Although it is often to narrow for my tastes, at least it falls within the natural direction my musical tastes were heading when I first learned about Linux. Do you find that the music you listen to ties in heavily with your coding habits, your view of your efforts and emotional responses to situations? In short, Is music intrinsic to your quality of life?
I hated Kaufman and I still hate Carrey; really, I do. This is not Carrey's movie, it's Forman's and DeVito (who USED to be purely physical but has transcended that for character acting)invests a class and heart. See it against your best judgment. Trust a fellow slashdotter on this, I REALLY hate Carrey, but this is a good movie.
Along this vein, I vote for the teachers in elementary, secondary, and all schools who taught me to read, write, and think in a procedural manner. Their efforts are, to a person, far more valuable than Bezos' ever could be.
Indeed, the similarities are overwhelming...aside from the biological aspects, humans tend to share motivations, desires, appetites and an admirable dose of perseverance. To read Plutarch and the middle ages hagiographies leads me to believe a physicist, a chef, an author, and statesman all share the ladership amino acids of charisma, gadly-ism, and perseverance. This was true of Alexander the Great, Cleopatra, Galileo, Napoleon, and even Eric Raymond.
I consider these cross references integral to my thrust...as apples and oranges are fruits and grow on trees, so are humans more similar than disparate. the few we rever, rvile, or otherwise distinguish merit comment because they most effectively use what they share with est us, rather than drawing on some magic ingredients to which we have no access.
of the reason why I read Katz religiously. While negativists neigh about his lack of horse sense, I read valid sociological and historical insights in this article. that;s not to say I agree with all his conclusions, processes, or premises...I just think that articles like this are far more interesting than painfully myopic techno-weenie things like EMACS vs. VI or How-Gateway-Sabotaged-Amiga. This is reporting because it starts with primary source material, expounds upon ae, and delivers conclusions of subjective merit.
The articles and the buzz outweigh the actual movie in appeal and interest! For instance, I found Katz's column far more interesting than Heather's whining. For my money, the low budget flick of last summer, PI, beat BWP hands down on every count! It had plot, atmosphere, momentum and power. BWP DRAGGED and rasped on my nerves.
In short, if this is the future of new movies, give me a Busby Berkely or CC DeMille production; I'd rather have the bombastic scale of the old Hollywood...it kept me entertained. BWP did not.
but I have some problems with this point:
Most people I know have very good ideas what they want, but when they go to see it or praise it, they're told that this director is uncool or that actor has sold out, and they should not watch it. More to the point, what we see is dictated by what the mega-cinema chains will show.
When I was growing up, my city (washington, DC) had many independent movie theaters, many of which showed various movies of questionable commercial appeal. theaters like the Apex, Biograph, Key, and The circle would all show repertory, Anime', off-color drama (Caligula's a perfect example -- not porn, but damned close), and foreign. Most of these places are now gone, some of which have been razed to the ground and replaced by synthetic megaliths of corporate or commercial intent...I think the CVS chain accounts for at least three former movie theaters in town.
My point in this ancient history is that I think many more people know what they want to see, but their vote at the box office is curtailed by major chain theater options and whoever is keeping stats of rentals (and the Monica Lewinsky scandal showed us someone must be) is not correlating them to what should be shown in movie houses.
Doubtless, this has more to do with profit centers than taste. That leads me to wonder...are we perpetually doomed to following the accountants when it comes to what we can see? I liked Pi, but found it difficult. I admire those who make movies on the cheap, but I don't think that should be a criterion for excellence, any more than star name power or special effects.
I'm not an advocate of pirating artistic endeavor, either, and I'd never want to watch a Kubrick film on my computer monitor...but I do argue with the notion that there are limits to which we should be going. Who gets to set those limits? It's the presence of limits, arbitrarily set, which occasioned and promulgated such tyrannies as Katz is decrying.
Let's breach these limits now before the industry sees we swallow their swill happily and they impose MORE!
The idea here is that only by swallowing whole a bunch of little problems are we going to find unity. Such thinking allows us to proclaim that our ratings system is worth preserving, despite the discrepancy between tolerance of violence and disgust at the depiction of sexuality onscreen.
I agree that some children are prepared and others aren't and having seen it, I agree that South Park is quite filthy and obscene. I do not believe that either the product or its natural market should be restricted from each other. Further, I do not believe there should be any silly ID-checks and I find the notion of putting teens in charge of policing other teens to be an invitation to the very insanity that breeds columbines. how likely is it that some kid working at the local mall theater will repeated play dirty preferential politics with a lower classmen from his school, only to get gunned down by an enraged junior who's been told he can't see this and he can't see that, but gets a ticket to a violent flick with NO problem? Worst case scenario, I think, but it's the picking and choosing of what a kid can see and putting his peers in charge of policing this that breeds the Columbine, not the open door policy that has ruled supreme ever since the early eighties. Who do you think goes to see these inappropriate movies, anyway? Doesn't anyone remember all the fact-finding that Meese and his anti-porn commission launched? to this day, Susie Bright proclaims the Meese report one of the most effective pieces of erotica she's ever held in her hot hands.
One last paragraph about South Park; I sometimes wonder whether a mediocre piece of animation is the right place to being a morality-jihad. Why not choose lolita or an equally worthy piece of art? But then I think of how I saw it...a free pass for a preview in which at least a couple kids got turned away. A bomb threat turned us all out of doors halfway through. Do I blame Trey Stone and Matt Parker for that? NO! I blame the apparatus that turned away a dumb movie's natural contituency! Further, the movie wasn't all that dumb...it had some cultural allusions and some finishing touches (like the Busby Berkeley synchronized swimming scenes or the b&w movie reels) which may go over the kids' heads, but may make someone ask their mom what those people are doing, swimming like that...
That said, I disapprove of such transmissions, but I think that
Like many others, I am gleefully awaiting the response of the religious right, but even more so, I'm dying to see what the outer frontiers will be. Practical applications are also beside the point for me...just keep pushing and let's see what we can create! This is exciting new territory!