You must be talking about another forum. Slashdot doesn't send replies to your comments to your email. It sends a notification that you got a reply, but not the text of the reply.
Try making it with olive oil, and less milk. As for watery, it sounds like you added way too much milk.
I hate the "home-style" mac-n-cheese at grocery stores. The macaroni is terribly overcooked to the point of being mush, and the cheese is tasteless and tastes like processed cheese. Nasty.
I think you're looking back at early TNG and DS9 with rose-colored glasses. Neither were good in their second seasons.
He never said that TNG (or DS9) was good in its second season. He just offhandedly said that at this rate, this new show, in *its* second season, might be as good as TNG. (Although you bring up a good point: maybe after two seasons at this improvement rate it'll only be as good as the Pulaski episodes, which of course is far short of the classic 3-5 seasons of TNG.)
It really wan't until the 3rd season that it got good.
You can thank Rick Berman for that miracle. Rick Berman took over TNG, Maurice Hurley (Roddenberry's drinking buddy and lead writer) left the show, and since Maurice had forced Gates McFadden out (because he was a dick), now with him gone and Roddenberry taking a back seat, Berman asked McFadden to return, reprising her role as the doctor, which of course likely saved the show since no one liked Pulaski.
I never really got into DS9, but was Roddenberry heavily involved there too? Honestly, it seems like the more control Roddenberry has over something, the worse it is. He's just like George Lucas: he has some good high-level ideas, but he needs other people to turn them into something really great, and when he gets too involved it turns to shit. Even the first season of TOS was pretty bad a lot of the time, especially the early episodes. After that, Roddenberry wasn't so involved and it was great. It sounds like DS9 was the same.
To be fair the JJ movies are getting slightly better (Into darkness is about as good as Star Trek V).
You made a mistake there, there's supposed to be an additional "I" there somewhere. Either you meant "Star Trek IV", or "Star Trek VI". There was no movie named "Star Trek V".
And I seriously doubt that Into Darkness was remotely as good as those two classics.
Every well-designed forum, as another poster noted here, shows explicitly when a most was modified.
In addition, if the first poster can edit their post, the responders can also edit theirs to match, or delete theirs.
Also, there's always the compromise position, which is to only allow editing within a certain time period after posting. Even if it's only a few minutes, that would be sufficient for most cases where someone posted too hastily.
Those brands are full of nasty artificial ingredients and hydrogenated oils. You've got to be kidding. Trans fats are proven to be extremely unhealthy, which is why the FDA is banning them.
Because we all know that we life in the mirror universe.
Exactly. The two mirror-universe episodes of Enterprise were excellent (with a fantastic opening theme too), but what they were really depicting was our own universe, because they showed how humans in *this* universe really are: a bunch of greedy, power-hungry murderers. The regular Star Trek universe is not the universe we live in; we are *not* a race of galactic do-gooders; that's just a universe that some of us wish we could live in.
Good luck with that. This series is being headed by the producers involved with JJTrek.
It'd be interesting to see more episodes in the mirror universe though, even if it is a little depressing because that's actually our universe. The "prime" universe you speak of, where most Star Trek occurs, is actually a parallel universe for us. Humans in our universe are nothing like that; we're really a bunch of evil, power-hungry murderers just like depicted in the mirror universe episodes.
Rick Berman saved TNG and made it what we came to know and love. When Roddenberry was in charge along with his henchmen Maurice Hurley, the show was pretty lame; that's what happened with seasons 1-2. Hurley even pushed out Gates McFadden (Dr. Crusher); when Hurley left the show after season 2, Berman asked her to come back, replacing the unliked Dr. Pulaski.
Oh please. Enterprise was actually a pretty good show. I'm only sorry I listened to people like you and didn't watch it until about a year ago on Netflix.
There's two main problems with Enterprise: 1) the opening theme song sucks donkey balls (except for the two mirror-universe episodes in season 4, that opening sequence is fantastic). 2) the whole Xindi arc in season 3.
Voyager was pretty bad, especially because of the annoying captain. It was far worse than Enterprise.
Even better is having an "Undo" button (or in the case of a forum like this, an "Edit" button).
Computers have had "undo" functionality for decades now, because even the smartest people make hasty mistakes all the time. There's zero technical reason why an "undo" function can't be added to almost any software system, except for purely idiotic ideological reasons.
That's like asking for countries to have governments that are not corrupt at all, are run efficiently and effectively, and work for the good of all their citizens.
Kraft mac-n-cheese is crap these days. But there's no point in griping about it, if you want boxed mac-n-cheese just grab a box of Annie's. It's pretty cheap and it's far better quality than Kraft ever was, and it comes in several varieties (regular mac-n-cheese, and shells-and-cheese in both dark yellow and white cheddars).
This is the nice thing about having choices and alternatives. If something sucks or turns to crap, just vote with your feet.
Everyone in the tech field remembers that, but also importantly, her time at HP is almost all Carly talks about in terms of her credentials, though she incredibly tries to paint it as a successful tenure.
And don't you mean Toyota's unintended acceleration problem? People still remember that too, that wasn't that long ago.
Um, maybe, but Amazon doesn't exactly have a stellar track record with selling products. How many people do *you* know who own an Amazon product? Aside from Kindles, I've never even *seen* an Amazon hardware product.
They're just not anything like, say, Samsung where it's pretty hard to find someone who doesn't own some kind of Samsung product. Nor are they anything like Apple where they have a devoted cult^Huserbase that buys all the Apple stuff they can. *No one* bought their dumb Fire phone or tablets. Even Microsoft has a stronger record at selling hardware with their crappy Surface tablets and shitty Windows Phones where we all laugh at their single-digit marketshare. WP's 1-5% marketshare is still far, far more than Amazon's marketshare in phones.
This seems like some seriously reality distortion going on in Bezos's head.
They get most of that stuff if they write and control the app. Maybe not the WiFi password and some other stuff, but they'd still get to advertise. Depending on the permissions available to the app, they might get some of that stuff too actually.
That's not obsession either. That's retailers; they do this with every holiday now, putting stuff for the next-next holiday on the shelves before the next holiday has even occurred. Marketers think it makes more profit somehow.
Don't blame that one on Americans.
Considering how much effort people actually go into to make Halloween costumes and decorations, versus Thanksgiving and Christmas, I'd say Halloween is actually a much more popular holiday, at least with younger people and also with kids. Christmas seems like it's lost a lot of its luster actually; people just buy store-credit cards for each other now, and is little more than an excuse for a slightly longer holiday (2 days instead of one usually, and 4 days if it backs up to a weekend which it usually does).
Weird, that really doesn't make sense. As long as you're watching Amazon Prime video, why would they care that you're using an LG smartTV to do it? They want you to fumble around with an additional piece of equipment that needs its own separate remote just so you can watch their video?
It's weird; it seems that when you go really extreme left, it looks almost exactly the same as when you go extreme right. Both of them are all for authoritarianism, just slightly different brands of it (on the left, it's basically Stalinism with the State as the decider of what's allowed, and on the right it's the State combined with religion deciding what's allowed, with the corporations benefiting, looking a lot like Iran crossed with Nazi Germany).
Maybe, but that would really screw with all the 3rd-party vendors' background updating schemes. And for various reasons, it seems like Microsoft has long been loathe to do anything to piss off the ISVs, no matter how bad this was for the user experience and overall security and stability of the OS.
She said that women want things to work and don't want to do the work to make things work. If something doesn't work the way it's supposed to women want to get other people to get them what they want, they don't want to have to carry out the "boring" task of figuring it out for themselves.
I've found this behavior in lots of people, not just women. Very few people I've met seem to have the curiosity or drive to figure things out for themselves; they'd rather go find someone who they know knows about it, and bother them to do it for them. I think it might have to do with introversion vs. extroversion. The extroverts think that they can get work done by standing around and talking about stuff endlessly, whereas the introverts actually put their heads down and do real work that requires deep thinking. So if there's a problem that requires serious thought or research, the introvert will start reading, googling, etc. to figure it out for themselves, and (hopefully) asking for help when they know they're out of their depth or need some pointers. The extrovert, by contrast, won't bother doing any of their own research beforehand, and will immediately go find the introvert and ask him, even if he could have found the answer with a quick google search.
I can see her point, I can't say I fully agree, at least on the lazy part. I have seen many women get interested, even obsessed with carrying out a task/solving a problem, doing tons of research and ground pounding and other work to get the task done,
Slashdot Mirror
You must be talking about another forum. Slashdot doesn't send replies to your comments to your email. It sends a notification that you got a reply, but not the text of the reply.
Try making it with olive oil, and less milk. As for watery, it sounds like you added way too much milk.
I hate the "home-style" mac-n-cheese at grocery stores. The macaroni is terribly overcooked to the point of being mush, and the cheese is tasteless and tastes like processed cheese. Nasty.
You're a liar, and likely a shill.
http://thehackernews.com/2014/...
http://www.geek.com/microsoft/...
Windows 10 DOES have a keylogger.
I think you're looking back at early TNG and DS9 with rose-colored glasses. Neither were good in their second seasons.
He never said that TNG (or DS9) was good in its second season. He just offhandedly said that at this rate, this new show, in *its* second season, might be as good as TNG. (Although you bring up a good point: maybe after two seasons at this improvement rate it'll only be as good as the Pulaski episodes, which of course is far short of the classic 3-5 seasons of TNG.)
It really wan't until the 3rd season that it got good.
You can thank Rick Berman for that miracle. Rick Berman took over TNG, Maurice Hurley (Roddenberry's drinking buddy and lead writer) left the show, and since Maurice had forced Gates McFadden out (because he was a dick), now with him gone and Roddenberry taking a back seat, Berman asked McFadden to return, reprising her role as the doctor, which of course likely saved the show since no one liked Pulaski.
I never really got into DS9, but was Roddenberry heavily involved there too? Honestly, it seems like the more control Roddenberry has over something, the worse it is. He's just like George Lucas: he has some good high-level ideas, but he needs other people to turn them into something really great, and when he gets too involved it turns to shit. Even the first season of TOS was pretty bad a lot of the time, especially the early episodes. After that, Roddenberry wasn't so involved and it was great. It sounds like DS9 was the same.
To be fair the JJ movies are getting slightly better (Into darkness is about as good as Star Trek V).
You made a mistake there, there's supposed to be an additional "I" there somewhere. Either you meant "Star Trek IV", or "Star Trek VI". There was no movie named "Star Trek V".
And I seriously doubt that Into Darkness was remotely as good as those two classics.
Every well-designed forum, as another poster noted here, shows explicitly when a most was modified.
In addition, if the first poster can edit their post, the responders can also edit theirs to match, or delete theirs.
Also, there's always the compromise position, which is to only allow editing within a certain time period after posting. Even if it's only a few minutes, that would be sufficient for most cases where someone posted too hastily.
Those brands are full of nasty artificial ingredients and hydrogenated oils. You've got to be kidding. Trans fats are proven to be extremely unhealthy, which is why the FDA is banning them.
Because we all know that we life in the mirror universe.
Exactly. The two mirror-universe episodes of Enterprise were excellent (with a fantastic opening theme too), but what they were really depicting was our own universe, because they showed how humans in *this* universe really are: a bunch of greedy, power-hungry murderers. The regular Star Trek universe is not the universe we live in; we are *not* a race of galactic do-gooders; that's just a universe that some of us wish we could live in.
Good luck with that. This series is being headed by the producers involved with JJTrek.
It'd be interesting to see more episodes in the mirror universe though, even if it is a little depressing because that's actually our universe. The "prime" universe you speak of, where most Star Trek occurs, is actually a parallel universe for us. Humans in our universe are nothing like that; we're really a bunch of evil, power-hungry murderers just like depicted in the mirror universe episodes.
Rick Berman saved TNG and made it what we came to know and love. When Roddenberry was in charge along with his henchmen Maurice Hurley, the show was pretty lame; that's what happened with seasons 1-2. Hurley even pushed out Gates McFadden (Dr. Crusher); when Hurley left the show after season 2, Berman asked her to come back, replacing the unliked Dr. Pulaski.
That's not possible. This thing is being produced by the dolts who made JJ's two crappy movies, so you're not going to get good stories.
Who are they going to sue? The citizens of the US collectively?
Oh please. Enterprise was actually a pretty good show. I'm only sorry I listened to people like you and didn't watch it until about a year ago on Netflix.
There's two main problems with Enterprise: 1) the opening theme song sucks donkey balls (except for the two mirror-universe episodes in season 4, that opening sequence is fantastic). 2) the whole Xindi arc in season 3.
Voyager was pretty bad, especially because of the annoying captain. It was far worse than Enterprise.
Even better is having an "Undo" button (or in the case of a forum like this, an "Edit" button).
Computers have had "undo" functionality for decades now, because even the smartest people make hasty mistakes all the time. There's zero technical reason why an "undo" function can't be added to almost any software system, except for purely idiotic ideological reasons.
Excellent boss...
Good luck finding one of those anywhere.
That's like asking for countries to have governments that are not corrupt at all, are run efficiently and effectively, and work for the good of all their citizens.
Sometimes you just have to take what you can get.
Kraft mac-n-cheese is crap these days. But there's no point in griping about it, if you want boxed mac-n-cheese just grab a box of Annie's. It's pretty cheap and it's far better quality than Kraft ever was, and it comes in several varieties (regular mac-n-cheese, and shells-and-cheese in both dark yellow and white cheddars).
This is the nice thing about having choices and alternatives. If something sucks or turns to crap, just vote with your feet.
Everyone in the tech field remembers that, but also importantly, her time at HP is almost all Carly talks about in terms of her credentials, though she incredibly tries to paint it as a successful tenure.
And don't you mean Toyota's unintended acceleration problem? People still remember that too, that wasn't that long ago.
Um, maybe, but Amazon doesn't exactly have a stellar track record with selling products. How many people do *you* know who own an Amazon product? Aside from Kindles, I've never even *seen* an Amazon hardware product.
They're just not anything like, say, Samsung where it's pretty hard to find someone who doesn't own some kind of Samsung product. Nor are they anything like Apple where they have a devoted cult^Huserbase that buys all the Apple stuff they can. *No one* bought their dumb Fire phone or tablets. Even Microsoft has a stronger record at selling hardware with their crappy Surface tablets and shitty Windows Phones where we all laugh at their single-digit marketshare. WP's 1-5% marketshare is still far, far more than Amazon's marketshare in phones.
This seems like some seriously reality distortion going on in Bezos's head.
They get most of that stuff if they write and control the app. Maybe not the WiFi password and some other stuff, but they'd still get to advertise. Depending on the permissions available to the app, they might get some of that stuff too actually.
I can't believe anyone actually thinks she'd make a good president. She ran HP straight into the ground; what do they think she'd do to the country?
That's not obsession either. That's retailers; they do this with every holiday now, putting stuff for the next-next holiday on the shelves before the next holiday has even occurred. Marketers think it makes more profit somehow.
Don't blame that one on Americans.
Considering how much effort people actually go into to make Halloween costumes and decorations, versus Thanksgiving and Christmas, I'd say Halloween is actually a much more popular holiday, at least with younger people and also with kids. Christmas seems like it's lost a lot of its luster actually; people just buy store-credit cards for each other now, and is little more than an excuse for a slightly longer holiday (2 days instead of one usually, and 4 days if it backs up to a weekend which it usually does).
Weird, that really doesn't make sense. As long as you're watching Amazon Prime video, why would they care that you're using an LG smartTV to do it? They want you to fumble around with an additional piece of equipment that needs its own separate remote just so you can watch their video?
It's weird; it seems that when you go really extreme left, it looks almost exactly the same as when you go extreme right. Both of them are all for authoritarianism, just slightly different brands of it (on the left, it's basically Stalinism with the State as the decider of what's allowed, and on the right it's the State combined with religion deciding what's allowed, with the corporations benefiting, looking a lot like Iran crossed with Nazi Germany).
Maybe, but that would really screw with all the 3rd-party vendors' background updating schemes. And for various reasons, it seems like Microsoft has long been loathe to do anything to piss off the ISVs, no matter how bad this was for the user experience and overall security and stability of the OS.
She said that women want things to work and don't want to do the work to make things work. If something doesn't work the way it's supposed to women want to get other people to get them what they want, they don't want to have to carry out the "boring" task of figuring it out for themselves.
I've found this behavior in lots of people, not just women. Very few people I've met seem to have the curiosity or drive to figure things out for themselves; they'd rather go find someone who they know knows about it, and bother them to do it for them. I think it might have to do with introversion vs. extroversion. The extroverts think that they can get work done by standing around and talking about stuff endlessly, whereas the introverts actually put their heads down and do real work that requires deep thinking. So if there's a problem that requires serious thought or research, the introvert will start reading, googling, etc. to figure it out for themselves, and (hopefully) asking for help when they know they're out of their depth or need some pointers. The extrovert, by contrast, won't bother doing any of their own research beforehand, and will immediately go find the introvert and ask him, even if he could have found the answer with a quick google search.
I can see her point, I can't say I fully agree, at least on the lazy part. I have seen many women get interested, even obsessed with carrying out a task/solving a problem, doing tons of research and ground pounding and other work to get the task done,
Yeah, those were the female introverts.