think about admiral ackbar, assault on the death star, radar being jammed, must know that they're coming....
if you still don't get it, you need to just turn around, head right back out the way you came in and leave your geek membership card with the doorman on your way out.
Internet2 is not a replacement for or sequel to the Internet. It's a private network of universities, research facilites, and the like. In that regard, it's something of a throwback to what the Internet was in the very beginning. Check out the wikipeida page on the subject.
in a word, no. at least not yet. nielsen ratings are what determine ad sales' costs, and to the best of my knowledge, nielsen doesn't have a way of monitoring whether or not we actually watch the commercial (and actually, i don't know how nielsen deals with/accounts for time-shifting via PVR). So, right now, the advertisers just have to take the stations/networks word for it that when 15 million people are watching a particular show on, let's say, Comedy Central, that those 15x10^6 are actually watching everything, not skipping the commercials with the ff button, not getting up for a snack or a drink when the commerials are on, and not hitting the mute button when they come on (as i'm prone to do b/c the damn things are fscking loud, and I don't have a PVR).
If and when nielsen can monitor the above activities, then maybe we'll see something significant happen. But, i doubt it will cause stations/netowrks to go bankrupt. what we'll have are more conspicuous product placements in the shows we watch. this will be coupled with either: a)a reduction in the number of commercials, with ad rates remaining largely unchanged, or b) more commercials with lower ad rates.
except that a great deal of modern art is precisely concerned with human interaction and transformation of the art object. I feel very ill at ease speaking about art much as my S.O. is getting her master's in art history and always seems to show me how woefully inadequate my artistic knowledge is, nevertheless, I will try to supply an example. at a museum that I went to once (I don't recall which one, precisely-I'm fairly sure it was the Dallas Museum of Art) there was a piece consisting of a metal structure and pieces of green candy in plastic wrappers. Many pieces. And I took one. As did many other people, b/c that was part of the piece and the artist's intent--people interacting with the piece by taking a piece of candy. Not to mention that much of contemporary drama and performance art has audience participation as a key component of the piece.
Even the so-called "static" arts are dependent on the interaction of the viewer. Much of what has been done in the arts in the last century has been to get people actively involved at looking at the work, examining it, not just passively staring at it.
In your post, you conflate software bugs with security vulnerabilities. These two things are not equivalent; at best, security vulnerabilities are a subset of software bugs.
Well, if this were a truly scientific experiment, then yes, the lack of a control would invalidate the results. However, the review is ultimately going after something a little more nebulous, the movie watching experience, even if they don't explicitly say such.
Moreover, doesn't the hardware's quality speak volumes about a formats potential in the market place? If the players don't work properly, who gives a flying f#@k about how great the format is? Especially since Sony will likely keep the price of blu-ray players artificially inflated b/c they're, you know, Sony.
The only part of your post that is totally true is the first part. Ultimately, Be died b/c they could get no major app developers to commit (and then Be went and shot themselves in the foot with their "focus shift" just as companies began to be interested, but that's another story).
The requirement to buy a BeBox went the way of the dodo with the first real commercial release (R3), which could run on any ppc architecture comp for which you had drivers. The BeBox-only versions were all developer releases.
And there was a good reason to buy the BeOS if one dealt with real-time multimedia-esp. audio. This was my good reason. It did it better than Macs did (at the time, OSX is much nicer), and did it much, much better than a wintel box. I accomplished much more using BeOS as a audio recording and production platform than I did with windows (exact same hardware set up for both OSs). Maybe Be didn't solve a problem that you had with PCs at the time, but it did solve one that I had.
I'm moving on to OSX now, but for a long time I've been happy dual-booting BeOS and GNU/Linux, and I'll probably always have a computer that runs BeOS or one of its derivatives (/me is wondering if he could get BeOS to run on an Intel Mac).
Take Two and Rockstar should have known the possible consequences of what they were doing. It was just plain stupid to include the "hot coffee" bit in the game and not think that, if it were known that it was in there, it wouldn't affect the game's ESRB rating or the potentiality of parents letting their children play.
Now, I know a lot of/.ers think "if parents don't want their kids exposed to this stuff, they need to pay attention to their kids and what they are doing and the games they are playing." That is true, and I agree. However, what Rockstar did was sell a game that contained objectionable content A, B C, D, and E, but only told people it contained A, B, and C. Now some parents (and think of them whatever you will) might be fine with their child playing a game filled with A, B, and C, but draw the line at D or E. They buy this game that warns that it contains A, B, and C, and they think, "that's fine. my little angel can handle that kind of imagery and it won't hurt him." they give him the game and they think that he's fine playing it by himself in his room, because they already know (or at least, they think they do) what content is in the game. Then, lo and behold, there's a whole bunch of D and E hidden in the game that was never advertised, and it was pretty simple for their little angel to find that hidden content.
Now, hopefully, my slightly abstracted example will make it clear to everyone that it isn't just that it was that the game had sex in it, but that there was no warning of any sort. Imagine, for a minute, that you are ok with your kids playing a Leisure Suit Larry game. "It's just a bunch of sex and slapstick," you think to yourself, "no harm in that." Then your kid unlocks the hidden level where Larry has to brutally, visciously, and mercilessly rape and murder all of the women on a particular block. You do object to that and to your child playing that kind of game, and you would have never let him play that kind of game if you had been warned.
That is the problem here. Had Rockstar simply played by the rules and told the ESRB what was in the game (and risk getting the AO rating at the outset), there wouldn't be any issue at all now. They were deceiving consumers and trying to game the rating system so that they could sell a few more units to the under 18 crowd.
Homer at a party would be great. Problem is, that time you saw him in real life doing the voice of Homer is the ONLY time you'll see it (and hear it). All of The Simpson's voice actors are under contractual agreement to never use any character's voices outside of the show. They were given special permission to do the voices when the cast appeared on Inside the Actor's Studio.
Actually, though, there's a scene (the big musical production number toward the end) in Cradle Will Rock when (off-camera) Hank Azaria is speaking in a voice that sounds an awful lot like Carl...
Billy was always the voice of Stimpy. He began voicing Ren when John Kricfalusi was fired. Not that you didn't know that, but your post didn't make that clear.
Who cares? I, as a consumer, care. If I take my computer to Geek Squad (I wouldn't, but speaking hypothetically) I don't want to be paying $150 just so they can take it to someone else whom they pay $75 to fix the problem. I'd rather take my computer straight to the guy who only charges $75.
Moreover, if I were the guy who submitted the ask/., I'd care because I could, theoretically, market directly to Geek Squad's customers and raise my prices, but only to a level where my company would be undercutting Geek Squad.
That's just the first two reasons I can think of. I'm sure I could think of more.
They aren't "held back" by the same morality and environmental issues we are. When they want to build the largest dam in the world (which is an engineering marvel that will put out as much electricity as 15 nuclear power plants combined), they just do it, and don't worry about the environmental, social, or historical implications.
It's exactly that type of attitude that will keep them from succeeding. They cannot continue to abuse their native population without reprecussion. There WILL be an uprising, which will cause more than enough instability to take them down a few rungs of the super power ladder. It might not happen tomorrow, or even in the next decade, but it will happen.
The environmental problems, well, that partly goes along with abusing the population. The people will get tired of having to blow all of the soot out of their nose first thing in the morning; people will continue to get pissed when they're forced to move because a regions about to be flooded by a huge hydro-elctric dam. And sooner or later, some big project is going to result in some sort of ecological disaster which the gov't there won't be able to cover-up and ignore.
Of course, regardless of what happens in China and India, the US is going down the tubes.
We've never had a very clear distinction between traditional high schools and trade (what we call Vocational/Technical or vo-tech in the US) schools in the US. A district or region might have a vo-tech school, but people were never forced into it or assigned to it, like in some other countries (don't know if that's the case in Holland). If we did have a system like that, or even a system where vo-tech was more emphasized, the my father-in-law would have ended up in one. He was educated in Catholic schools, and was, by all accounts, a very poor student (only ever did well in Theology). Got into college (mainly because it was a small Catholic college), and ended up going to Europe to get his PhD in philosophy, and in the process became fluent in German, French, and Italian. His book apart from making my head feel like it's going to explode is held to be a very important piece of Heidegger scholarship. Of course, none of that would have happened if he'd been forced into a trade school.
Nearby, like many words, is not an absolute term. It is relative to the scale of the things involved. No, 41 lightyears is not nearby if you're talking about the distance from your house to the nearest gas station, but when you are talking about interstellar distances, 41 lightyears is much more near our sun (i.e., nearby) than say a star on the opposite side of the Milky Way.
Think of it like this. We'll use another word whose meaning is varaible in a similar way: close. A scafolding platform collapses and a pile of bricks comes within one foot of crashing down on you. You might say, "Wow! that was close." You throw a pitch in a ball game and you throw wide one foot left of the strike zone. No one would call that close. You'd need to be in a range of, say, a centimeter from the plate for a pitch to be called close.
Slashdot Mirror
think about admiral ackbar, assault on the death star, radar being jammed, must know that they're coming....
if you still don't get it, you need to just turn around, head right back out the way you came in and leave your geek membership card with the doorman on your way out.
Internet2 is not a replacement for or sequel to the Internet. It's a private network of universities, research facilites, and the like. In that regard, it's something of a throwback to what the Internet was in the very beginning. Check out the wikipeida page on the subject.
"It says, 'Let's BEE friends'...and there's a picture of a bee!"
//}
I choo-choo-choose to post this logged in, thus risking my karma.
Now here's a picture of a train.
(
'( '
"'
( ''"
_||__ ____ ____ ____
(o)___)}___}}___}}___}
'U'0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
in a word, no. at least not yet. nielsen ratings are what determine ad sales' costs, and to the best of my knowledge, nielsen doesn't have a way of monitoring whether or not we actually watch the commercial (and actually, i don't know how nielsen deals with/accounts for time-shifting via PVR). So, right now, the advertisers just have to take the stations/networks word for it that when 15 million people are watching a particular show on, let's say, Comedy Central, that those 15x10^6 are actually watching everything, not skipping the commercials with the ff button, not getting up for a snack or a drink when the commerials are on, and not hitting the mute button when they come on (as i'm prone to do b/c the damn things are fscking loud, and I don't have a PVR).
If and when nielsen can monitor the above activities, then maybe we'll see something significant happen. But, i doubt it will cause stations/netowrks to go bankrupt. what we'll have are more conspicuous product placements in the shows we watch. this will be coupled with either: a)a reduction in the number of commercials, with ad rates remaining largely unchanged, or b) more commercials with lower ad rates.
uhhh...what you described is basting, not basing.
Wii be friends? Why can't Wii be friends? Why can't Wii be friends? Why can't Wii be friends?
(With apologies to War)
the only application that ever crashed my BeOS install was Snes9x.
except that a great deal of modern art is precisely concerned with human interaction and transformation of the art object. I feel very ill at ease speaking about art much as my S.O. is getting her master's in art history and always seems to show me how woefully inadequate my artistic knowledge is, nevertheless, I will try to supply an example. at a museum that I went to once (I don't recall which one, precisely-I'm fairly sure it was the Dallas Museum of Art) there was a piece consisting of a metal structure and pieces of green candy in plastic wrappers. Many pieces. And I took one. As did many other people, b/c that was part of the piece and the artist's intent--people interacting with the piece by taking a piece of candy. Not to mention that much of contemporary drama and performance art has audience participation as a key component of the piece.
Even the so-called "static" arts are dependent on the interaction of the viewer. Much of what has been done in the arts in the last century has been to get people actively involved at looking at the work, examining it, not just passively staring at it.
In your post, you conflate software bugs with security vulnerabilities. These two things are not equivalent; at best, security vulnerabilities are a subset of software bugs.
Well, if this were a truly scientific experiment, then yes, the lack of a control would invalidate the results. However, the review is ultimately going after something a little more nebulous, the movie watching experience, even if they don't explicitly say such.
Moreover, doesn't the hardware's quality speak volumes about a formats potential in the market place? If the players don't work properly, who gives a flying f#@k about how great the format is? Especially since Sony will likely keep the price of blu-ray players artificially inflated b/c they're, you know, Sony.
Your university is only believed to be or assumed to be a university? I'd say get out now.
The only part of your post that is totally true is the first part. Ultimately, Be died b/c they could get no major app developers to commit (and then Be went and shot themselves in the foot with their "focus shift" just as companies began to be interested, but that's another story).
The requirement to buy a BeBox went the way of the dodo with the first real commercial release (R3), which could run on any ppc architecture comp for which you had drivers. The BeBox-only versions were all developer releases.
And there was a good reason to buy the BeOS if one dealt with real-time multimedia-esp. audio. This was my good reason. It did it better than Macs did (at the time, OSX is much nicer), and did it much, much better than a wintel box. I accomplished much more using BeOS as a audio recording and production platform than I did with windows (exact same hardware set up for both OSs). Maybe Be didn't solve a problem that you had with PCs at the time, but it did solve one that I had.
I'm moving on to OSX now, but for a long time I've been happy dual-booting BeOS and GNU/Linux, and I'll probably always have a computer that runs BeOS or one of its derivatives (/me is wondering if he could get BeOS to run on an Intel Mac).
Interesting, perhaps, but I am extremely skeptical and distrustful of any theory that reduces great art to simply being a by-product of disease.
Take Two and Rockstar should have known the possible consequences of what they were doing. It was just plain stupid to include the "hot coffee" bit in the game and not think that, if it were known that it was in there, it wouldn't affect the game's ESRB rating or the potentiality of parents letting their children play.
/.ers think "if parents don't want their kids exposed to this stuff, they need to pay attention to their kids and what they are doing and the games they are playing." That is true, and I agree. However, what Rockstar did was sell a game that contained objectionable content A, B C, D, and E, but only told people it contained A, B, and C. Now some parents (and think of them whatever you will) might be fine with their child playing a game filled with A, B, and C, but draw the line at D or E. They buy this game that warns that it contains A, B, and C, and they think, "that's fine. my little angel can handle that kind of imagery and it won't hurt him." they give him the game and they think that he's fine playing it by himself in his room, because they already know (or at least, they think they do) what content is in the game. Then, lo and behold, there's a whole bunch of D and E hidden in the game that was never advertised, and it was pretty simple for their little angel to find that hidden content.
Now, I know a lot of
Now, hopefully, my slightly abstracted example will make it clear to everyone that it isn't just that it was that the game had sex in it, but that there was no warning of any sort. Imagine, for a minute, that you are ok with your kids playing a Leisure Suit Larry game. "It's just a bunch of sex and slapstick," you think to yourself, "no harm in that." Then your kid unlocks the hidden level where Larry has to brutally, visciously, and mercilessly rape and murder all of the women on a particular block. You do object to that and to your child playing that kind of game, and you would have never let him play that kind of game if you had been warned.
That is the problem here. Had Rockstar simply played by the rules and told the ESRB what was in the game (and risk getting the AO rating at the outset), there wouldn't be any issue at all now. They were deceiving consumers and trying to game the rating system so that they could sell a few more units to the under 18 crowd.
Homer at a party would be great. Problem is, that time you saw him in real life doing the voice of Homer is the ONLY time you'll see it (and hear it). All of The Simpson's voice actors are under contractual agreement to never use any character's voices outside of the show. They were given special permission to do the voices when the cast appeared on Inside the Actor's Studio.
Actually, though, there's a scene (the big musical production number toward the end) in Cradle Will Rock when (off-camera) Hank Azaria is speaking in a voice that sounds an awful lot like Carl...
Billy was always the voice of Stimpy. He began voicing Ren when John Kricfalusi was fired. Not that you didn't know that, but your post didn't make that clear.
Leave something for the rest of us to aks. Sheesh!
[Dear Grammar/Spelling Nazis: the above misspelling is intentional and is keeping in the spirit of the article.]
Who cares? I, as a consumer, care. If I take my computer to Geek Squad (I wouldn't, but speaking hypothetically) I don't want to be paying $150 just so they can take it to someone else whom they pay $75 to fix the problem. I'd rather take my computer straight to the guy who only charges $75.
/., I'd care because I could, theoretically, market directly to Geek Squad's customers and raise my prices, but only to a level where my company would be undercutting Geek Squad.
Moreover, if I were the guy who submitted the ask
That's just the first two reasons I can think of. I'm sure I could think of more.
I thought the giant methane cloud was nearby, having been produced by Uranus.
There is no place for judeo-christian values in China and the sooner we realize that the better.
There is no absolute connection between human freedom&dignity and Judeo-Christian values, and the sooner we realize that, the better.
They aren't "held back" by the same morality and environmental issues we are. When they want to build the largest dam in the world (which is an engineering marvel that will put out as much electricity as 15 nuclear power plants combined), they just do it, and don't worry about the environmental, social, or historical implications.
It's exactly that type of attitude that will keep them from succeeding. They cannot continue to abuse their native population without reprecussion. There WILL be an uprising, which will cause more than enough instability to take them down a few rungs of the super power ladder. It might not happen tomorrow, or even in the next decade, but it will happen.
The environmental problems, well, that partly goes along with abusing the population. The people will get tired of having to blow all of the soot out of their nose first thing in the morning; people will continue to get pissed when they're forced to move because a regions about to be flooded by a huge hydro-elctric dam. And sooner or later, some big project is going to result in some sort of ecological disaster which the gov't there won't be able to cover-up and ignore.
Of course, regardless of what happens in China and India, the US is going down the tubes.
We've never had a very clear distinction between traditional high schools and trade (what we call Vocational/Technical or vo-tech in the US) schools in the US. A district or region might have a vo-tech school, but people were never forced into it or assigned to it, like in some other countries (don't know if that's the case in Holland). If we did have a system like that, or even a system where vo-tech was more emphasized, the my father-in-law would have ended up in one. He was educated in Catholic schools, and was, by all accounts, a very poor student (only ever did well in Theology). Got into college (mainly because it was a small Catholic college), and ended up going to Europe to get his PhD in philosophy, and in the process became fluent in German, French, and Italian. His book apart from making my head feel like it's going to explode is held to be a very important piece of Heidegger scholarship. Of course, none of that would have happened if he'd been forced into a trade school.
After all, science plays no prominent role in hip-hop "culture,"
I think you're forgetting a certain astrophysicist MC. Fo shizzle.
Most likely the former [mag. field], because then you have negative and positive poles so you can reference what is up and what is down.
The sun's magnetic field reverses itself about every 11 years. It would not be good having a refernce based on something that goes changing itself every 11 years or so.
The reference for "north" and "south" w/regard to the solar system is the ecliptic.
Nearby, like many words, is not an absolute term. It is relative to the scale of the things involved. No, 41 lightyears is not nearby if you're talking about the distance from your house to the nearest gas station, but when you are talking about interstellar distances, 41 lightyears is much more near our sun (i.e., nearby) than say a star on the opposite side of the Milky Way.
Think of it like this. We'll use another word whose meaning is varaible in a similar way: close. A scafolding platform collapses and a pile of bricks comes within one foot of crashing down on you. You might say, "Wow! that was close." You throw a pitch in a ball game and you throw wide one foot left of the strike zone. No one would call that close. You'd need to be in a range of, say, a centimeter from the plate for a pitch to be called close.