There was also a movie called something like "The History of American Rock & Roll." I'm not sure of the title. Lots of rotoscoping in there. The old side scrolling video game Flashback used rotoscoping for the main character. Kick ass game.:)
Far too much voice over. If you have to have the actors speaking their thoughts to the audience, then clearly actors, director and writers have not done a good enough job.
I don't think that's always true. Have you seen High Fidelity? That was an effective movie, and we got information we couldn't have from just observing actions and inter-character dialogue.
Arcades can't really compete with your standard joystick / button / TV screen games any more. They need to offer more.
And they are starting to... I'm seeing a lot of games with massive, beautifully detailed screens and wacky input methods. Therein lies the future of arcade machines.
As for the "hanging out at the arcade" aspect, that makes a difference too. There's always a bunch of kids hanging around the DDR and other dancing machines checking out moves and socializing.:)
Personally, I don't think it's right for someone to put a flyer under my windshield wiper. If I saw someone doing it, I'd be all like, "Get the Hell away from my friggin car! What? Oh, a coupon? Nevermind. Score!"
It's very depressing... I bought a pair of B&W bookshelf speakers and a Cambridge Audio power amp to power them. The speakers were $550, the amp $500. That was all I was willing to spend.
The shrewd salesman let me listen to the speakers with a $1500 amplifier, and it sounded nicer. "Please, no more!" I cried.
I have no problem accepting any skeptic's proof that "you can't hear this / that," but without being told the cost difference between two >$30k sets of speakers, I was able to pick out the more horridly expensive set. I had a chance to hear a pair of B&W Nautilus speakers, too (the big snail shell ones). Holy.
I was also impressed with the difference between the same recording of a Cello on CD vs. SACD. I know very well the human ear can't distinguish a 50kHz sine wave, but having the reproduced frequency range extending to around 50kHz (I may be wrong on the figure) did make a noticeable difference.
I've been buying a lot more CDs since Napster came about. Strangely, I usually buy CDs that are totally different from what I download. Other times if I'm really impressed with tunes I get, I buy the CD.
It seems that in my case, having so much music available has just increased my hunger for music, and I buy CDs willy-nilly.
Despite being so gung-ho about buying CDs now, I never spend over $17 CAD. Anything more and I feel like I'm being ripped off severely.
A lot of the time, when something comes out, it's available at Future Shop for around $13.95. I listen to some tracks, and if half of them are good, I go ahead and pick it up. I saw Moving Shadow 99.2 (D&B 2 CD compilation) for $10 and didn't even think about it: I bought it right away.
I can't argue _for_ Napster, though, because I know for sure that a lot of people seek out free music and never buy CDs or pay artists in any other way.
The first thing I ever saw that used that effect was a beer commercial where you see a beer spilling off of a pool table. That was about a year before the Gap ad. I was actually surprised it took so long for everybody and their dog to start using the effect: I expected, after seeing that ad, to see it everywhere within a month.
Re:wtf should he need to be a "big fan" of that Po
on
The Art Of The Matrix
·
· Score: 1
The Matrix was a movie, not a religious text. I thought it was OK, but not the deeply moving experience some people make it out to be, and surely there are a lot of people who feel the same way.
I, for one...
Keanu Reeves is a bad actor.
He has his place. In many movies, actors widely regarded as being weak at their trade (more truthfully, actors with a narrow range) have defined certain characters. Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker springs to mind. I liked the Neo character, and I don't mind that he is basically just "The Keanu Character." I think it was just good casting. I should mention that I don't think KR is a bad actor: just that he doesn't have a great range.
Bladerunner -- that's a good movie. Stack that against the Matrix any time.
I love Bladerunner! I'm going to have to grab the DVD, in fact. However, it's not at all the same kind of film. If I were to stack any movie up to the Matrix, it would be Dark City.
and if the whole "brain in a jar" idea was somewhat more novel.
I don't know about your comparison there... It seems oversimplified. The Matrix deals with a concept that has been covered before, but does it well. And it had Kung-Fu.:)
When all is said and done, the Matrix is one of my favourite movies. The cinematography, effects, fighting, concept, atmosphere, and execution do it for me. Unfortunately, there were a couple of spots where the dialogue made me groan (and what's with "Tank" and the really awkward scene where he wakes up Neo?) Also, the human battery idea is a tad lame. Doesn't it waste tremendous amounts of energy growing a human? *&^) Dark City, however, had no such "minuses." Still: no Kung-Fu...
I'm on Shaw Cable's cable modem service, and the most I can hope for when downloading is around a quarter of your worst speeds. Uploading, I get maybe 20k/s. (And yes: that's disgustingly slow)
Computing Science deals pretty much exclusively with software. You go into a lot of detail concerning algorithms, computing theory, and other things that are very academically interesting. Usually, Computer Engineering deals with hardware and software. It's like a mix of Electrical Engineering and Computing Science.
The hardware you cover is enough for you to be able to interface real-world devices with software. You don't go into much power electronics (thankfully...)
The software aspect teaches you enough to go out and write basically anything, but leaves out the more theoretical stuff.
I've got a Computer Engineering degree, and now I write embedded software. Still, I know a lot of CompE's who go into software jobs exclusively. Some companies look for Computer Engineers specifically if they need someone who can handle hardware / software interfacing well, or even just for straight software if they appreciate the Engineering approach to design. Others (usually founded by CS graduates) will not even consider Computer Engineers over Computing Scientists.
I don't know how many other places are doing this, but the University of Alberta (where I graduated from) is now offering a stream of Computer Engineering called Software Engineering, which is basically Computing Science with an Engineering approach. Plus you then have an Engineering degree.
Blah blah blah. Hope that was interesting for someone.
Let's not be silly here... Ok, we can be silly, but let's be realistic. The old design was basically universally liked. Everybody I ever talked to about the dark grey / purple VAIO thought it looked cool. I was disappointed when I saw the post that said "looks like barf" but when I saw it, I thought it was awesome! Clearly, the fault of this new design is that it's a 'hit or miss' deal. Some people like it (I luv it.:) and some people just hate it.
No more of this "clearly you have no taste for thinking the new design is good/bad!" crap...
Slashdot Mirror
(At least it should be.)
There was also a movie called something like "The History of American Rock & Roll." I'm not sure of the title. Lots of rotoscoping in there. The old side scrolling video game Flashback used rotoscoping for the main character. Kick ass game. :)
Hmm. Are you sure you know what a follicle is?
I don't think that's always true. Have you seen High Fidelity? That was an effective movie, and we got information we couldn't have from just observing actions and inter-character dialogue.
I thought BeOS didn't support hardware 3D acceleration at all. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
And they are starting to... I'm seeing a lot of games with massive, beautifully detailed screens and wacky input methods. Therein lies the future of arcade machines.
As for the "hanging out at the arcade" aspect, that makes a difference too. There's always a bunch of kids hanging around the DDR and other dancing machines checking out moves and socializing. :)
That seems to ring a bell...
Holy it's time to go home.
They just always are.
(Haven't seen the TR movie yet.)
I believe the 'o' stands for 'octet.'
The shrewd salesman let me listen to the speakers with a $1500 amplifier, and it sounded nicer. "Please, no more!" I cried.
I have no problem accepting any skeptic's proof that "you can't hear this / that," but without being told the cost difference between two >$30k sets of speakers, I was able to pick out the more horridly expensive set. I had a chance to hear a pair of B&W Nautilus speakers, too (the big snail shell ones). Holy.
I was also impressed with the difference between the same recording of a Cello on CD vs. SACD. I know very well the human ear can't distinguish a 50kHz sine wave, but having the reproduced frequency range extending to around 50kHz (I may be wrong on the figure) did make a noticeable difference.
What was I noticing? I dunno.
I've been buying a lot more CDs since Napster came about. Strangely, I usually buy CDs that are totally different from what I download. Other times if I'm really impressed with tunes I get, I buy the CD. It seems that in my case, having so much music available has just increased my hunger for music, and I buy CDs willy-nilly. Despite being so gung-ho about buying CDs now, I never spend over $17 CAD. Anything more and I feel like I'm being ripped off severely. A lot of the time, when something comes out, it's available at Future Shop for around $13.95. I listen to some tracks, and if half of them are good, I go ahead and pick it up. I saw Moving Shadow 99.2 (D&B 2 CD compilation) for $10 and didn't even think about it: I bought it right away. I can't argue _for_ Napster, though, because I know for sure that a lot of people seek out free music and never buy CDs or pay artists in any other way.
Hmm. Just tried that (Win2000, MSIE). Doesn't happen. I seem to remember what you're talking about, though. Confused.
The first thing I ever saw that used that effect was a beer commercial where you see a beer spilling off of a pool table. That was about a year before the Gap ad. I was actually surprised it took so long for everybody and their dog to start using the effect: I expected, after seeing that ad, to see it everywhere within a month.
I, for one...
Keanu Reeves is a bad actor.
He has his place. In many movies, actors widely regarded as being weak at their trade (more truthfully, actors with a narrow range) have defined certain characters. Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker springs to mind. I liked the Neo character, and I don't mind that he is basically just "The Keanu Character." I think it was just good casting. I should mention that I don't think KR is a bad actor: just that he doesn't have a great range.
Bladerunner -- that's a good movie. Stack that against the Matrix any time.
I love Bladerunner! I'm going to have to grab the DVD, in fact. However, it's not at all the same kind of film. If I were to stack any movie up to the Matrix, it would be Dark City.
and if the whole "brain in a jar" idea was somewhat more novel.
I don't know about your comparison there... It seems oversimplified. The Matrix deals with a concept that has been covered before, but does it well. And it had Kung-Fu. :)
When all is said and done, the Matrix is one of my favourite movies. The cinematography, effects, fighting, concept, atmosphere, and execution do it for me. Unfortunately, there were a couple of spots where the dialogue made me groan (and what's with "Tank" and the really awkward scene where he wakes up Neo?) Also, the human battery idea is a tad lame. Doesn't it waste tremendous amounts of energy growing a human? *&^) Dark City, however, had no such "minuses." Still: no Kung-Fu...
Enough of me.
I'm on Shaw Cable's cable modem service, and the most I can hope for when downloading is around a quarter of your worst speeds. Uploading, I get maybe 20k/s. (And yes: that's disgustingly slow)
The hardware you cover is enough for you to be able to interface real-world devices with software. You don't go into much power electronics (thankfully...)
The software aspect teaches you enough to go out and write basically anything, but leaves out the more theoretical stuff.
I've got a Computer Engineering degree, and now I write embedded software. Still, I know a lot of CompE's who go into software jobs exclusively. Some companies look for Computer Engineers specifically if they need someone who can handle hardware / software interfacing well, or even just for straight software if they appreciate the Engineering approach to design. Others (usually founded by CS graduates) will not even consider Computer Engineers over Computing Scientists.
I don't know how many other places are doing this, but the University of Alberta (where I graduated from) is now offering a stream of Computer Engineering called Software Engineering, which is basically Computing Science with an Engineering approach. Plus you then have an Engineering degree.
Blah blah blah. Hope that was interesting for someone.
No more of this "clearly you have no taste for thinking the new design is good/bad!" crap...
*&^)