In a recent Time Magazine article, George Lucas explains the depressingly foreordained saga of Anakin Skywalker's slide into evil-demigodhood by saying: "He turns into Vader because he gets attached to things. He can't let go of his mother; he can't let go of his girlfriend. He can't let go of things. It makes you greedy. And when you're greedy, you are on the path to the dark side, because you fear you're going to lose things, that you're not going to have the power you need."
So in essence, Lucas has modelled the Vader character after himself. The series has so much potential, everyone can see that. But Lucas is content to drag it down to the lowest level, simply because he is greedy.
I also really like the author's suggestion for Episode Three, which is a major plot twist. I have thought about it, and I think it could work very well. I'd have to review the previous movies to see if it works all the way through the trilogy, but I think it would. He proposes that Obi Wan and Darth Vader are actually teaming up against Yoda and the Emperor.
I think it would be a cool twist to reveal that the Empire is really the good guys, and the Rebels are the bad guys. There was a whole article on this somewhere, and I thought it was a pretty unique and intriguing analysis of the saga.
Honestly, when I can buy a 40G Seagate for $64, so what if it only has a one year warranty. You made backups, right? Toss it and get a new one.
What did you make your backups on? I am finding this to be a problem as I start to fill more and more HD space. CDROMs don't cut it anymore, and I haven't sprung for a tape drive. But even then, it would take a lot to back up everything. I recently used Ghost to backup and restore a drive when I got a new one, and my images were big. I have a 120GB drive that is about 50% full now. Toss a drive every year and get a new one? That's insane. Why is everything considered disposable nowadays? Whatever happened to quality?
no reason to be an asshole about it... its an honest question... not like we can click on a link and watch the show
ROFL. You can't?
Hmm, did you even follow the link to the story on MSNBC? The picture at the top of the article SHOWS the shaft, and the guy inserting the robot into it. Right next to it is a VIDEO that you can click to watch what happens when it inserts the camera into the hole. Or how about the article on the BBC which shows where the shaft is in the pyramid, and more pictures? All I said was RTFA before making smart-ass comments about it. The person I was replying to did not ask an honest question, he asked a smart-ass question and made a bunch of dumb comments. Since you are too lazy to read the article, you are probably too lazy to read the comments, so here they are: So can someone explain to me why they didn't open the door? I mean seriously. If there is a big secret that nobody knows wouldn't you want to find out immediately? How can you possibly resist opening the door? What kind of idiot finds a new door and doesn't open it? I mean isn't that what video games teach us, open every door as soon as you find it!
And don't they have sonar? They should use it to "see" what is behind the door. Whether it's an empty room or a treasure hoarde with a curse I doubt anything bad can come of opening a door. That is I don't believe in the supernatural. I'm sure the archaelogists don't either.
Now, reading it again, does it sound like such an honest question?
You mean write correct, well-commented code with built in tests? Testing *is* part of a developer's job.
Yes, that is precisely what I mean. That makes QA's job much easier. There are many levels of testing that need to be done, so if we get code that is unit tested, that takes away some of the easy stuff. But unit testing does not mean that a product is tested.
So can someone explain to me why they didn't open the door? I mean seriously.
Short answer - RTFA!
Did you even see the show? The "door" is in an 8"x8" square shaft that entends up at about a 45 degree angle. I think the shaft was 200 ft long.
Over months, they built a special robot that chould get to the door, and it tried to move it. They used some kind of sonar to determine that the door was only 3" thick, so they tested out a device to drill a 3" hole in it, so they could insert a small camera and light.
So instead of thinking that you are so clever, maybe you should have watched the show, or at least read the article before going off on some pseudo tirade.
I have already proven that you can break the speed of light barrier, in 5 years. I was visited today by myself. I guess in 4 years I am going to fall while hanging a picture in the bathroom, and hit my head on the sink. I'll be knocked unconscious and have a vision of something called the flux capacitor. It will take a year to develop, and I will be able to travel faster than the speed of light. Oh wait, or was it travel in time? Crap, I can't remember what I told me.
Why is this "irritating"? They don't do a Microsoft and roll world+dog into a security patch, it's *just* a security patch. When a bugfix or other errata patch comes out, there'll be a version for that, too, and it will include the patch.
Well, I can answer that. Security reports say to be running at least revision "e". To me, this did not look like revision "e". That is why there are revision numbers, after all. Now if I would have known that they back-patched it, I wouldn't have downloaded the source and compiled it. Why not bump up the version on the package? I don't see any reason not to do so.
OK, let's assume for a moment that they actually do get a real actor to play Superman. Face it, Keanu isn't Superman. The better question is, who would be Lex Luthor? Lois Lane? They have to do some better casting than just finding the right Man of Steel. Think about who helped out Keaton in Batman. We know that Spiderman wouldn't have been as good without the supporting cast, and the Matrix was ALL about the supporting cast.
I mean no offense, but that's a terrible idea. I say that only because we had a pretty serious debate-- okay, shouting match-- about this in a team meeting about a year ago. On the one hand, there were us-- the managers-- saying that the software had to be resilient in the face of inconsistent or wrong user input. On the other, we had the engineers who said things like, "Browsers just don't work that way," and "Of course it's going to break if you do something stupid," and "We have to rely on the user closing their session properly."
Will you be my manager?
Honestly, I have never seen management side against engineering on issues like this. When it comes to issues like this, it always seems to be someone from QA (me) who has to propose these scenarios that "will never happen". Usually management just wants to get the thing out the door. Getting the customer not to do "something stupid" is a training or documentation issue.
Not true in many developement shops. With short iterations, refactoring, rigorous unit testing, collective code ownership, and continuous integration, code can be constantly changing but stable. Take for example the Mozilla Tinderbox [mozilla.org]. Development proceeds on many components and the builds and tests are run continuously.
I have to really wonder how efficient this is in the long run. Sure, I understand that this *can* work in some instances, but it won't in all. The prototype/spin cycle approach isn't the right one for every project. In this case, tests are reactionary. How on earth are you advancing your testing if the code is constantly changing (especially if the UI changes)? If that is the case, forget system test automation, it won't work. You have to have a reasonably stable, unchanging base in order to automate testing or you will spend all your time re-automating it. The entire purpose of automating your testing is to *save* time in the long run. In this model, there is no long run, everything is done in the short term.
Embrace Change.
I do embrace change, but not simply for the sake of changing. I have to have a good reason to change.
If you are a developer, do what you do best. If you want a tester, go out and find a good one. They are worth their weight in gold.
OK, maybe I am a little biased, as I have been in QA for 8 years.:-) But my comments still stand.
That said, we are currently using Rational's products to test our application, which includes a web piece. Hint: Don't use javascript if you plan on using Rational. They have SiteLoad, which I believe is free, but rest assured the rest of their products are NOT. Their licensing scheme is nothing short of trying to balance the budget of a small country. If you are wanting to implement their products in a big project, to handle requirements (Requisite Pro), Bugs (ClearQuest) and test plans (Test Manager), then prepare yourself for headaches. If you just want to get Rational Robot to record/playback user actions for testing, it is pretty solid. Rational purchased all different components of their system, so they aren't the smoothest to integrate. I have spent many hours with their phone support people.
I have also worked with Mercury and SilkTest, but to a lesser degree.
Oh, and if you are constantly changing critical code, you need to worry more about your development practices and not your testing.
we do that by creating a resource, named something like... "7th Floor small conference room".
I have tried that where I work, but it doesn't work right. It says I don't have permission for that resource. So we always have to include the room as an attendee. Then we get a confirmation, and the time is blocked off. I don't know if there is logic in there to prevent multiple bookings, I have never tried. But I can go in and see the room's schedule to see if it is booked.
But there has to be a better way of doing it than it is currently done.
They *all* leave it up to a higher power, be it God, Karma, the Tao, etc.
I can agree with this, but what I was getting at is that men can make the god, karma, tao, etc pretty much "say" whatever they want. In this way, the higher power is a creation of man. If it were truly up to the higher power, there would be no interpretation. That is why you can pretty much justify anything with a bible verse.
As far as I can tell, all organized religions worship and follow some artifact that supposedly came from their god, and not the god itself.
If you can find me a religion that states man decides who lives and who dies, than I will eat my words.
Sorry, I am not going to fall for your little tactic. You originally said
"Whether you are christian, muslim, jew or otherwise, the common thread is that man does not determine who lives and dies, god does.".
First of all, "otherwise" means everything else, which doesn't necessarily mean religion. You should be more clear.
Second, I don't know of any religion that says "man decides who lives and dies", nor one that says "god decides who lives and dies". So by posing a false question, you are assured to get the answer you want. You are putting the ideals of religions into your own words, to suit your own purposes. But don't feel bad, it has been done for generation upon generation, you aren't the first. You have PRECISELY illustrated my point. Thank you.
Whether you are christian, muslim, jew or otherwise, the common thread is that man does not determine who lives and dies, god does. Think about that.
Holy Crap, do you even see what is wrong with this statement? You have just crammed YOUR religious beliefs into a sentence that is supposedly about letting people believe what they want to believe. YOU need to think about the fact that not everyone believes in God, let along YOUR god. Not everyone has the same views, you need to respect that.
But I do agree with you about peace and harmony. The real problem here is that sometimes you cannot hug someone and make it all better. You need to accept the fact that there are people out there whose beliefs and actions threaten others. Changing your beliefs will not necessarily change theirs. Even if you strive for peace, they may not. What do you do then? Palastine/Israel is a prime example. There is no clear right or wrong in that situation, if there was then the outcome would be obvious. It is not. I think the source of a lot of the world's conflicts can't be solved by organized religion because they are CAUSED by the beliefs that organized religion perpetuates. A lot of the most horrific things that the human race has done have been in the name of religion. So I agree that we should all pursue peace. But do it for the sake of peace, not under the guise of religion.
It has only been a year. It is hard for me to even hear about these events, let alone see the images. I don't need to re-live them. Not yet. Maybe not ever. I am in the Chicago area, so it isn't even like I was as directly affected as those who live and work in NYC. But we were all affected in some way or another.
I purchased a red/white/blue ribbon from a fireman at a stoplight just a few days after the attack, and it is still on my car antenna, albeit a bit dirtier now. I don't need to wear red white and blue to work today, even though it was "suggested". I don't need some kind of mandated or suggested sign of solidarity.
I was really surprised at how soon Americans went back to their daily lives. Saddened, really. It wasn't long before I heard my first Bin Laden joke, or was emailed pictures of him with a building going up his butt, or saw a Tshirt with a target on his face. I was amazed, but not really surprised, at how quickly good ol' Americans returned to their stupid, over the top, to the EXTREME! ways. It was nice to see a flag on everyone's car. It was sad to see some cars with 30 flags on them. It was nice to see sentiments of freedom, sad to see such bravado and machismo. I kid you not, someone near where I work painted their house red, white, and blue, with big hand painted letters phrase "Justice will prevail".
Sometimes I am very proud to be an American, but sadly sometimes I am a little embarassed. Today, I am going to be proud. Proud of the fact that we do enjoy freedoms in this country. That we try to offer it to everyone. Even if it means that you can act like an ass sometimes. That we have clean water to drink, and plenty of food to eat. That I have a beautiful wife of 3 months. Sad that corporations are so greedy and controlling, and that money is such a driving force. Sad that so many people lost their lives because of ignorance and fear. Hope - that we can all get beyond what happened a year ago, and what atrocities happen every single day on this planet. If there is a God, may she bless us all.
Your comment had NOTHING to do with the article, other than trolling about it not interesting you
I disagree. I am a big Star Wars fan, but I was disgusted with Episode I. Attack of the Clones was reviews as "OK" by most critics. Why would an OK movie need to go to IMAX, and more importantly, why is THAT news? Obviously, it is to get people to see it, and I was commenting that even going to IMAX doesn't make me want to see it. I am part of the Star Wars fanbase.
I can't believe how many people were indignant with me because I didn't want to see it. People kept asking me "Did you see it yet?" and I would simply reply "No, and I probably won't". Some people were even on the verge of getting upset with me, all because I didn't want to see it. Something is wrong there. Something is wrong in the geek culture where people are derided for not having the stereotypical views. I am a computer geek, but I hate Star Trek. I don't play D&D. That boggles some people's minds, and makes them pissed at me. I just don't get it.
So say that my post may be offtopic, and doesn't do anything but state my opinion. Well holy crap Maynard, just where do you thing you are? This is Slashdot. Heaven forbid that someone disagree with what is regarded as "the only view".
Honestly, I haven't even seen it yet, and the idea of seeing it on an IMAX doesn't pique my interest at all. You know what? I have survived this long without seeing it. I may not even give Blockbuster my $2.99 when it comes out for rent.
The problem is that Palladium is hardware-embedded Digital Rights Denial. It's paving the way for music and movies that won't play at all unless you have a Palladium-enabled processor.
Isn't Palladium a hardware/software combination? If so, then you won't be able to play unless you have Palladium enabled AND you are using an "approved" player. Hmm, MS is in this bed, do you think that they will approve of Linux players?
At first I thought I wouldn't mind if they implemented Palladium as long as there was a non-Palladium option. But we all know that if it gets a foothold, the non-Palladium option would be phased out.
I know some people, a lot of people, will say "WOW, I could never fill up that much space."
Back in 1991, my roommate got a new 486sx that trounced my 386dx-33. Mine had an 80MB hard drive, and my roommate had something like 200MB, I don't remember exactly. I knew that he wouldn't be able to fill it up. Now I have more memory than that in all my machines.
There are many things that could easily fill this drive up fast. Even when people talk about having a terabyte on the desktop, you just have to be creative to figure out how to fill it. What if everyone had a TiVo-like device where the TV stations sent you your favorite programs that you could watch whenever you wanted? Record every show on multiple channels. Movies maybe.
You have to think outside the para-diggem.:-)
Right now you watch TV in real-time. In 5 years, what if you had the ability to simply store everything that was sent and watch it later? Not only one channel, or multiple channels, but all channels? That might take up some HD space, huh?
I have read The Elegant Universe, and I don't think you could say it is for beginners. And it doesn't deal with physics in general, it concentrates on Superstrings. It is a very good book, but a good Physics book? I don't know about that. I would say you could pick up a good used Physics textbook at a used bookstore. That should cover general physics. If you want to get "out there", or maybe "in here" a little more, pick up Godel Escher Bach by Hofstader. If you are more adventurous, try and read his book Metamagical Themas. I still can't believe I read that whole thing.
Oh, and I make no claims to fully understanding any of the aforementioned books. They are all good reads, and I have read parts of them more than once. Understand them? Heh, I don't think so. I really like Hofstader's stuff.
Really? You can use Win2k to back up your Linux drives? How does that work? If you will notice, coward, this is not an article that has anything to do with Win2k.
Move along, sheep. Go wait for your shepherd to tell you what to do.
Slashdot Mirror
In a recent Time Magazine article, George Lucas explains the depressingly foreordained saga of Anakin Skywalker's slide into evil-demigodhood by saying: "He turns into Vader because he gets attached to things. He can't let go of his mother; he can't let go of his girlfriend. He can't let go of things. It makes you greedy. And when you're greedy, you are on the path to the dark side, because you fear you're going to lose things, that you're not going to have the power you need."
So in essence, Lucas has modelled the Vader character after himself. The series has so much potential, everyone can see that. But Lucas is content to drag it down to the lowest level, simply because he is greedy.
I also really like the author's suggestion for Episode Three, which is a major plot twist. I have thought about it, and I think it could work very well. I'd have to review the previous movies to see if it works all the way through the trilogy, but I think it would. He proposes that Obi Wan and Darth Vader are actually teaming up against Yoda and the Emperor.
I think it would be a cool twist to reveal that the Empire is really the good guys, and the Rebels are the bad guys. There was a whole article on this somewhere, and I thought it was a pretty unique and intriguing analysis of the saga.
What did you make your backups on? I am finding this to be a problem as I start to fill more and more HD space. CDROMs don't cut it anymore, and I haven't sprung for a tape drive. But even then, it would take a lot to back up everything. I recently used Ghost to backup and restore a drive when I got a new one, and my images were big. I have a 120GB drive that is about 50% full now. Toss a drive every year and get a new one? That's insane. Why is everything considered disposable nowadays? Whatever happened to quality?
ROFL. You can't?
Hmm, did you even follow the link to the story on MSNBC? The picture at the top of the article SHOWS the shaft, and the guy inserting the robot into it. Right next to it is a VIDEO that you can click to watch what happens when it inserts the camera into the hole. Or how about the article on the BBC which shows where the shaft is in the pyramid, and more pictures? All I said was RTFA before making smart-ass comments about it. The person I was replying to did not ask an honest question, he asked a smart-ass question and made a bunch of dumb comments. Since you are too lazy to read the article, you are probably too lazy to read the comments, so here they are:
So can someone explain to me why they didn't open the door? I mean seriously. If there is a big secret that nobody knows wouldn't you want to find out immediately? How can you possibly resist opening the door? What kind of idiot finds a new door and doesn't open it? I mean isn't that what video games teach us, open every door as soon as you find it! And don't they have sonar? They should use it to "see" what is behind the door. Whether it's an empty room or a treasure hoarde with a curse I doubt anything bad can come of opening a door. That is I don't believe in the supernatural. I'm sure the archaelogists don't either.
Now, reading it again, does it sound like such an honest question?
Yes, that is precisely what I mean. That makes QA's job much easier. There are many levels of testing that need to be done, so if we get code that is unit tested, that takes away some of the easy stuff. But unit testing does not mean that a product is tested.
Short answer - RTFA!
Did you even see the show? The "door" is in an 8"x8" square shaft that entends up at about a 45 degree angle. I think the shaft was 200 ft long.
Over months, they built a special robot that chould get to the door, and it tried to move it. They used some kind of sonar to determine that the door was only 3" thick, so they tested out a device to drill a 3" hole in it, so they could insert a small camera and light.
So instead of thinking that you are so clever, maybe you should have watched the show, or at least read the article before going off on some pseudo tirade.
I have already proven that you can break the speed of light barrier, in 5 years. I was visited today by myself. I guess in 4 years I am going to fall while hanging a picture in the bathroom, and hit my head on the sink. I'll be knocked unconscious and have a vision of something called the flux capacitor. It will take a year to develop, and I will be able to travel faster than the speed of light. Oh wait, or was it travel in time? Crap, I can't remember what I told me.
Well, I can answer that. Security reports say to be running at least revision "e". To me, this did not look like revision "e". That is why there are revision numbers, after all. Now if I would have known that they back-patched it, I wouldn't have downloaded the source and compiled it. Why not bump up the version on the package? I don't see any reason not to do so.
OK, let's assume for a moment that they actually do get a real actor to play Superman. Face it, Keanu isn't Superman. The better question is, who would be Lex Luthor? Lois Lane? They have to do some better casting than just finding the right Man of Steel. Think about who helped out Keaton in Batman. We know that Spiderman wouldn't have been as good without the supporting cast, and the Matrix was ALL about the supporting cast.
Will you be my manager?
Honestly, I have never seen management side against engineering on issues like this. When it comes to issues like this, it always seems to be someone from QA (me) who has to propose these scenarios that "will never happen". Usually management just wants to get the thing out the door. Getting the customer not to do "something stupid" is a training or documentation issue.
I do stupid things every day. That's my job.
# rpm -Fvh ftp://updates.redhat.com/7.3/en/os/i386/openssl*. 9.6b-28.i386.rpm
Retrieving ftp://updates.redhat.com/7.3/en/os/i386/openssl-0
So RedHat doesn't have the latest version on the ftp site?
I have a redhat system, but I have already upgraded to e. I just tried this out of curiousity.
I have to really wonder how efficient this is in the long run. Sure, I understand that this *can* work in some instances, but it won't in all. The prototype/spin cycle approach isn't the right one for every project. In this case, tests are reactionary. How on earth are you advancing your testing if the code is constantly changing (especially if the UI changes)? If that is the case, forget system test automation, it won't work. You have to have a reasonably stable, unchanging base in order to automate testing or you will spend all your time re-automating it. The entire purpose of automating your testing is to *save* time in the long run. In this model, there is no long run, everything is done in the short term.
Embrace Change.
I do embrace change, but not simply for the sake of changing. I have to have a good reason to change.
OK, maybe I am a little biased, as I have been in QA for 8 years. :-) But my comments still stand.
That said, we are currently using Rational's products to test our application, which includes a web piece. Hint: Don't use javascript if you plan on using Rational. They have SiteLoad, which I believe is free, but rest assured the rest of their products are NOT. Their licensing scheme is nothing short of trying to balance the budget of a small country. If you are wanting to implement their products in a big project, to handle requirements (Requisite Pro), Bugs (ClearQuest) and test plans (Test Manager), then prepare yourself for headaches. If you just want to get Rational Robot to record/playback user actions for testing, it is pretty solid. Rational purchased all different components of their system, so they aren't the smoothest to integrate. I have spent many hours with their phone support people.
I have also worked with Mercury and SilkTest, but to a lesser degree.
Oh, and if you are constantly changing critical code, you need to worry more about your development practices and not your testing.
I have tried that where I work, but it doesn't work right. It says I don't have permission for that resource. So we always have to include the room as an attendee. Then we get a confirmation, and the time is blocked off. I don't know if there is logic in there to prevent multiple bookings, I have never tried. But I can go in and see the room's schedule to see if it is booked.
But there has to be a better way of doing it than it is currently done.
I can agree with this, but what I was getting at is that men can make the god, karma, tao, etc pretty much "say" whatever they want. In this way, the higher power is a creation of man. If it were truly up to the higher power, there would be no interpretation. That is why you can pretty much justify anything with a bible verse.
As far as I can tell, all organized religions worship and follow some artifact that supposedly came from their god, and not the god itself.
Sorry, I am not going to fall for your little tactic. You originally said
"Whether you are christian, muslim, jew or otherwise, the common thread is that man does not determine who lives and dies, god does.".
First of all, "otherwise" means everything else, which doesn't necessarily mean religion. You should be more clear.
Second, I don't know of any religion that says "man decides who lives and dies", nor one that says "god decides who lives and dies". So by posing a false question, you are assured to get the answer you want. You are putting the ideals of religions into your own words, to suit your own purposes. But don't feel bad, it has been done for generation upon generation, you aren't the first. You have PRECISELY illustrated my point. Thank you.
Holy Crap, do you even see what is wrong with this statement? You have just crammed YOUR religious beliefs into a sentence that is supposedly about letting people believe what they want to believe. YOU need to think about the fact that not everyone believes in God, let along YOUR god. Not everyone has the same views, you need to respect that.
But I do agree with you about peace and harmony. The real problem here is that sometimes you cannot hug someone and make it all better. You need to accept the fact that there are people out there whose beliefs and actions threaten others. Changing your beliefs will not necessarily change theirs. Even if you strive for peace, they may not. What do you do then? Palastine/Israel is a prime example. There is no clear right or wrong in that situation, if there was then the outcome would be obvious. It is not. I think the source of a lot of the world's conflicts can't be solved by organized religion because they are CAUSED by the beliefs that organized religion perpetuates. A lot of the most horrific things that the human race has done have been in the name of religion. So I agree that we should all pursue peace. But do it for the sake of peace, not under the guise of religion.
I purchased a red/white/blue ribbon from a fireman at a stoplight just a few days after the attack, and it is still on my car antenna, albeit a bit dirtier now. I don't need to wear red white and blue to work today, even though it was "suggested". I don't need some kind of mandated or suggested sign of solidarity.
I was really surprised at how soon Americans went back to their daily lives. Saddened, really. It wasn't long before I heard my first Bin Laden joke, or was emailed pictures of him with a building going up his butt, or saw a Tshirt with a target on his face. I was amazed, but not really surprised, at how quickly good ol' Americans returned to their stupid, over the top, to the EXTREME! ways. It was nice to see a flag on everyone's car. It was sad to see some cars with 30 flags on them. It was nice to see sentiments of freedom, sad to see such bravado and machismo. I kid you not, someone near where I work painted their house red, white, and blue, with big hand painted letters phrase "Justice will prevail".
Sometimes I am very proud to be an American, but sadly sometimes I am a little embarassed. Today, I am going to be proud. Proud of the fact that we do enjoy freedoms in this country. That we try to offer it to everyone. Even if it means that you can act like an ass sometimes. That we have clean water to drink, and plenty of food to eat. That I have a beautiful wife of 3 months. Sad that corporations are so greedy and controlling, and that money is such a driving force. Sad that so many people lost their lives because of ignorance and fear. Hope - that we can all get beyond what happened a year ago, and what atrocities happen every single day on this planet. If there is a God, may she bless us all.
I disagree. I am a big Star Wars fan, but I was disgusted with Episode I. Attack of the Clones was reviews as "OK" by most critics. Why would an OK movie need to go to IMAX, and more importantly, why is THAT news? Obviously, it is to get people to see it, and I was commenting that even going to IMAX doesn't make me want to see it. I am part of the Star Wars fanbase.
I can't believe how many people were indignant with me because I didn't want to see it. People kept asking me "Did you see it yet?" and I would simply reply "No, and I probably won't". Some people were even on the verge of getting upset with me, all because I didn't want to see it. Something is wrong there. Something is wrong in the geek culture where people are derided for not having the stereotypical views. I am a computer geek, but I hate Star Trek. I don't play D&D. That boggles some people's minds, and makes them pissed at me. I just don't get it.
So say that my post may be offtopic, and doesn't do anything but state my opinion. Well holy crap Maynard, just where do you thing you are? This is Slashdot. Heaven forbid that someone disagree with what is regarded as "the only view".
Isn't Palladium a hardware/software combination? If so, then you won't be able to play unless you have Palladium enabled AND you are using an "approved" player. Hmm, MS is in this bed, do you think that they will approve of Linux players?
At first I thought I wouldn't mind if they implemented Palladium as long as there was a non-Palladium option. But we all know that if it gets a foothold, the non-Palladium option would be phased out.
Think it won't happen? Who is going to stop them?
Back in 1991, my roommate got a new 486sx that trounced my 386dx-33. Mine had an 80MB hard drive, and my roommate had something like 200MB, I don't remember exactly. I knew that he wouldn't be able to fill it up. Now I have more memory than that in all my machines.
There are many things that could easily fill this drive up fast. Even when people talk about having a terabyte on the desktop, you just have to be creative to figure out how to fill it. What if everyone had a TiVo-like device where the TV stations sent you your favorite programs that you could watch whenever you wanted? Record every show on multiple channels. Movies maybe.
You have to think outside the para-diggem. :-)
Right now you watch TV in real-time. In 5 years, what if you had the ability to simply store everything that was sent and watch it later? Not only one channel, or multiple channels, but all channels? That might take up some HD space, huh?
Oh, and I make no claims to fully understanding any of the aforementioned books. They are all good reads, and I have read parts of them more than once. Understand them? Heh, I don't think so. I really like Hofstader's stuff.
Move along, sheep. Go wait for your shepherd to tell you what to do.