Well, there is a simple cure for that, dumb down college and inflate college grades! Err, wait, we're already doing that.
This might be happening at some universities, but I assure you it's not happening at the good ones. In the engineering programs here at Purdue, they still occasionally give us problems without any correct solution to make sure we can pick them out.
Bullshit. Everyone thinks their school doesn't do it because they want to have some high opinion of themselves. Let me assure you, you're wrong.
I have attended 6 different universities over 20 years and they all do it. It doesn't matter whether you're studying engineering, math, basket-weaving, or psychology. Universities are "dumbing down" (at least here in the USA) because it's financially beneficial for them to do so. If universities had unusually high fail-out rates (that would imply they aren't "dumbing down" and/or grading on a curve) people would stop attending those universities. Like it or not higher education is a huge business, first and foremost.
English is neither a native language nor the first foreign language for me.
I suspect that's the case with the person who submitted the paper as well.
The sentence was most likely intended to mean "the bathroom smelled like death" or "the bathroom smelled like something had died in it" but was most likely submitted by a non-native English speaker who did a literal translation and didn't notice that a literal translation didn't really make much sense in that particular context.
That has very little to do with being correct and everything to do with making a teacher look stupid when you're less than half their age. I had issues with that in elementary and middle school, but finally learned to just keep my mouth shut in high school unless the teacher was being a dick. You get along much better in life by not proving to people you're smarter than they are, or more educated. Blend in as necessary, stand out when it will benefit you.
Where are these sealed engines that only authorized mechanics can work with that you're talking about? I know dealers imply such bs when you buy, but there is no such warranty that can be voided that way legally. Effectively, there are many things that are more difficult to do at home, now, but they can still be done.
Now, what you're real point is still makes good sense. If enough people buy "closed" options that it puts the "open" option in the dark then eventually there will be no "open" option because it simply won't give a good enough return on investment for the manufacturer.
Now your vote really doesn't count... if it ever did after creation of the electoral college. With unlimited spending the sheep who listen without thinking will just keep electing who they're told and never consider the consequences. Yay...
A common enough suggestion. But there are genres of music that are not amenable to concert performance. And there are genres of music whose fans aren't the types to clamour after T-shirts proclaiming their musical taste.
Are we saying that those kinds of music don't deserve to get made? (Or don't deserve to be self-financing, at least).
Honestly, what genre is it that doesn't have associated merchandise? Opera? No, I've definitely seen opera shirts (not the browser). Jazz? Nope, seen those too. Maybe religious... hell they have a whole Crusade behind them... wait maybe it's hip hop? Nope, that's not it. Classical? Nah, all those t-shirts with Bach and Beethoven bust that idea.
I agree that the concert t-shirt isn't really the big seller for some genres that it is for others, but everything can be performed live (even electronica) and I have yet to find any music genre that doesn't have some sort of merchandising to go along with it. T-shirts, programs, posters, whatever.
Certainly most of the more obscure merchandising genres do better selling CDs than merchandise and they most certainly deserve to be made, but the case was for the merchandise to be sold if the music were given away, not how to get the music made in the first place.
The real answer? Because radio is controlled by the labels and has been for 60 years. It's worse now than ever for the case of radio, which is why we're seeing more and more bands gain popularity on myspace, facebook, and youtube. This is only going to become more common as more and more of us turn to what we use daily (who really listens to radio these days for anything other than shock jocks?) like the internet to get more and more of our entertainment, like music.
Really? A computer is now as cheap as a CD or a single concert ticket? I want to live where you live!
Seriously, I agree that you're on the right track, especially over the next five years, but it's not that easy yet. I think the biggest issue the opposition to your statement is missing is the fact that growing "organically" doesn't mean instant success with your first album. The generation that "changed music" in the 60s didn't do it with a single album. They did it by putting out a lot of good music over time. A couple of big names had instant impact but for the most part these were artists who "earned their stripes" so to speak. They grew their fans over time. We're going back to the way it was, only with new methods of distribution, nothing more.
I, on the other hand, live in the DC area and had nothing but crap coverage where I need it most. The best coverage I had with Sprint was when I was traveling, which wasn't that often back then. I'm sure it's improved significantly since then, though.
The interest in these has never been lacking. They simply cost too much for a reasonably well designed model to make any real headway though. If they could get the low end down to below $300 and the high end closer to $800-$1000 they might actually make some progress, but until then, there will be no significant change in the way people use bicycles.
Especially when you consider the fact that most people (in the USA at least) use bicycles because they either can't afford something more practical/versatile or are using it as a way to exercise.
So you think you're getting ethernet, usb, video (at a big bandwidth) and whatever else they're saying you get with this cable in something smaller than a pen? Good luck with that. I'll believe it when I see it, but I suspect if you ever get one that small you'll have significant signal loss from interference. You simply can't shield that many different signals well enough in a cable that thin.
Except that one cable to rule them all requires a ridiculously expensive cable to replace when your ferret/gerbil/guinea pig/mouse/small child decides it tastes good. It also makes a very fat cable that is generally harder to bury somewhere so that it isn't visible. It also requires you replace an entire computer/monitor/whatever if a single connector goes bad, rather than pieces.
That most people don't have a 15 Mbit residential connection, or a 2 GHz processor... You can't really have missed that point. A significant portion of the population (of the world, not just the USA) does still use some form of dial up and encryption would definitely be noticeable to them.
Terrorism has been successful in several instances. First I can think of is the creation of the United States. There are more recent examples such as Afghanistan in the 90s. Terrorism and revolution are two sides of the same coin, as others have already stated.
Wow, we definitely had very different takes on that movie... While I agree that the spying on them was a bit low for Superman, the fact that he "gave up" the one thing in the world he truly wants (a normal life with the woman he Loves) for the "good of mankind" is a pretty important message that has always been a part of the Superman story. He didn't know he got her pregnant and then abandoned her. He erased her memory in Superman II (which this is supposed to follow) so there is no reason for there to be any kind of "abandonment" because she never knew they were "together".
I'm not sure I ever saw Lois "ditch" anyone in the movie, but maybe you're referring to their little flight around the city.
Let's not get into the fact that Lois Lane isn't married in the new movie, they are engaged, with no apparent date set for a wedding. As for being played by James Marsden (however that is supposed to influence things) do you really think any human man could "stand up" to the qualities of Superman? Yes, he's a good guy and comes off as better than Superman in this particular film, or at least as good as, because he genuinely cares for Lois and her son, but that's not the point. It's Superman! If you're in Love with Superman it doesn't matter who comes along after that... you're going to always harbor some lingering feelings for Superman, no matter how great the next guy is.
Perhaps Lois should be "more appreciative of the guy who put her first" but unfortunately that's not how this franchise (or Love in real life) actually works. There has to be something that actually connects Superman to the human race and Lois is that thing. Otherwise, he's just a guy who can fly and has no reason for giving a shit about this planet and its inhabitants.
Welcome to the real world, where cheating is acceptable, laziness is often rewarded and the only people who succeed are those who stand up and shout for it or those who suck up for it. If you don't speak up about your own value, no one else will, or worse, someone else will try to claim your work as their own. Get used to the bad work ethic, it's here to stay, no matter what company you work for, but make sure you let your supervisor(s) know what you have done for them work-wise and you should be okay. Don't play the blame game, just do your part and let it be known that you have.
Promises are easily broken. They shouldn't have been able to do it in the first place, and that still doesn't help support the argument that they won't change their format in the future to something no longer compatible.
Turn down the brightness of your monitor. I do believe the e-ink will still be less irritating/straining to the eyes, but not having your monitor ridiculously bright makes a huge difference and people seem to forget they can control it.
I suspect that's because it looked more like what you think a habitable world would look like. GP made some very good points about the realism of the show as far as science goes. Avatar chose to focus on different aspects of science, obviously, and those stand out as obvious things that many movies get wrong, while some of the other things (such as why there was no bioluminescence before Sully lit his torch but there was after it was extinguished) were overlooked for the sake of pushing the plot along.
I swear we saw different movies. I didn't see anything in 3D that added to the movie at all. I could only tell a couple of things were 3D for that matter. Everything else could have been done with standard filming techniques. It was fantastic cinematography but I didn't think the 3D did anything but make my head hurt because those glasses suck.
I felt exactly the same way. My daughter wanted to see it, and some friends gave me the idea of the plot, which you could get from the previews though perhaps not as clearly, and we saw it. It's the same story... "tough guy" finds a heart he (or other people) didn't know he had and is really a "good guy" underneath. He gets the girl and the true bad guy gets what's due to him because he's so one sided and cliche (right down to his tattoos and scars).
I actually thought the 3D effects of the movie were minimal and more detracting from the whole than if it were just standard. As for predictable movies, it's the same for most movies (at least for me) no matter where they are filmed. Humans, as a whole, have the same basic desires... Americans tend to root for the underdog a little more in their movies, but not by too much. The guy you want to get the girl always does in every film I've ever seen and the "good guy" always wins, no matter where the movie is made. Of course there are exceptions, but as generalizations go, I haven't seen much difference in films written or filmed in other countries than those I've seen in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
IMHO, affixing some kind of rigid standard to spoken language is the lazy way --
This, however, isn't about the spoken language. It's about the written language. They are not synonymous.
Well, there is a simple cure for that, dumb down college and inflate college grades! Err, wait, we're already doing that.
This might be happening at some universities, but I assure you it's not happening at the good ones. In the engineering programs here at Purdue, they still occasionally give us problems without any correct solution to make sure we can pick them out.
Bullshit. Everyone thinks their school doesn't do it because they want to have some high opinion of themselves. Let me assure you, you're wrong.
I have attended 6 different universities over 20 years and they all do it. It doesn't matter whether you're studying engineering, math, basket-weaving, or psychology. Universities are "dumbing down" (at least here in the USA) because it's financially beneficial for them to do so. If universities had unusually high fail-out rates (that would imply they aren't "dumbing down" and/or grading on a curve) people would stop attending those universities. Like it or not higher education is a huge business, first and foremost.
English is neither a native language nor the first foreign language for me.
I suspect that's the case with the person who submitted the paper as well.
The sentence was most likely intended to mean "the bathroom smelled like death" or "the bathroom smelled like something had died in it" but was most likely submitted by a non-native English speaker who did a literal translation and didn't notice that a literal translation didn't really make much sense in that particular context.
That has very little to do with being correct and everything to do with making a teacher look stupid when you're less than half their age. I had issues with that in elementary and middle school, but finally learned to just keep my mouth shut in high school unless the teacher was being a dick. You get along much better in life by not proving to people you're smarter than they are, or more educated. Blend in as necessary, stand out when it will benefit you.
Where are these sealed engines that only authorized mechanics can work with that you're talking about? I know dealers imply such bs when you buy, but there is no such warranty that can be voided that way legally. Effectively, there are many things that are more difficult to do at home, now, but they can still be done.
Now, what you're real point is still makes good sense. If enough people buy "closed" options that it puts the "open" option in the dark then eventually there will be no "open" option because it simply won't give a good enough return on investment for the manufacturer.
Now your vote really doesn't count... if it ever did after creation of the electoral college. With unlimited spending the sheep who listen without thinking will just keep electing who they're told and never consider the consequences. Yay...
Concert tickets and T-Shirts
A common enough suggestion. But there are genres of music that are not amenable to concert performance. And there are genres of music whose fans aren't the types to clamour after T-shirts proclaiming their musical taste.
Are we saying that those kinds of music don't deserve to get made? (Or don't deserve to be self-financing, at least).
Honestly, what genre is it that doesn't have associated merchandise? Opera? No, I've definitely seen opera shirts (not the browser). Jazz? Nope, seen those too. Maybe religious... hell they have a whole Crusade behind them... wait maybe it's hip hop? Nope, that's not it. Classical? Nah, all those t-shirts with Bach and Beethoven bust that idea.
I agree that the concert t-shirt isn't really the big seller for some genres that it is for others, but everything can be performed live (even electronica) and I have yet to find any music genre that doesn't have some sort of merchandising to go along with it. T-shirts, programs, posters, whatever.
Certainly most of the more obscure merchandising genres do better selling CDs than merchandise and they most certainly deserve to be made, but the case was for the merchandise to be sold if the music were given away, not how to get the music made in the first place.
The real answer? Because radio is controlled by the labels and has been for 60 years. It's worse now than ever for the case of radio, which is why we're seeing more and more bands gain popularity on myspace, facebook, and youtube. This is only going to become more common as more and more of us turn to what we use daily (who really listens to radio these days for anything other than shock jocks?) like the internet to get more and more of our entertainment, like music.
Really? A computer is now as cheap as a CD or a single concert ticket? I want to live where you live!
Seriously, I agree that you're on the right track, especially over the next five years, but it's not that easy yet. I think the biggest issue the opposition to your statement is missing is the fact that growing "organically" doesn't mean instant success with your first album. The generation that "changed music" in the 60s didn't do it with a single album. They did it by putting out a lot of good music over time. A couple of big names had instant impact but for the most part these were artists who "earned their stripes" so to speak. They grew their fans over time. We're going back to the way it was, only with new methods of distribution, nothing more.
I, on the other hand, live in the DC area and had nothing but crap coverage where I need it most. The best coverage I had with Sprint was when I was traveling, which wasn't that often back then. I'm sure it's improved significantly since then, though.
The interest in these has never been lacking. They simply cost too much for a reasonably well designed model to make any real headway though. If they could get the low end down to below $300 and the high end closer to $800-$1000 they might actually make some progress, but until then, there will be no significant change in the way people use bicycles.
Especially when you consider the fact that most people (in the USA at least) use bicycles because they either can't afford something more practical/versatile or are using it as a way to exercise.
So you think you're getting ethernet, usb, video (at a big bandwidth) and whatever else they're saying you get with this cable in something smaller than a pen? Good luck with that. I'll believe it when I see it, but I suspect if you ever get one that small you'll have significant signal loss from interference. You simply can't shield that many different signals well enough in a cable that thin.
Except that one cable to rule them all requires a ridiculously expensive cable to replace when your ferret/gerbil/guinea pig/mouse/small child decides it tastes good. It also makes a very fat cable that is generally harder to bury somewhere so that it isn't visible. It also requires you replace an entire computer/monitor/whatever if a single connector goes bad, rather than pieces.
That most people don't have a 15 Mbit residential connection, or a 2 GHz processor... You can't really have missed that point. A significant portion of the population (of the world, not just the USA) does still use some form of dial up and encryption would definitely be noticeable to them.
Terrorism has been successful in several instances. First I can think of is the creation of the United States. There are more recent examples such as Afghanistan in the 90s. Terrorism and revolution are two sides of the same coin, as others have already stated.
Wow, we definitely had very different takes on that movie... While I agree that the spying on them was a bit low for Superman, the fact that he "gave up" the one thing in the world he truly wants (a normal life with the woman he Loves) for the "good of mankind" is a pretty important message that has always been a part of the Superman story. He didn't know he got her pregnant and then abandoned her. He erased her memory in Superman II (which this is supposed to follow) so there is no reason for there to be any kind of "abandonment" because she never knew they were "together".
I'm not sure I ever saw Lois "ditch" anyone in the movie, but maybe you're referring to their little flight around the city.
Let's not get into the fact that Lois Lane isn't married in the new movie, they are engaged, with no apparent date set for a wedding. As for being played by James Marsden (however that is supposed to influence things) do you really think any human man could "stand up" to the qualities of Superman? Yes, he's a good guy and comes off as better than Superman in this particular film, or at least as good as, because he genuinely cares for Lois and her son, but that's not the point. It's Superman! If you're in Love with Superman it doesn't matter who comes along after that... you're going to always harbor some lingering feelings for Superman, no matter how great the next guy is.
Perhaps Lois should be "more appreciative of the guy who put her first" but unfortunately that's not how this franchise (or Love in real life) actually works. There has to be something that actually connects Superman to the human race and Lois is that thing. Otherwise, he's just a guy who can fly and has no reason for giving a shit about this planet and its inhabitants.
Superman's powers can't help with Louis leaving him
Holy Shit! Superman is gay now?!?!?! I didn't know he gave up on Lois and started trying to date Louis... this explains so much about that last film!
Didn't the web shooters fail repeatedly during the second movie or third movie? What have I missed?
Welcome to the real world, where cheating is acceptable, laziness is often rewarded and the only people who succeed are those who stand up and shout for it or those who suck up for it. If you don't speak up about your own value, no one else will, or worse, someone else will try to claim your work as their own. Get used to the bad work ethic, it's here to stay, no matter what company you work for, but make sure you let your supervisor(s) know what you have done for them work-wise and you should be okay. Don't play the blame game, just do your part and let it be known that you have.
Promises are easily broken. They shouldn't have been able to do it in the first place, and that still doesn't help support the argument that they won't change their format in the future to something no longer compatible.
Turn down the brightness of your monitor. I do believe the e-ink will still be less irritating/straining to the eyes, but not having your monitor ridiculously bright makes a huge difference and people seem to forget they can control it.
I suspect that's because it looked more like what you think a habitable world would look like. GP made some very good points about the realism of the show as far as science goes. Avatar chose to focus on different aspects of science, obviously, and those stand out as obvious things that many movies get wrong, while some of the other things (such as why there was no bioluminescence before Sully lit his torch but there was after it was extinguished) were overlooked for the sake of pushing the plot along.
I swear we saw different movies. I didn't see anything in 3D that added to the movie at all. I could only tell a couple of things were 3D for that matter. Everything else could have been done with standard filming techniques. It was fantastic cinematography but I didn't think the 3D did anything but make my head hurt because those glasses suck.
I felt exactly the same way. My daughter wanted to see it, and some friends gave me the idea of the plot, which you could get from the previews though perhaps not as clearly, and we saw it. It's the same story... "tough guy" finds a heart he (or other people) didn't know he had and is really a "good guy" underneath. He gets the girl and the true bad guy gets what's due to him because he's so one sided and cliche (right down to his tattoos and scars).
I actually thought the 3D effects of the movie were minimal and more detracting from the whole than if it were just standard. As for predictable movies, it's the same for most movies (at least for me) no matter where they are filmed. Humans, as a whole, have the same basic desires... Americans tend to root for the underdog a little more in their movies, but not by too much. The guy you want to get the girl always does in every film I've ever seen and the "good guy" always wins, no matter where the movie is made. Of course there are exceptions, but as generalizations go, I haven't seen much difference in films written or filmed in other countries than those I've seen in the US.