Very much a personal opinion, but I don't see how my understanding of what it means to be alive would be enhanced by a movie based upon an incestuous relationship.
My sister, who doesn't resemble me much, lived with me for a few years before we both married.
A gabby neighbor, whom neither of us knew well, thought we were an item.
Thus, I could foresee a comedy based upon what might have appeared an incestuous relationship, where the lesson is that you should straighten out the facts first, and gossip less. Could be a real hoot, in the right hands.
A variation on this might be adopted siblings who fall in love, and have to jump through some hoops to work things out.
A love story with a geneaological twist, where the lovers are cousins, and things are about to fall apart, but they are revealed to be sufficiently distant, and we have some reactionary busy-bodies as antagonists, could be OK.
But the deep-seated taboo against inbreeding is there for a reason, I agree with it, and wouldn't sit through a flick trying to argue "it felt good, so it must have been justified".
No, their idea that "people are teh st00p3d" is what's out.
Movies with: actual plots, decent acting, and good taste will always be in fashion.
actual plots means that it's OK to require the viewer to pay attention. Tired, formulaic vehicles are exactly that.
decent acting probably means load-shedding the big names and going for some undiscovered talent.
good taste means that, while we require a hint of the human capacity for evil to understand why the villian is the villian, we aren't really interested in wallowing in the evil. Lynch/Tarentino will always have their fan base, and I'm not advocating censorship here, just letting you know that "less is more". Expanding on that, less emphasis on potty mouth and hormones would also enhance their dramatic value. Finally, stories rooted in sexual confusion are of no interest whatsoever.
Summarizing: movies with some didactic value, not just "chewing gum for the mind", are what is needed.
Neither have I, since a glance at the first draft.
In defense of RMS, flexibility
a) isn't simple, and
b) hasn't historically helped much, and I'm thinking about WIFI and video drivers (and the thought processes behind them) when I write that.
The situation is a lump of coal, but the amount of heat and pressure, one hopes, will get us do a diamond.
Yes, but will GPLv3 allow you to have an emergency, fail-safe ROM, without providing a way for the FNG (that's me) to b0rk it?
Given the seller, the buyer, and the marketplace in between, the whole argument centers around control of the market.
On the one hand, you have the monopolists whow want to destroy the market,
And on the other are these on the other end who want to destroy the market, and usher in some purported paradise.
While I support the FSF, it is my hope that the tension will resolve in a way that respects the spectrum of motives driving human use of use technology. We can't reasonably privilege any one side of the situation.
The part where the extremes feel the need to label the opposition, throwing out accusations like "communist" or "unethical" is where they reveal they've overstepped themselves.
The GPLv2 stands on its own as a monument to common sense.
Its going to become another pawn issue in the Ultra-Manly U.S. Pride game
Your coin is well taken; the US needs to recover some of that Teddy Rooseveltian soft-spokenness.
The flip side of that coin is the European situation.
While I own no firearms, I'll cheerfully start building an arsenal to make ESR envious before I see my country go the European route.
If anything positive emerges, it will be a drive towards IPv6.
For example, (since I forgot to log in the first time on this thread), the US invented the Internet.
The US chose to make it free and open, and this is a Good Thing.
The attitude of the rest of the world that the US is somehow false for choosing to manage it carefully, rather than just hand it over to, say, Kofi Anan and his *cough* able *cough* UN team, smells of a full diaper to me.
No one has prevented the rest of the world from devising its own protocol and implementing it.
Go ahead!
If the energy wasted whining about "those guys are evil because they won't give us their toys" were usefully diverted to accomplishing something, then global warming, world hunger, and the inability of the mainstream media to report facts would have long since been solved.
OK, I'll admit the last problem cited is insoluable. Please do not blame me for dreaming.
Ok, so the syntax was standardized.
XML says little of the semantics. This isn't evil in and of itself. The way it was marketed as a silver bullet, even though the semantic holes|canyons|abysses stretch wide, explains the backlash.
What's good about XML, and I used to go to some government working groups about it, is that by calling everything "human readable text", there was much participation from people who otherwise wouldn't budge.
The bad news, in the government case, is that homo bureaucratus realized that free transfer of information among agencies would mean a migration of the logic from people-ware to software. Realizing the ensuing threat to the rice bowls, the whole working group collapses in semantic wars. Shall we use attributes or nest entities? and so on.
Once again, technology fails to overcome behavioral problems.
What will succeed XML as a soteriological technology? Rails?
My point being that, if we want to do maintenance to the codebase, let's go ahead and branch formally.
Pussyfooting around would draw out the process, and any hairsplitting and legalese generated would be used to do something completely sick and wrong that feels good to some minority, and then we'd all look back and say "Wow, that Electoral College thing looked good at the time, but the dumb ideas that followed sure turned out to have all the appeal of a cancerous, bleeding ulcer. Would that we had kept to the existing process, rather than delving into hacks."
Well, you'd need some clever engineering.
No, it would never work. Better to stick to circuit-switched networks and proprietary licenses. Other possibilities are sheer madness.
But how hard is it to put the passport in an absorbent sleeve?
And, for added juice, an additional transmitter in the absorbent sleeve announcing that you're CowboyNeal! Who says the era of Cowboy Diplomacy is over?
Slashdot Mirror
Very much a personal opinion, but I don't see how my understanding of what it means to be alive would be enhanced by a movie based upon an incestuous relationship.
My sister, who doesn't resemble me much, lived with me for a few years before we both married.
A gabby neighbor, whom neither of us knew well, thought we were an item.
Thus, I could foresee a comedy based upon what might have appeared an incestuous relationship, where the lesson is that you should straighten out the facts first, and gossip less. Could be a real hoot, in the right hands.
A variation on this might be adopted siblings who fall in love, and have to jump through some hoops to work things out.
A love story with a geneaological twist, where the lovers are cousins, and things are about to fall apart, but they are revealed to be sufficiently distant, and we have some reactionary busy-bodies as antagonists, could be OK.
But the deep-seated taboo against inbreeding is there for a reason, I agree with it, and wouldn't sit through a flick trying to argue "it felt good, so it must have been justified".
No, their idea that "people are teh st00p3d" is what's out.
Movies with: actual plots, decent acting, and good taste will always be in fashion.
actual plots means that it's OK to require the viewer to pay attention. Tired, formulaic vehicles are exactly that.
decent acting probably means load-shedding the big names and going for some undiscovered talent.
good taste means that, while we require a hint of the human capacity for evil to understand why the villian is the villian, we aren't really interested in wallowing in the evil. Lynch/Tarentino will always have their fan base, and I'm not advocating censorship here, just letting you know that "less is more". Expanding on that, less emphasis on potty mouth and hormones would also enhance their dramatic value. Finally, stories rooted in sexual confusion are of no interest whatsoever.
Summarizing: movies with some didactic value, not just "chewing gum for the mind", are what is needed.
Neither have I, since a glance at the first draft.
In defense of RMS, flexibility
a) isn't simple, and
b) hasn't historically helped much, and I'm thinking about WIFI and video drivers (and the thought processes behind them) when I write that.
The situation is a lump of coal, but the amount of heat and pressure, one hopes, will get us do a diamond.
Yes, but will GPLv3 allow you to have an emergency, fail-safe ROM, without providing a way for the FNG (that's me) to b0rk it?
Given the seller, the buyer, and the marketplace in between, the whole argument centers around control of the market.
On the one hand, you have the monopolists whow want to destroy the market,
And on the other are these on the other end who want to destroy the market, and usher in some purported paradise.
While I support the FSF, it is my hope that the tension will resolve in a way that respects the spectrum of motives driving human use of use technology. We can't reasonably privilege any one side of the situation.
The part where the extremes feel the need to label the opposition, throwing out accusations like "communist" or "unethical" is where they reveal they've overstepped themselves.
The GPLv2 stands on its own as a monument to common sense.
graphviz might also be a way to go, and it's unchained.
<your emacs joke here>
The flip side of that coin is the European situation.
While I own no firearms, I'll cheerfully start building an arsenal to make ESR envious before I see my country go the European route.
If anything positive emerges, it will be a drive towards IPv6.
For example, (since I forgot to log in the first time on this thread), the US invented the Internet.
The US chose to make it free and open, and this is a Good Thing.
The attitude of the rest of the world that the US is somehow false for choosing to manage it carefully, rather than just hand it over to, say, Kofi Anan and his *cough* able *cough* UN team, smells of a full diaper to me.
No one has prevented the rest of the world from devising its own protocol and implementing it.
Go ahead!
If the energy wasted whining about "those guys are evil because they won't give us their toys" were usefully diverted to accomplishing something, then global warming, world hunger, and the inability of the mainstream media to report facts would have long since been solved.
OK, I'll admit the last problem cited is insoluable. Please do not blame me for dreaming.
These three words sum up the difference between free and proprietary software.
I'll admit that sometimes it's nice to manage the iceberg from just the tip, but among the bits of knowledge of "those who know" are two things:
a) sometimes you really have to get below the waterline and check out the iceberg, and
b) the habit of knowing how to get below the waterline is a survival mechanism worth cultivating.
Ignorance is both bliss and a grave.
Ok, so the syntax was standardized.
XML says little of the semantics. This isn't evil in and of itself. The way it was marketed as a silver bullet, even though the semantic holes|canyons|abysses stretch wide, explains the backlash.
What's good about XML, and I used to go to some government working groups about it, is that by calling everything "human readable text", there was much participation from people who otherwise wouldn't budge.
The bad news, in the government case, is that homo bureaucratus realized that free transfer of information among agencies would mean a migration of the logic from people-ware to software. Realizing the ensuing threat to the rice bowls, the whole working group collapses in semantic wars. Shall we use attributes or nest entities? and so on.
Once again, technology fails to overcome behavioral problems.
What will succeed XML as a soteriological technology? Rails?
You mean this stuff I've been quaffing for years is bogus? Piss!
My point being that, if we want to do maintenance to the codebase, let's go ahead and branch formally.
Pussyfooting around would draw out the process, and any hairsplitting and legalese generated would be used to do something completely sick and wrong that feels good to some minority, and then we'd all look back and say "Wow, that Electoral College thing looked good at the time, but the dumb ideas that followed sure turned out to have all the appeal of a cancerous, bleeding ulcer. Would that we had kept to the existing process, rather than delving into hacks."
Buy two when they come out.
These soul-sucking proprietary vendors can piss off.
If we want to change the Constitution, the procedure exists, and affords suitable prohibition of bad ideas.
Setting up an end-around will only weaken the sanctity of the document.
Peering into the future, the subsequent election of CowboyNeal ought to be a sufficient caution for us all.
Dude, space was already at a premium for the better talks. I daresay they need to consider space ahead of advertising.
Well, you'd need some clever engineering.
No, it would never work. Better to stick to circuit-switched networks and proprietary licenses. Other possibilities are sheer madness.
Hm. PV=nRT, right?
Why not have a compressor somewhere removed from the thing you're trying to refrigerate?
With the right engineering/business model, that work could come from people on exercise bikes.
Attack power generation, fat, and unemployment problems in parallel.
This idea is too good to work in practice.
I've liked previous releases, but, as I boot 'Doze less and less, I'm wondering if they'll release GNU/Linux compatible versions.
Granted, marketing in stores probably won't be realistic, but how about straight from the company?
pleonasm
It was actually useful for the editors to go through an article and lift a little signal out of the noise.
I, for one, feel there should be more of this sort of actual editing going on in slashdotland.
But how hard is it to put the passport in an absorbent sleeve?
And, for added juice, an additional transmitter in the absorbent sleeve announcing that you're CowboyNeal! Who says the era of Cowboy Diplomacy is over?
I'd settle for Alan Cox on YouTube.
Somehow...I find myself wishing that sounded less...hmmm...
Your argument would mean that a Mazda RX8 is zippier than a BMW Z4, just based on the highest integer value in the product name.
While the dumb-as-a-post users you refer to certainly exist, they are not in any majority.
...your .Net solution also locks you into x86 chip architectures.
Performance so often comes at the expense of flexibility.
Given a requirement to work nicely across arbitrary hardware platforms with 'Doze, how will you do this? Emulation? Sorry about that performance...
Certainly, if you're starting from scratch, homogeneous is the way to go, but sometimes you're no' so lucky.
Because this retarded locking nonsense has all of the appeal of region-coded DVDs.
Paraphrasing Paul radically: "I never wanted to be a thug until you laid these rules on me." (Romans 7)