I gave up on Kubuntu a version or two ago and have been running regular No-K Ubuntu. I'd like to go back, but not until I hear good reviews. Yours is #1...
All through the late 90's and 2000's Microsoft had a tendency to waste more and more screen real-estate on stupid chrome and other pointless UI cruft in each successive version of their apps. I thought they'd gotten past that by now. I guess I was wrong. I use IE only so I can use MS Project Web Access at work, which is so horrible on and of itself that it distracts me from any aspects of the browser I might not like by its sheer volume of crappiness.
It's like not notice a mosquito bite because there's a wolverine gnawing on your leg.
I don't think our reliance on silicone technology is all that important. I mean in Hollywood maybe, but most of us do fine without it, well, except for maybe weather-stripping.
If this were as advanced as some of you guys are making it out to be, blindness, deafness, and paralysis would be a thing of the past. We're still a long way from Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom.
Yeah, for one thing the clerk at 7-11 totally refused to let me pay in whuffie.
Your definition is irrelevant. My definition is irrelevant. The only definition that matters in this conversation is that of the people in charge of green-lighting these projects. If they think "Serenity" bombed, then that means it is more likely their hiring of Whedon to write "The Avengers" is, as someone stated above, a ploy to attract attention without making a huge financial commitment, and less likely because they think Whedon's writing will make it a successful movie.
Having said that, I think your definition is reasonable and the folks who actually _made_ the movie, as opposed to those who financed it, would probably agree with you.
Hollywood is first and foremost a business. If creativity happens, if someone creates art, if people are inspired or awed by their product, it is simply a lucky side-effect. Almost every movie exec will be much happier to finance a movie that makes tens of millions of people slightly less bored for 90 minutes rather than a million people (or a hundred thousand, or ten thousand...) deeply moved.
We comic books fans have been lucky in that a lot of movies based on the genre in the 15 years or so have been quite good, but Hollywood is lazy and doesn't like to take risks and the moment they think comic book adaptations are less than on fire, we fans will be back out in the weeds like we were through most of the 70s and 80s (minus a few obvious exceptions).
Personally, I think Whedon would be a mixed bag as far as this movie is concerned. There are a lot of good things he could do for the movie, but also a lot of bad things. I actually stopped reading comics in the dark days of the early 90s and have had little or no interest in going back, so I can't comment on his comic book gig, but I am still very interested in the movies, and several the recent Marvel movies have been really excellent, and even some of the less-than-excellent ones (like the Fantastic 4 movies or Spider-man 3 were still a lot of fun).
And this points to a huge problem in IT departments, companies in general and our whole society. So much effort needs to be put into CYA activities, not because you're not doing your job right, but because you are liable to be subject to the whimsical judgement of stupid or ignorant people. Appearing to do the right thing is perceived as much more important that actually doing the right thing because failures of appearance tend to have much worse consequences. Look at Congress, 90% of what they do is so they appear to taking positive action on some issue, regardless of the effects it will have. And for them, it clearly works because they keep getting re-elected despite being the most consistently incompetent group of people drawing a salary in the U.S..
Thank you! I was waiting for someone to realize this. You saved me from having to point this out. You can link 2 toruses (i.e., 3D rings) and in doing so they do not intersect each other while linked, but would need to do so to get from non-linked to linked in 3D space. "Linking" 2D rings is a bad analogy because you can't have 2D rings that are linked without them intersecting each other. Putting one 2D ring inside the other is the proper analogy.
Works for me. My boss is my FB friend. He doesn't use it much, but I'm happy for anyone in the world to see anything I put anywhere. If I were to get in trouble for something I say online then it would only show that my employer is not someone I would want to continue working for.
And it's happened in the past. I once got blowback on an internal developer discussion list for saying something that should have been completely benign. I said that I very much liked a technology that the company was using, and I later got in trouble from an upper manager who was part of a faction that didn't like that technology and was looking to replace it. From that point on, I lost all respect for the upper management at that place. (And that was far from the only reason.) Management would read the list, but not participate, but when someone said something impolitic, there would be trouble. This was, in my opinion, the very definitions of arrogance and cowardice. Needless to say, upper management at this place was like dealing with autistic toddlers (and I've had a little experience with that).
by JonKatzTheSecond (63445274) on 20-03-18 22:01 (#815223905)
By season 14, Futurama seemed to outlive itself. Its humor was meant for the early years of the 2010s when the world was scared of global warming and still revered "Heroes" and "Lost" as the pinnacle of science fiction. When three-eyed omnivores and impoverished Jewish space lobsters were still 'hot' - and not in a weird way. It was a time when an old man could still dream of leading an army of mutant gorillas to global conquest, and maybe, just maybe it was possible (the U.S. still wasn't frozen over and Joe Biden hadn't developed his mighty telekinetic powers). A time when Seattle wasn't a gaping canyon and the Grand Canyon wasn't filled with coffee cups and flannel shirts, and the President still hadn't solved the "War on Terror" with a game of "Quarters" and two-falls-out-of-three Jell-O Wrestling, only to lead to tyrannical world domination by the Mormons. It was a simpler time. Futurama is as dead to me now as electric cheese and skeet shooting using Senators.
The key here is that you got three movies' worth of material (and more if you bought the extended editions when they came out). Each year, they delivered a "movie's worth" of content, which was certainly worth the price of the movie even though you weren't getting the whole thing.
Frankly, I don't see what the uproar is all about, _unless_ you weren't getting something you were led to believe, or it would be reasonable to expect you would get. Or if the game cannot be said to be complete without the extra content.
What different does it make if this extra content was done when the rest of the game was done, which seems to be a sticking point with some people? They obviously felt the extra content added value to the game and could be charged for, and that the whole shmear was worth $5 more than the original package. I don't see how any promises were broken, even implied ones. This kind of thing is done in the software industry all the time. And in fact, if you aren't talking about consumer software, it's probably more common than not.
You've got a good point, but you and me and everyone we know will be dead by then, so I have a hard time getting worked up about it. I blame our Congresswhores.
That must have been before NT 4.0 because I never had a problem doing that very thing. But wait. Did NTFS even exist before NT 4.0? Ah. Wikipedia says it was introduced with NT 3.1, which I never used, and I only used NT 3.5x briefly.
In any event that problem was solved a long time ago.
I don't imagine the poster does, but from personal experience, I can tell you that the phrase "yard Nazi" can often be appropriate.
Our HOA was being run by the proverbial yard Nazis for a couple years and it was not pleasant. These are the kind of people who love confrontation and lording their power over you for no other reason than because they can. Fortunately, they left and grown-ups took over. There hasn't been a problem since.
I think the idea of an HOA is ludicrous myself. As if we don't have enough government already, people willingly band together to produce more? But the neighborhood was otherwise exactly what we were looking for, the house was a really nice and a tremendous deal at the time (1998, shortly before prices nearly tripled), and the location was excellent.
All in all, it was a good decision to buy, but I would definitely consider _not_ having an HOA to be a plus.
Slashdot Mirror
I gave up on Kubuntu a version or two ago and have been running regular No-K Ubuntu. I'd like to go back, but not until I hear good reviews. Yours is #1...
All through the late 90's and 2000's Microsoft had a tendency to waste more and more screen real-estate on stupid chrome and other pointless UI cruft in each successive version of their apps. I thought they'd gotten past that by now. I guess I was wrong. I use IE only so I can use MS Project Web Access at work, which is so horrible on and of itself that it distracts me from any aspects of the browser I might not like by its sheer volume of crappiness.
It's like not notice a mosquito bite because there's a wolverine gnawing on your leg.
I don't think our reliance on silicone technology is all that important. I mean in Hollywood maybe, but most of us do fine without it, well, except for maybe weather-stripping.
How about "GIMP"? No, taken already? Then.... no.
If this were as advanced as some of you guys are making it out to be, blindness, deafness, and paralysis would be a thing of the past. We're still a long way from Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom.
Yeah, for one thing the clerk at 7-11 totally refused to let me pay in whuffie.
Yeah, but isn't that generally true in Real Life(TM) too?
When I drank before I was 21, the legal age was 18, you insensitive clod!
Regarding speeding and stop signs, I'll plead the fifth.
> Laws exist to make us criminals. We all are. We just get away with our crimes until we piss off the wrong people.
This is a very cynical view of what laws have become rather than what they should be. It's also right.
Your definition is irrelevant. My definition is irrelevant. The only definition that matters in this conversation is that of the people in charge of green-lighting these projects. If they think "Serenity" bombed, then that means it is more likely their hiring of Whedon to write "The Avengers" is, as someone stated above, a ploy to attract attention without making a huge financial commitment, and less likely because they think Whedon's writing will make it a successful movie.
Having said that, I think your definition is reasonable and the folks who actually _made_ the movie, as opposed to those who financed it, would probably agree with you.
Hollywood is first and foremost a business. If creativity happens, if someone creates art, if people are inspired or awed by their product, it is simply a lucky side-effect. Almost every movie exec will be much happier to finance a movie that makes tens of millions of people slightly less bored for 90 minutes rather than a million people (or a hundred thousand, or ten thousand...) deeply moved.
We comic books fans have been lucky in that a lot of movies based on the genre in the 15 years or so have been quite good, but Hollywood is lazy and doesn't like to take risks and the moment they think comic book adaptations are less than on fire, we fans will be back out in the weeds like we were through most of the 70s and 80s (minus a few obvious exceptions).
Personally, I think Whedon would be a mixed bag as far as this movie is concerned. There are a lot of good things he could do for the movie, but also a lot of bad things. I actually stopped reading comics in the dark days of the early 90s and have had little or no interest in going back, so I can't comment on his comic book gig, but I am still very interested in the movies, and several the recent Marvel movies have been really excellent, and even some of the less-than-excellent ones (like the Fantastic 4 movies or Spider-man 3 were still a lot of fun).
And this points to a huge problem in IT departments, companies in general and our whole society. So much effort needs to be put into CYA activities, not because you're not doing your job right, but because you are liable to be subject to the whimsical judgement of stupid or ignorant people. Appearing to do the right thing is perceived as much more important that actually doing the right thing because failures of appearance tend to have much worse consequences. Look at Congress, 90% of what they do is so they appear to taking positive action on some issue, regardless of the effects it will have. And for them, it clearly works because they keep getting re-elected despite being the most consistently incompetent group of people drawing a salary in the U.S..
has Lucas himself even had a non-Star Wars idea in the last few decades
Three words: Nuke the Fridge.
Thank you! I was waiting for someone to realize this. You saved me from having to point this out. You can link 2 toruses (i.e., 3D rings) and in doing so they do not intersect each other while linked, but would need to do so to get from non-linked to linked in 3D space. "Linking" 2D rings is a bad analogy because you can't have 2D rings that are linked without them intersecting each other. Putting one 2D ring inside the other is the proper analogy.
Ah, yes, the dystopian, but prophetic classic that starts with:
"It was a bright cold day in April, and the computers were all blue-screening..."
The Dunning-Kruger effect has been running this country for decades.
Works for me. My boss is my FB friend. He doesn't use it much, but I'm happy for anyone in the world to see anything I put anywhere. If I were to get in trouble for something I say online then it would only show that my employer is not someone I would want to continue working for.
And it's happened in the past. I once got blowback on an internal developer discussion list for saying something that should have been completely benign. I said that I very much liked a technology that the company was using, and I later got in trouble from an upper manager who was part of a faction that didn't like that technology and was looking to replace it. From that point on, I lost all respect for the upper management at that place. (And that was far from the only reason.) Management would read the list, but not participate, but when someone said something impolitic, there would be trouble. This was, in my opinion, the very definitions
of arrogance and cowardice. Needless to say, upper management at this place was like dealing with autistic toddlers (and I've had a little experience with that).
So if I don't tell the government I'm a white person they might get rid of white people?
But the Last Supper was on Thursday.
by JonKatzTheSecond (63445274) on 20-03-18 22:01 (#815223905)
By season 14, Futurama seemed to outlive itself. Its humor was meant for the early years of the 2010s when the world was scared of global warming and still revered "Heroes" and "Lost" as the pinnacle of science fiction. When three-eyed omnivores and impoverished Jewish space lobsters were still 'hot' - and not in a weird way. It was a time when an old man could still dream of leading an army of mutant gorillas to global conquest, and maybe, just maybe it was possible (the U.S. still wasn't frozen over and Joe Biden hadn't developed his mighty telekinetic powers). A time when Seattle wasn't a gaping canyon and the Grand Canyon wasn't filled with coffee cups and flannel shirts, and the President still hadn't solved the "War on Terror" with a game of "Quarters" and two-falls-out-of-three Jell-O Wrestling, only to lead to tyrannical world domination by the Mormons. It was a simpler time. Futurama is as dead to me now as electric cheese and skeet shooting using Senators.
The first time I read the headline I did parse it as CPAN and wondered what "footage" had to do with Perl.
The key here is that you got three movies' worth of material (and more if you bought the extended editions when they came out).
Each year, they delivered a "movie's worth" of content, which was certainly worth the price of the movie even though you weren't getting the whole thing.
Frankly, I don't see what the uproar is all about, _unless_ you weren't getting something you were led to believe, or it would be reasonable to expect you would get. Or if the game cannot be said to be complete without the extra content.
What different does it make if this extra content was done when the rest of the game was done, which seems to be a sticking point with some people? They obviously felt the extra content added value to the game and could be charged for, and that the whole shmear was worth $5 more than the original package. I don't see how any promises were broken, even implied ones. This kind of thing is done in the software industry all the time. And in fact, if you aren't talking about consumer software, it's probably more common than not.
You've got a good point, but you and me and everyone we know will be dead by then, so I have a hard time getting worked up about it.
I blame our Congresswhores.
+1 insightful, -1000 for misspelling "particle"
That must have been before NT 4.0 because I never had a problem doing that very thing. But wait. Did NTFS even exist before NT 4.0? Ah. Wikipedia says it was introduced with NT 3.1, which I never used, and I only used NT 3.5x briefly.
In any event that problem was solved a long time ago.
I don't imagine the poster does, but from personal experience, I can tell you that the phrase "yard Nazi" can often be appropriate.
Our HOA was being run by the proverbial yard Nazis for a couple years and it was not pleasant. These are the kind of people who love confrontation and lording their power over you for no other reason than because they can. Fortunately, they left and grown-ups took over. There hasn't been a problem since.
I think the idea of an HOA is ludicrous myself. As if we don't have enough government already, people willingly band together to produce more? But the neighborhood was otherwise exactly what we were looking for, the house was a really nice and a tremendous deal at the time (1998, shortly before prices nearly tripled), and the location was excellent.
All in all, it was a good decision to buy, but I would definitely consider _not_ having an HOA to be a plus.
The most common things people do when they are witnesses to someone committing an illegal activity is re-elect him.
I wish I could, but no matter how long I wait, it's always the present.