And make sure the DNA runs on Linux. Then it'll be immune to radiation altogether.
Unlike Microsoft.DNA, which creates its own radiation and actively seeks to corrupt and destroy other DNA... haw haw... haw...
Wow, a video game based on a fifteen year old Japanese franchise with a small and extraordinarily dedicated fan base? How can an idea like this possibly go wrong? I can just see the positive review, flowing in by the hundreds, telling us "yes, it DOES do the movie justice!"
I don't see what's so great about this Opera gesture system. I've been trying to throw a fireball on those banner ads for the last hour and I still can't get it to work. Needs some bugs worked out if you ask me.
Incidentally, I actually tried that God-awful bit of software (briefly), and the "information" you're taken to consists entirely of this:
Click on the word "Tibet"
Shop for "Tibet" at nbci.com!
Shop for "Tibet" at movies.nbci.com!
Shop for "Tibet" at tv.nbci.com!
Shop for "Tibet" at nickel-plated-sissy-pistols.nbci.com!
Then way down at the bottom: a dictionary.com button and maybe a thesaurus.com link. Yes, that certainly was a lot of information. Thanks, red-haired lady!
I guess, in retrospect, I shouldn't have been surprised -- why would anyone at NBCi develop this if it wasn't essentially a pop-up ad? But somehow, in my naivete, I thought "information" would mean something I could actually use... ah, youth.
Re:American Television - Killed by commerce
on
15 Minutes
·
· Score: 1
Well, I enjoyed the Matrix personally, so I put it a cut above most of the swill that ends up on serial television. Not that I think The Matrix is freakin' Crime and Punishment, but it's also not Jerry Springer IMHO.
Re:American Television - Killed by commerce
on
15 Minutes
·
· Score: 1
"Besides, the low quality of US TV is pushing people into computer entertainment, which is good for everyone but a TV exec."
Which of course has resulted in such top-flight computer games as Who Wants to Beat Up a Millionaire, Deer Hunter and Barbie Fashion Designer. Soon computer entertainment will be the same ol' cesspool.
Makes me want to paraphrase Agent Smith's monologue in The Matrix. "Media execs are a disease. You move into an entertainment medium and you reproduce... and you keep reproducing until every resource has been consumed... and then you move on..."
Re:Haven't seen the movie, probably won't...
on
15 Minutes
·
· Score: 1
"Seriously, it seems very hypocritical, making a movie condemning violence in the media by... making a violent movie. It makes about as much sense as the apologists for Natural Born Killers."
That's an interesting point. I ran up against a similar issue when watching Fight Club with a friend. He found the movie seriously lacking because, as he put it, "it's an anti-capitalist, anti-consumer movie that cost fifty million dollars." The question I really wanted to ask him -- I'm sad I didn't at the time -- is, at what dollar value does it become acceptable to make an anti-consumer movie? Ten million? Ten thousand? Ten bucks? Is the message okay if the movie tanks at the box office? Is the message automatically invalidated if the movie is a commercial success? Can, in fact, an anti-consumer movie ever be made at all under these criteria?
The same question can go for this film. Can you make a movie condemning violence without featuring any violence? Is the movie a success if you feel sickened by it? Is it a failure if you're completely desensitized to it? At what level of violence is an "anti-violent" movie going to be acceptable, and where does it go over the line into hypocrisy?
I watched Natural Born Killers and was mostly nauseated, not only because of the constant, repetitive violence, but because it was such a poorly made film. If Stone intended to send a message about desensitizing violence by inflicting it on his audience, he succeeded with flying colors in my book. On the other hand, if he intended to make his "protagonists" into sympathetic, or somehow heroic, characters (which is the feeling I got from the film), I think it was a dismal failure.
If the film had been completely devoid of violence, I'm not sure the same message would have gotten across. I'd like to see a filmmaker try to do so, though I'm not certain how such an endeavor would look.
Unfortunately, I haven't yet seen this film (15 minutes), so I can't speak to that.
Star War MMORPG. That'll be neat. I can see it now... somewhere in a galaxy far, far away...
NE1 NO WHER I CAN FIND SOME POONTANG
fags suk
hi how is everyone LOL i am fine LOL
+17 blaster for sale msg me plz
hi leia228whatever wanna fuk?
boobies
I spend a tremendous amount of money on music. My CD collection has grown so large that storing them all has become a problem. I've ripped a fraction of my collection to my computer for convenient listening, and I'm running low on hard drive space.
I also use Napster, albeit infrequently. Almost 100% of the time it's to get some old song from my teenage years, or something that's out of print and rare. In both cases, the song is something that I wouldn't pay money for: I wouldn't go buy the fifteen year old album to get a single song, nor would I throw down for some crappy compilations disc, nor am I going to spend hundreds of dollars looking for that rare cut.
If Napster didn't exist, I would probably just hum the song to myself once every few months and then forget about it. But removing Napster from the picture isn't going to get the RIAA, or anyone else, any of my money. I have no more intention of going to spend money on the stuff I'm downloading for free, even if every single avenue of getting it for free were denied to me.
So that, and the fact that the RIAA still gets hundreds of dollars from me a year, leaves me with little to no guilt about the affair. I feel about as bad as if I had taped a song off the radio fifteen years ago and were listening to it again today -- which is to say, not bad at all.
That's just me. I have no doubt my reasons for using Napster are different from a lot of other users.
I can practically guarantee that should CmdrTaco post such a story, you would get no less than five to ten posts correcting CmdrTaco's grammar, two posts telling him to "open the source," and at least six asking if this was really news for nerds or stuff that matters.
Add in four or five goatsex links, eight "first posts," and you've got about twenty to thirty posts right there.... all of them offtopic.
Never mind when people actually start talking -about- the content...
Re:Again, what this is about..
on
The Pledge
·
· Score: 2
Pardon my tone, but who the hell are you to tsk-tsk at Slashdot readers and tell them what will "make the topic work better" and what won't? If you lack so much confidence in your own reviews, either try proofreading them (eliminating a few personal pronouns would be a good place to start) or just don't post them. But for God's sake, have enough pride in your work to let it stand on its own merits, without getting on your high horse and trying to dictate how you think people should respond to it.
If you really want to render the flamers, lamers, and "adolescent chest-thumpers" irrelevant, just ignore them -- set your threshold a little higher and go on with your life, stay on topic, and (if you will pardon my language) quit your bitching. Getting on your pedestal and crowing about how inferior they all are compared to you (and your coolly intellectual prose, which -never- gives way to passion, right?) doesn't make you look any better, believe me.
I'd like to add that I'm not making this post because "you are JonKatz and I disagree on that basis alone." I'm making it because your high-handed attitude nauseates me. I have no grudge against your regular articles; I've read a good potion of them, and have no quarrel, with their content or with you personally. By all means, write your articles, say what you like, but don't tell your readers how to respond to it. If people want to flame you and insult you, that's their business, just as how I choose to respond to you (and your article) is mine. Choosing to insult and condescend them first with a "shame on you" finger-wagging isn't the solution.
I'm sure this will come in mighty handy when some guy needs to drive his pregnant wife to the hospital, or needs to catch a plane, or the like.... brilliant.
Man, I can't wait for MoOIII. I really look forward to unfairly comparing it to its predecessor, bitching about how it's not like before, and pining endlessly for playing the original on my 386. I'm chomping at the bit to carp about "graphics at the expense of gameplay" and carp at the fact that it's dumbed down for kids... not like in my generation, where you had to be a Rhodes scholar just to figure out how to play!
...which is the bastardized version of the mechanical adding machine, which is the bastardized version of the abacus, which is the bastardized version of two sticks rubbed together to make fire...
Stephenson rates fine with me as an author, but I'd hate to see his stuff on the big screen. Stephenson's appeal lies in the wit and charm with which he brings his characters to life, and Hollywood movies, in general (especially science fiction) have all the cleverness of a recently poleaxed steer. Please, God, no Neal Stephenson movies.
Foundation might translate fairly well as a mini-series, but I'd hate to see it as a movie -- especially the first book, which takes fifty-year leaps of time with regularity. You'd have to have three different sets of main characters, and Hari Seldon would appear for all of ten minutes before he dies off and spend the rest of the movie being talked about in hushed tones. Frankly, I'm not sure I'd want to see that in movie form. As a miniseries... a definite maybe.
Well, whatever you do, please make sure you judge it based on knee-jerk assumptions about CGI and NOT on any merit the movie itself might contain. Also be sure to dismiss it as "just CGI" when the time comes.
"Attention: Page Creators, INC ceased to operate, and has been moved to Trinity Host LLC since December 27, 2000. However, a back-up version of Page Creators Site can be found at http://www.pagecreators.net/secure/BACKUP_AS_OF_12 2700/"
"Trinity Host, LLC?
This site looks remarkably similar to the famous Page Creators, INC, even the Customer Raves are similar (at least one of them is the same, the author can only remember one because the same customer has joined to the authors' victims list) and both companies share the same toll-free number 1-877-336-4472 (Of course, nobody answers this phone). The author was told that PageCreators' clients now belong to this company (LLC, Page Creators probably needs this). The hosting package is also very similar. It is too early to draw any conclusion yet because this site is not even complete, but we are going to watch this company."
Imagine you have a mathematician. Let's say he's got an IQ of 250 and demonstrates unbelievable genius in mathematics, except that he keeps calculating the sum of 2 and 2 as 5. Then, when people call him on this, he shrugs it off as "not a big deal" and refuses to have someone edit or correct this error, because anyone who notices it is just being "anal".
If you're a writer, language is the medium in which you work, and you should have a basic grasp of it. The difference between "its" and "it's" is hardly rocket science, and no, I don't think it's too much to ask that a semi-professional writer know the difference.
"I'm not sure I'd trust my mission critical apps to a company that can't even afford to give it's flagship OS its own domain name."
And I'm not sure I'd trust my mission critical apps to someone who doesn't know the difference between "its" and "it's". Second grade grammar. Master it. Then let's talk about who's stupid and who isn't.
Oh, hey, the W3 recommended it! I wonder what impact this will have on how Netscape and IE put together their browsers... hmm... well they've been pretty top-flight in sticking to spec so far, haven't they? I imagine they'll be about as compatible as they have so far, which is to say, very freakin' little.
Slashdot Mirror
And make sure the DNA runs on Linux. Then it'll be immune to radiation altogether. Unlike Microsoft .DNA, which creates its own radiation and actively seeks to corrupt and destroy other DNA... haw haw... haw...
Wow, a video game based on a fifteen year old Japanese franchise with a small and extraordinarily dedicated fan base? How can an idea like this possibly go wrong? I can just see the positive review, flowing in by the hundreds, telling us "yes, it DOES do the movie justice!"
I don't see what's so great about this Opera gesture system. I've been trying to throw a fireball on those banner ads for the last hour and I still can't get it to work. Needs some bugs worked out if you ask me.
Incidentally, I actually tried that God-awful bit of software (briefly), and the "information" you're taken to consists entirely of this:
Click on the word "Tibet"
Shop for "Tibet" at nbci.com!
Shop for "Tibet" at movies.nbci.com!
Shop for "Tibet" at tv.nbci.com!
Shop for "Tibet" at nickel-plated-sissy-pistols.nbci.com!
Then way down at the bottom: a dictionary.com button and maybe a thesaurus.com link. Yes, that certainly was a lot of information. Thanks, red-haired lady!
I guess, in retrospect, I shouldn't have been surprised -- why would anyone at NBCi develop this if it wasn't essentially a pop-up ad? But somehow, in my naivete, I thought "information" would mean something I could actually use... ah, youth.
Well, I enjoyed the Matrix personally, so I put it a cut above most of the swill that ends up on serial television. Not that I think The Matrix is freakin' Crime and Punishment, but it's also not Jerry Springer IMHO.
Which of course has resulted in such top-flight computer games as Who Wants to Beat Up a Millionaire, Deer Hunter and Barbie Fashion Designer. Soon computer entertainment will be the same ol' cesspool.
Makes me want to paraphrase Agent Smith's monologue in The Matrix. "Media execs are a disease. You move into an entertainment medium and you reproduce... and you keep reproducing until every resource has been consumed... and then you move on..."
"Seriously, it seems very hypocritical, making a movie condemning violence in the media by... making a violent movie. It makes about as much sense as the apologists for Natural Born Killers."
That's an interesting point. I ran up against a similar issue when watching Fight Club with a friend. He found the movie seriously lacking because, as he put it, "it's an anti-capitalist, anti-consumer movie that cost fifty million dollars." The question I really wanted to ask him -- I'm sad I didn't at the time -- is, at what dollar value does it become acceptable to make an anti-consumer movie? Ten million? Ten thousand? Ten bucks? Is the message okay if the movie tanks at the box office? Is the message automatically invalidated if the movie is a commercial success? Can, in fact, an anti-consumer movie ever be made at all under these criteria?
The same question can go for this film. Can you make a movie condemning violence without featuring any violence? Is the movie a success if you feel sickened by it? Is it a failure if you're completely desensitized to it? At what level of violence is an "anti-violent" movie going to be acceptable, and where does it go over the line into hypocrisy?
I watched Natural Born Killers and was mostly nauseated, not only because of the constant, repetitive violence, but because it was such a poorly made film. If Stone intended to send a message about desensitizing violence by inflicting it on his audience, he succeeded with flying colors in my book. On the other hand, if he intended to make his "protagonists" into sympathetic, or somehow heroic, characters (which is the feeling I got from the film), I think it was a dismal failure.
If the film had been completely devoid of violence, I'm not sure the same message would have gotten across. I'd like to see a filmmaker try to do so, though I'm not certain how such an endeavor would look.
Unfortunately, I haven't yet seen this film (15 minutes), so I can't speak to that.
Star War MMORPG. That'll be neat. I can see it now... somewhere in a galaxy far, far away...
NE1 NO WHER I CAN FIND SOME POONTANG
fags suk
hi how is everyone LOL i am fine LOL
+17 blaster for sale msg me plz
hi leia228whatever wanna fuk?
boobies
I'm breathless with anticipation.
I spend a tremendous amount of money on music. My CD collection has grown so large that storing them all has become a problem. I've ripped a fraction of my collection to my computer for convenient listening, and I'm running low on hard drive space.
I also use Napster, albeit infrequently. Almost 100% of the time it's to get some old song from my teenage years, or something that's out of print and rare. In both cases, the song is something that I wouldn't pay money for: I wouldn't go buy the fifteen year old album to get a single song, nor would I throw down for some crappy compilations disc, nor am I going to spend hundreds of dollars looking for that rare cut.
If Napster didn't exist, I would probably just hum the song to myself once every few months and then forget about it. But removing Napster from the picture isn't going to get the RIAA, or anyone else, any of my money. I have no more intention of going to spend money on the stuff I'm downloading for free, even if every single avenue of getting it for free were denied to me.
So that, and the fact that the RIAA still gets hundreds of dollars from me a year, leaves me with little to no guilt about the affair. I feel about as bad as if I had taped a song off the radio fifteen years ago and were listening to it again today -- which is to say, not bad at all.
That's just me. I have no doubt my reasons for using Napster are different from a lot of other users.
I can practically guarantee that should CmdrTaco post such a story, you would get no less than five to ten posts correcting CmdrTaco's grammar, two posts telling him to "open the source," and at least six asking if this was really news for nerds or stuff that matters.
Add in four or five goatsex links, eight "first posts," and you've got about twenty to thirty posts right there.... all of them offtopic.
Never mind when people actually start talking -about- the content...
Pardon my tone, but who the hell are you to tsk-tsk at Slashdot readers and tell them what will "make the topic work better" and what won't? If you lack so much confidence in your own reviews, either try proofreading them (eliminating a few personal pronouns would be a good place to start) or just don't post them. But for God's sake, have enough pride in your work to let it stand on its own merits, without getting on your high horse and trying to dictate how you think people should respond to it.
If you really want to render the flamers, lamers, and "adolescent chest-thumpers" irrelevant, just ignore them -- set your threshold a little higher and go on with your life, stay on topic, and (if you will pardon my language) quit your bitching. Getting on your pedestal and crowing about how inferior they all are compared to you (and your coolly intellectual prose, which -never- gives way to passion, right?) doesn't make you look any better, believe me.
I'd like to add that I'm not making this post because "you are JonKatz and I disagree on that basis alone." I'm making it because your high-handed attitude nauseates me. I have no grudge against your regular articles; I've read a good potion of them, and have no quarrel, with their content or with you personally. By all means, write your articles, say what you like, but don't tell your readers how to respond to it. If people want to flame you and insult you, that's their business, just as how I choose to respond to you (and your article) is mine. Choosing to insult and condescend them first with a "shame on you" finger-wagging isn't the solution.
If they're going to make an override button, why even build the system? People are just going to use the overrides all the time.
"Yeah, officer, I had a medical emergency... I'm hypoglycemic, had to get to Burger King right away for that shake or I'd die..."
I'm sure this will come in mighty handy when some guy needs to drive his pregnant wife to the hospital, or needs to catch a plane, or the like.... brilliant.
Man, I can't wait for MoOIII. I really look forward to unfairly comparing it to its predecessor, bitching about how it's not like before, and pining endlessly for playing the original on my 386. I'm chomping at the bit to carp about "graphics at the expense of gameplay" and carp at the fact that it's dumbed down for kids... not like in my generation, where you had to be a Rhodes scholar just to figure out how to play!
I'm stoked.
...which is the bastardized version of the mechanical adding machine, which is the bastardized version of the abacus, which is the bastardized version of two sticks rubbed together to make fire...
Stephenson rates fine with me as an author, but I'd hate to see his stuff on the big screen. Stephenson's appeal lies in the wit and charm with which he brings his characters to life, and Hollywood movies, in general (especially science fiction) have all the cleverness of a recently poleaxed steer. Please, God, no Neal Stephenson movies.
Foundation might translate fairly well as a mini-series, but I'd hate to see it as a movie -- especially the first book, which takes fifty-year leaps of time with regularity. You'd have to have three different sets of main characters, and Hari Seldon would appear for all of ten minutes before he dies off and spend the rest of the movie being talked about in hushed tones. Frankly, I'm not sure I'd want to see that in movie form. As a miniseries... a definite maybe.
Well, whatever you do, please make sure you judge it based on knee-jerk assumptions about CGI and NOT on any merit the movie itself might contain. Also be sure to dismiss it as "just CGI" when the time comes.
"Attention: Page Creators, INC ceased to operate, and has been moved to Trinity Host LLC since December 27, 2000. However, a back-up version of Page Creators Site can be found at http://www.pagecreators.net/secure/BACKUP_AS_OF_12 2700/"
http://www.trinityhost.com/
"Trinity Host, LLC? This site looks remarkably similar to the famous Page Creators, INC, even the Customer Raves are similar (at least one of them is the same, the author can only remember one because the same customer has joined to the authors' victims list) and both companies share the same toll-free number 1-877-336-4472 (Of course, nobody answers this phone). The author was told that PageCreators' clients now belong to this company (LLC, Page Creators probably needs this). The hosting package is also very similar. It is too early to draw any conclusion yet because this site is not even complete, but we are going to watch this company."
Maybe this one should get /.ed too. heh.
See, now I just feel like a sorry old shithead for even pointing it out.
Oh, illegal! Well, that'll stop those big companies right in their tracks, won't it?
If you're a writer, language is the medium in which you work, and you should have a basic grasp of it. The difference between "its" and "it's" is hardly rocket science, and no, I don't think it's too much to ask that a semi-professional writer know the difference.
"I'm not sure I'd trust my mission critical apps to a company that can't even afford to give it's flagship OS its own domain name." And I'm not sure I'd trust my mission critical apps to someone who doesn't know the difference between "its" and "it's". Second grade grammar. Master it. Then let's talk about who's stupid and who isn't.
Oh, hey, the W3 recommended it! I wonder what impact this will have on how Netscape and IE put together their browsers... hmm... well they've been pretty top-flight in sticking to spec so far, haven't they? I imagine they'll be about as compatible as they have so far, which is to say, very freakin' little.
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0051337
7th Voyage of Sinbad, The (1958)