maybe you would, maybe you wouldn't. The standard American heuristic of "who do i sue?" is to sue the person with the deepest pockets, if thats the security agency your lawyer would tell you to sue them. So why in this particular case would we think that the biggest pay-off would be to blame NASA? The only way that would pay off would be if you were in a position to get funds earmarked for NASA that congress would now be reluctant to hand over to them. Some people (in gov't) don't really like NASA and are quick to point out it's errors whenever they come up. Oddly enough, many of these people also like handing out money to Lcokheed Martin for black military projects (sorry for sounding sort of conspiracy paranoid).
"Indeed, the whole development of flight is a pretty suspicious business anyhow."
Yeah, but look how many times thats come up independently. Flight has developed in insects, mammals (bats), birds (obviously), and probably a few others i'm not aware of. I know there were winged dinosaurs, but i'm not sure if they were gliders or fliers.
"there were the beginnings of visual organs in most early creatures, and it is not unreasonable to assume that Coelentrates (jellies and anemones), vertebrates and cephalopods had a common ancestor capable of light/dark perception"
I'm by no means a student of biology, but i seem to recall that the fundamental difference between the evolution of cephalopod and vertebrate eyes is that the vertebrates evolved from nerve cells while the cephalopods evolved from skin cells (i might be wrong though). I'm pretty sure this would mean that they didn't have a common visual ancestor.
You didn't steal anything, but hired people in good faith that they would fulfill a contractual agreement and generally behave in an ethical manner--clearly they are at fault. I doubt you would have much luck suing yourself for compensation of grievances, but suing the security agency would most certainly be succesful, unless they hire Johnny Cochrane or something like that. In almost any other situation this is how the world would see it, but because its NASA they're supposed to know better, huh?--whatever. Its just a big gov't agency with dicey funding that doesn't have congress backing them up for crazy useless things like moon landings anymore, so its hard to lure the best and brightest at gov't wages to do projects the world doesn't really give a crap about anymore. If they could actually pull off something like a Mars landing it would reinvigorate interest in the agency, more than the int'l space station is now.
yeah that does sound fairly likely. Most of what i know about inheritance comes from c++ and java (heh heh). I was just trying to think of a way to say why i thought the claim of finding a single specimen of a supposedly feathered reptile was pretty thin evidence to say anything about the true origin of birds. But you know, a scientist would never make any sort of unfounded claims about the amazing earth shattering highly fundable signifigance of their research, so i'm sure if i knew more about this fossil i'd be in complete agreement that birds aren't descended from dinosaurs.
Just because this scientist thinks feathers are too complicated to evolve twice doesn't mean they didn't. Something as complicated as an eye has independently evolved in both vertebrates and cephalopods, there is no common ancestor to the 2 that had eyes. Cephalopod eyes might not be too impressive in slugs but an octopus has a very advanced eye quite similar to vertebrates. What is being described here is a trait from an ancestor of dinosaurs which is also a trait that has been ascribed to a descendent of dinosaurs. A recessive trait from an ancestor manifest in a descendent does not seem exactly impossible to me. There just doesn't seem to be anywhere near enough evidence yet to say that birds definitely are or aren't descended from dinosaurs, there just seems to be enough data to prove that feathers have been around a long time.
I think you might be confused over what digital means, its not a specification for an electric wave. "A digital system is a set of positive and reliable techniques (methods, devices) for producing and reidentifying tokens, or configurations of tokens, from some prespecified set of types" (from "Artificial Intelligence", Haugeland) A positive technique is one that can succeed absolutely. You can write something in sloppy handwriting, but i can still (potentially) succeed absolutely in reading what it is that you have written. The potentially is important, because a digital system is not required to be reliable, just that it is possible to work absolutely correct. The mechanics of how a brain can read arbitrary handwriting (or any number of things we do everyday) is undoubtedly analog, but some systems within the brain are digital. Writing a post for slashdot is analog, i cannot "absolutely succeed" in putting my words together in an intelligible way that says everything a post should. But the act of posting a post is digital, i can succeed absolutely by pressing this little submit button down here, which i will do....now
After reading this article, i guess i do sort of want one of these monitors, when they're the price of flat panels. But then at that point you have to see if this 3D junk would end up giving you a headache if you tried using it as your regular monitor all day. If it does turn out to cause headaches they might as well keep the price high because its only going to see use as a novelty at arcades and a visualization aide in science and industry
My vision of hell:
Being locked in a room with "Evil" and "KillerG", the gangsta geek doodz. Hey yo, yo! We gotz the forties, now we can start codin proppa! Crank that "Thugz for Jesus" album while i'm hacking up the Visual Basic!
Re:bsd succumbing to the latest fad
on
Java 2 For BSD
·
· Score: 1
This whole post is just a joke, right?
"I was trained in Java in '92" Thats funny, Java just turned 5 a week or 2 ago. You must have gotten a hold of the beta-beta-beta version. But wait a minute, if you have been working/hating java for 8 long years now, i guess that means bsd isn't really "succumbing to the latest fad" does it?
"It's OO code is *horrible* and if anything I think it's actually getting *slower*." There are a few places where the OO is somewhat odd, but for the most part it is exemplary. Whip out the GoF's "Design Patterns", and then check out java.awt.* -- you'll be pleasantly surprised. The amount of time to invoke a method in java and a comparable function in C++ is about the same, the slowness you experience initially is the VM getting loaded (which is alleviated with more memory), but after that java works fine. This is why java has evolved away from short lived applets to applications and server middleware--where it doesn't matter if it takes 20 seconds to start as long as it works fine after that and can be moved to different platforms, like BSD.
"I wish everyone would wake up to the fact that the only workable way to be portable between two operating systems is to have completely seperate code bases for each operating system" That is hogwash. Many people i know write java on their dopey win-box at home, then take it to work to run on solaris, win, and mac with not one damn change to any of the code. The only big "gotcha" with cross platform java is running applets in the browsers vm, but most people aren't writing java for applets anymore anyway.
"You save so much time in the long run that way" Huh? How?! By doing twice as much work you save time--that just doesn't make any damn sense. Irregardless of the language of choice a programmer is going to produce about the same amount of lines of code (based on how fast they can type, and how fast they think) So if i have to write N codebases for N OS's its going to take around N-1 more time to do than just writing it once, and it looks like now if its written in java you can run it in a few more "anywhere"s
I'm wondering if any physics geeks out there know if this would effect the 'ol problem of infinite energy required to move infinite mass as the mass approaches the speed of light. This sounds like another one of those places where physics equations "blow up" to infinite values, and this new theory purports to try and remove things like that. I really don't know much about physics, i'm just trying to figure out if this could work to the advantage of a sci-fi plot that required spacecraft to move from star to star in less than a few centuries.
A lot of people seem to be all enthusiastic about this new site, but why? If you want to use gimp why not just use it locally on your own computer so everything runs faster? The gimp has been ported to lots of OS's (i'm not sure if its on the mac, but they have good image programs anyway) so any casual user can use it without going to the trouble of changing their OS to linux, thats one of the little effects of posting the source. So if you only plan on tweaking images about 5 times a year, and you don't have gimp or something similar on your computer already, i guess this site would save you a little download time--otherwise it would make a whole lot more sense just to get the gimp.
As far as i can tell the aol webpage is done by some antigravity fanboy, Jean Louis Naudin. The person who actually came up with all this crap is Fran De Aquino from Maranhao State University, Brazil. He has his own webpage at: http://www.elo.com.br/~deaquino/ He apparently has presented stuff in journals, at least according to the good folks at los alamos: http://eprints.lanl.gov/cgi-bin/w3vdkhgw?qryRDAD2_ .g_;phys-9904018 The references cite that he's been in the Electric Spacecraft Journal, i have no idea what sort of a publication this is though, it could be a trashy magazine about UFO abductions or what not parading as a journal, i'm not too sure.
I'm by no means an iridium buff, but i do seem to recall a story about how one of the major costs (after the initial satellite launch) would be the periodic replacement of the satellites that decayed out of orbit and crashed. The reason why you could get a direct link to these satellites was because they were in a pretty low orbit, they need constant adjustment to remain in there low orbit but are eventually doomed to a fiery death. This low orbit was also the reason why they had to have so many satellites to have a global network, the pesky earth would get in the way of line of sight communication. How in the heck is some band of geeks going to figure out how to raise the money to keep the sats that are up in orbit, and get new ones up there every couple of years to maintain the network? They're not, thats how...
It seems to me that the free market has already proved there is NO demand for some dorky looking handheld satellite uplink thingy--so if you don't need to reach a satellite by some handheld then there is a whole slew of standard satellites you can reach, with a good-old-fashioned satellite dish. I've never done anything like this, but a quick look over at the lair of ham radio geeks seems to indicate a lot of other people are.
Every time I've pointed out how i thought an 'offtopic' troll comment was actually original and funny (its rare, but it happens) i've always gotten a -1 for paying attention to the expressions of free speech delivered by the 40 year old virgins posting crap here. But now, score:3 for pointing out an onion article. HAW HAW! (my best Nelson Muntz impression in ASCII) This PROVES anyone with enough spare time to moderate has just got to be on the pipe. I'm only killing time now to write this because the #@!! server for/. keeps hanging and this is as far down the page as i can see...
Oh yeah--I'll submit another "slash style creative writing page" someone has started, i think its called freshmeat or something like that.
Sweet jesus you're a long winded bastard! This thing goes on for like 5 pages or something! I will give you credit though for the one line: "Cripes, I've been arrested for Statuetory rape" after all that Natalie Portman turning into a statue fantasy stuff--probably best not to try and over-analyze that too long. All in all about as interesting as this "Science" article about multics...
good lord, you really have no idea what your talking about do you?
if you have some java applet (not on a webpage, you've already downloaded the code, have it on disk, something like that) and you want to start it up without a browser type: appletviewer TheNameOfTheHtmlFileWithTheAppletTag Its been a while since i tried this, but i'm pretty sure this also works across a network, if your browser shy.
If you have a java application you don't need "java binaries" (like from TowerJ) you just need java byte code. Try typing something like: java TheNameOfMyDotClassFileWithAMainInIt and see what happens. Holy ShiT! A java program without some patch to the kernel and without turning linux into Win98 by using a web browser...
I'll agree that C++ is more mature, but there really isn't too much of a difference between the complexity of the 2 languages. Comparing the core API's between them might make C++ look more complex, but thats an API implementation issue not related to the difficulty of the actual language.
I have no idea at all where you got the idea that Java has some "inherent use of networking and such"--thats just flat out false. Java is no more network reliant than any other language, it just makes the possibility of connecting to networks a lot easier than most languages. I get the impression from your statement about using standalone programs that you think Java only exists as applets in web browsers, most Java coders stopped making applets a couple of years ago. I love Java but hate applets (never know what version of Java is going to be on the browser, if any, can't be sure how their classloader is going to work, etc.), Java does standalone programs just fine.
more take overs, eh? The first thing i thought when i heard this was that redhat had over extended themselves from just this sort of activity and needed the extra money just to keep going at their current pace. I'd be pretty surprised if Redhat could take over O'Reilly, Netscape(owned by people with $$), SGI, or Inprise--despite the current linux IPO buzz these companies have much more market proven businesses and would demand HUGE prices. Take away the stock market madness and its still pretty hard to turn a profit off of giving code away, i know i'm not very damn rich, but if Redhat could take over some business(es) that turned a profit off of more things than tech support it would put them in a much more stable position for the future--like next year when the suits stop giving a shit about linux IPOs and the next cash cow darling comes along.
If McDonalds came out with a new McShitwich 70s Classic Burger that they did a really good job on, they would still be McDonalds and they would still suck. Jim Carrey is still Jim Carrey, ergo he still sucks. I am willing to forgive crimes against society way before crimes against culture. People go to prison for smoking a little pot because they're hurting society in some vague way, yet movies like The Cable Guy are OK? What! I don't think I'd want to issue jail time (but i might make an exception for everyone involved in Show Girls, shudder) but there should be excessive fines raised against all the stupid people involved in the making of crimes against culture, to discourage any further similar activity. The money raised could go to the NEA or something.
I'm not joking, i'm serious here! I think Whoopi Goldberg should be made to pay out of her own pocket for damages inflicted on global culture for those Sister Act movies. Seeing her on Hollywood Squares is a small step towards justice, but it just doesn't go far enough. The crimes of Jim Carrey are possibly even greater, I would be willing to forgive him if he donated his proceeds from Man on the Moon towards improving the arts in the US (sorry rest of the world, we need it the most!) and promised to never make another movie similar to Ace Ventura. But thats not too likely to happen, so I don't think its too likely that i'm going to be acknowledging the "greatness of Jim Carrey" any time soon.
This is just the most slanted, misguided quote ever:
"Man In The Moon" may be the best holiday movie of the year so far, even though Jim Carrey is already much more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman, the man he portrays.
Jim Carrey has made more movies and more $$ but he is by no *NO* means more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman. Andy was a genius that will be remembered for generations to come, like Charlie Chaplin. Jim Carrey will be quickly forgotten as an icon of a very stupid age in media, gone the way of the Tony Danza's of this world.
I believe i've found this guys webpage, unless there is another lizard man out there. He apparently now goes by the name Spidergod5. Heres the URL: http://members.aol.com/spidergod5/index.html
Slashdot Mirror
maybe you would, maybe you wouldn't. The standard American heuristic of "who do i sue?" is to sue the person with the deepest pockets, if thats the security agency your lawyer would tell you to sue them.
So why in this particular case would we think that the biggest pay-off would be to blame NASA? The only way that would pay off would be if you were in a position to get funds earmarked for NASA that congress would now be reluctant to hand over to them. Some people (in gov't) don't really like NASA and are quick to point out it's errors whenever they come up. Oddly enough, many of these people also like handing out money to Lcokheed Martin for black military projects (sorry for sounding sort of conspiracy paranoid).
"Indeed, the whole development of flight is a pretty suspicious business anyhow."
Yeah, but look how many times thats come up independently. Flight has developed in insects, mammals (bats), birds (obviously), and probably a few others i'm not aware of. I know there were winged dinosaurs, but i'm not sure if they were gliders or fliers.
"there were the beginnings of visual organs in most early creatures, and it is not unreasonable to assume that Coelentrates (jellies and anemones), vertebrates and cephalopods had a common ancestor capable of light/dark perception"
I'm by no means a student of biology, but i seem to recall that the fundamental difference between the evolution of cephalopod and vertebrate eyes is that the vertebrates evolved from nerve cells while the cephalopods evolved from skin cells (i might be wrong though). I'm pretty sure this would mean that they didn't have a common visual ancestor.
You didn't steal anything, but hired people in good faith that they would fulfill a contractual agreement and generally behave in an ethical manner--clearly they are at fault. I doubt you would have much luck suing yourself for compensation of grievances, but suing the security agency would most certainly be succesful, unless they hire Johnny Cochrane or something like that.
In almost any other situation this is how the world would see it, but because its NASA they're supposed to know better, huh?--whatever. Its just a big gov't agency with dicey funding that doesn't have congress backing them up for crazy useless things like moon landings anymore, so its hard to lure the best and brightest at gov't wages to do projects the world doesn't really give a crap about anymore. If they could actually pull off something like a Mars landing it would reinvigorate interest in the agency, more than the int'l space station is now.
yeah that does sound fairly likely. Most of what i know about inheritance comes from c++ and java (heh heh). I was just trying to think of a way to say why i thought the claim of finding a single specimen of a supposedly feathered reptile was pretty thin evidence to say anything about the true origin of birds. But you know, a scientist would never make any sort of unfounded claims about the amazing earth shattering highly fundable signifigance of their research, so i'm sure if i knew more about this fossil i'd be in complete agreement that birds aren't descended from dinosaurs.
Just because this scientist thinks feathers are too complicated to evolve twice doesn't mean they didn't. Something as complicated as an eye has independently evolved in both vertebrates and cephalopods, there is no common ancestor to the 2 that had eyes. Cephalopod eyes might not be too impressive in slugs but an octopus has a very advanced eye quite similar to vertebrates. What is being described here is a trait from an ancestor of dinosaurs which is also a trait that has been ascribed to a descendent of dinosaurs. A recessive trait from an ancestor manifest in a descendent does not seem exactly impossible to me. There just doesn't seem to be anywhere near enough evidence yet to say that birds definitely are or aren't descended from dinosaurs, there just seems to be enough data to prove that feathers have been around a long time.
The register is running a pretty amusing article on .NET
http://www.theregister.co.uk/cont ent/1/11538.htmlI think you might be confused over what digital means, its not a specification for an electric wave.
"A digital system is a set of positive and reliable techniques (methods, devices) for producing and reidentifying tokens, or configurations of tokens, from some prespecified set of types" (from "Artificial Intelligence", Haugeland)
A positive technique is one that can succeed absolutely. You can write something in sloppy handwriting, but i can still (potentially) succeed absolutely in reading what it is that you have written. The potentially is important, because a digital system is not required to be reliable, just that it is possible to work absolutely correct. The mechanics of how a brain can read arbitrary handwriting (or any number of things we do everyday) is undoubtedly analog, but some systems within the brain are digital. Writing a post for slashdot is analog, i cannot "absolutely succeed" in putting my words together in an intelligible way that says everything a post should. But the act of posting a post is digital, i can succeed absolutely by pressing this little submit button down here, which i will do....now
After reading this article, i guess i do sort of want one of these monitors, when they're the price of flat panels. But then at that point you have to see if this 3D junk would end up giving you a headache if you tried using it as your regular monitor all day. If it does turn out to cause headaches they might as well keep the price high because its only going to see use as a novelty at arcades and a visualization aide in science and industry
My vision of hell:
Being locked in a room with "Evil" and "KillerG", the gangsta geek doodz. Hey yo, yo! We gotz the forties, now we can start codin proppa! Crank that "Thugz for Jesus" album while i'm hacking up the Visual Basic!
This whole post is just a joke, right?
"I was trained in Java in '92"
Thats funny, Java just turned 5 a week or 2 ago. You must have gotten a hold of the beta-beta-beta version. But wait a minute, if you have been working/hating java for 8 long years now, i guess that means bsd isn't really "succumbing to the latest fad" does it?
"It's OO code is *horrible* and if anything I think it's actually getting *slower*."
There are a few places where the OO is somewhat odd, but for the most part it is exemplary. Whip out the GoF's "Design Patterns", and then check out java.awt.* -- you'll be pleasantly surprised. The amount of time to invoke a method in java and a comparable function in C++ is about the same, the slowness you experience initially is the VM getting loaded (which is alleviated with more memory), but after that java works fine. This is why java has evolved away from short lived applets to applications and server middleware--where it doesn't matter if it takes 20 seconds to start as long as it works fine after that and can be moved to different platforms, like BSD.
"I wish everyone would wake up to the fact that the only workable way to be portable between two operating systems is to have completely seperate code bases for each operating system"
That is hogwash. Many people i know write java on their dopey win-box at home, then take it to work to run on solaris, win, and mac with not one damn change to any of the code. The only big "gotcha" with cross platform java is running applets in the browsers vm, but most people aren't writing java for applets anymore anyway.
"You save so much time in the long run that way"
Huh? How?! By doing twice as much work you save time--that just doesn't make any damn sense. Irregardless of the language of choice a programmer is going to produce about the same amount of lines of code (based on how fast they can type, and how fast they think) So if i have to write N codebases for N OS's its going to take around N-1 more time to do than just writing it once, and it looks like now if its written in java you can run it in a few more "anywhere"s
FUD! FUD!
I'm wondering if any physics geeks out there know if this would effect the 'ol problem of infinite energy required to move infinite mass as the mass approaches the speed of light. This sounds like another one of those places where physics equations "blow up" to infinite values, and this new theory purports to try and remove things like that.
I really don't know much about physics, i'm just trying to figure out if this could work to the advantage of a sci-fi plot that required spacecraft to move from star to star in less than a few centuries.
Actually, the character RMS is loosely based on Lazlo.
It was in december 11, 1998...back when they were popular /12/11/2338244.shtml
http://slashdot.org/articles/98
several times, in fact. I'm afraid the only use she sees for a computer is making the worlds most expensive virtual deck of cards to play solitaire.
A lot of people seem to be all enthusiastic about this new site, but why? If you want to use gimp why not just use it locally on your own computer so everything runs faster? The gimp has been ported to lots of OS's (i'm not sure if its on the mac, but they have good image programs anyway) so any casual user can use it without going to the trouble of changing their OS to linux, thats one of the little effects of posting the source. So if you only plan on tweaking images about 5 times a year, and you don't have gimp or something similar on your computer already, i guess this site would save you a little download time--otherwise it would make a whole lot more sense just to get the gimp.
As far as i can tell the aol webpage is done by some antigravity fanboy, Jean Louis Naudin. The person who actually came up with all this crap is Fran De Aquino from Maranhao State University, Brazil. He has his own webpage at:_ .g_;phys-9904018
http://www.elo.com.br/~deaquino/
He apparently has presented stuff in journals, at least according to the good folks at los alamos:
http://eprints.lanl.gov/cgi-bin/w3vdkhgw?qryRDAD2
The references cite that he's been in the Electric Spacecraft Journal, i have no idea what sort of a publication this is though, it could be a trashy magazine about UFO abductions or what not parading as a journal, i'm not too sure.
It seems to me that the free market has already proved there is NO demand for some dorky looking handheld satellite uplink thingy--so if you don't need to reach a satellite by some handheld then there is a whole slew of standard satellites you can reach, with a good-old-fashioned satellite dish. I've never done anything like this, but a quick look over at the lair of ham radio geeks seems to indicate a lot of other people are.
Every time I've pointed out how i thought an 'offtopic' troll comment was actually original and funny (its rare, but it happens) i've always gotten a -1 for paying attention to the expressions of free speech delivered by the 40 year old virgins posting crap here. But now, score:3 for pointing out an onion article. /. keeps hanging and this is as far down the page as i can see...
HAW HAW! (my best Nelson Muntz impression in ASCII)
This PROVES anyone with enough spare time to moderate has just got to be on the pipe. I'm only killing time now to write this because the #@!! server for
Oh yeah--I'll submit another "slash style creative writing page" someone has started, i think its called freshmeat or something like that.
Sweet jesus you're a long winded bastard! This thing goes on for like 5 pages or something! I will give you credit though for the one line:
"Cripes, I've been arrested for Statuetory rape"
after all that Natalie Portman turning into a statue fantasy stuff--probably best not to try and over-analyze that too long.
All in all about as interesting as this "Science" article about multics...
shouldn't that be:
"Look ma, no handle!"
good lord, you really have no idea what your talking about do you?
if you have some java applet (not on a webpage, you've already downloaded the code, have it on disk, something like that) and you want to start it up without a browser type:
appletviewer TheNameOfTheHtmlFileWithTheAppletTag
Its been a while since i tried this, but i'm pretty sure this also works across a network, if your browser shy.
If you have a java application you don't need "java binaries" (like from TowerJ) you just need java byte code. Try typing something like:
java TheNameOfMyDotClassFileWithAMainInIt
and see what happens. Holy ShiT! A java program without some patch to the kernel and without turning linux into Win98 by using a web browser...
I'll agree that C++ is more mature, but there really isn't too much of a difference between the complexity of the 2 languages. Comparing the core API's between them might make C++ look more complex, but thats an API implementation issue not related to the difficulty of the actual language.
I have no idea at all where you got the idea that Java has some "inherent use of networking and such"--thats just flat out false. Java is no more network reliant than any other language, it just makes the possibility of connecting to networks a lot easier than most languages. I get the impression from your statement about using standalone programs that you think Java only exists as applets in web browsers, most Java coders stopped making applets a couple of years ago. I love Java but hate applets (never know what version of Java is going to be on the browser, if any, can't be sure how their classloader is going to work, etc.), Java does standalone programs just fine.
more take overs, eh?
The first thing i thought when i heard this was that redhat had over extended themselves from just this sort of activity and needed the extra money just to keep going at their current pace. I'd be pretty surprised if Redhat could take over O'Reilly, Netscape(owned by people with $$), SGI, or Inprise--despite the current linux IPO buzz these companies have much more market proven businesses and would demand HUGE prices. Take away the stock market madness and its still pretty hard to turn a profit off of giving code away, i know i'm not very damn rich, but if Redhat could take over some business(es) that turned a profit off of more things than tech support it would put them in a much more stable position for the future--like next year when the suits stop giving a shit about linux IPOs and the next cash cow darling comes along.
No, you shut up--I admit nothing!!!
If McDonalds came out with a new McShitwich 70s Classic Burger that they did a really good job on, they would still be McDonalds and they would still suck. Jim Carrey is still Jim Carrey, ergo he still sucks. I am willing to forgive crimes against society way before crimes against culture. People go to prison for smoking a little pot because they're hurting society in some vague way, yet movies like The Cable Guy are OK? What! I don't think I'd want to issue jail time (but i might make an exception for everyone involved in Show Girls, shudder) but there should be excessive fines raised against all the stupid people involved in the making of crimes against culture, to discourage any further similar activity. The money raised could go to the NEA or something.
I'm not joking, i'm serious here! I think Whoopi Goldberg should be made to pay out of her own pocket for damages inflicted on global culture for those Sister Act movies. Seeing her on Hollywood Squares is a small step towards justice, but it just doesn't go far enough. The crimes of Jim Carrey are possibly even greater, I would be willing to forgive him if he donated his proceeds from Man on the Moon towards improving the arts in the US (sorry rest of the world, we need it the most!) and promised to never make another movie similar to Ace Ventura. But thats not too likely to happen, so I don't think its too likely that i'm going to be acknowledging the "greatness of Jim Carrey" any time soon.
This is just the most slanted, misguided quote ever:
"Man In The Moon" may be the best holiday movie of the year so far, even though Jim Carrey is already much more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman, the man he portrays.
Jim Carrey has made more movies and more $$ but he is by no *NO* means more of a comedic legend than Andy Kaufman. Andy was a genius that will be remembered for generations to come, like Charlie Chaplin. Jim Carrey will be quickly forgotten as an icon of a very stupid age in media, gone the way of the Tony Danza's of this world.
I believe i've found this guys webpage, unless there is another lizard man out there. He apparently now goes by the name Spidergod5. Heres the URL:
http://members.aol.com/spidergod5/index.html