there is publicity for this car being left in the open to be stolen, so anyone in the area stealing cars that can pick up a newspaper is going to be on the lookout for it
Yeah, the cops are so incredibly stupid that they are going to put the exact same car on the front of the paper out to catch thieves.
Meanwhile, at a Dunkin' Donuts:
"Hey Steve, I just came up with an idea, I think the criminals have noticed our specific car, and we might need to move all of the electronics to A NEW CAR. That way they won't know that it is the rigged car."
Unfortunately, a lot of what you are saying is a flawed argument in response to LordNimon.
Someone asked if he was a psychologist to push his expertise.
I'll up it a little. My best friend is a psychiatrist (big distinction between the two) and he would tell you that LordNimon is absolutely correct about taking obsessions to the "next level." He's spoken to me several times about these kind of behaviors. Also, you'll find extremely few dissenting opinions on his answer among the medical community.
There have been plenty of case studies to back this up. I just can't point you in that direction, and my friend is not a/.er.
Yes. After we whittle it down, you and I are both correct. The hardest thing in the news business is not the resources, but the time.
Time, time, time. I just did a story about tax laws and they chopped the meat out of it for time so that we could add another relevant story. Was I pissed, hell yes. Did I think the other story was relevent? HELL YES. So I sucked it up and started whittling away.
Time is THE major difference between the media and a lot of other businesses in the world. Other businesses are not time constrained to the hilt. If you say that the plane will drop out of the sky if I don't get another week, then they give you another week. The world wants to know RIGHT FREAKING NOW.
My timetable is in minutes and seconds. Never hours or days. That is what I meant earlier when I said that many people could not mentally handle it. It is like shooting craps all day, but the difference is that your entire career rides on it... daily. Like I said, it is amazingly difficult. I've seen 35 year old men with money and no dependents quit their high end careers to get into the news game because it is interesting work and their dream to see all that we see, and flame out six weeks later. I'd say the turnover rate on starting employees is about 90 to 95%. It is the stress that really crawls up your ass.
That being said, I was the second in line to go to Afghanistan. Almost made it there. That is something no one else in the world gets to do unless you carry a rifle. And being in a crack house and the govenor's mansion in the same day is rather interesting, no other job can give me that.
I understand your concern about reporting the honest truth. And for the most part we (the collective media we) try our best to give it out, as soon as possible. We do give the truth. As we know it. But the truth we give is the truth of action, not the specifics that we cannot understand. You are a physicist. I have a great friend that is a MRI and elementary particles friend up at Northwestern that I cannot even understand anymore when he talks about his work.
If I did a story about physics I would royally screw it up. If you trieds to lay it out it would be impossible to explain. What would the public find out? Nothing. So we compress it so they don't turn the TV off when one thing comes up that they only have a passing interest in. Their reaction would be something like this.... "Hey, that's neato. Cool." Most info goes out the other ear, but it would stick to the physics enthusiasts and they would seek the specifics.
See, all I can really do is let the world know it is there. I may mess up a little but I generate some interest. When the phone is ringing, dinner is on the stove, the kids are crying, and the TV is blaring, the home audience is not going to get much about it with all of the distractions, but they will know something is happening, and that is what the news does.
Also, my job is on the line with anything I work on. My boss says, "you have one and a half minutes to tell it... make it good. At least make it interesting. Tell me one thing I didn't know about this story that I would be interested in."
That is the pressure of news. It is a curse for having a real interesting job.
Wow. this is totally against my rules to talk to ACs out there, but here goes.
I was surprised to learn that the questions in the interview are generally filmed after the answers. That was what really drove home to me what kind of presentation this really is.
First of all, most major news outlets like 20/20 don't do that. If they do, it is simply because it is that there are not enough crew members to go around or the location is bad for doing a two camera interview. This really doesn't change the answers, unless the journalist changes the question, which is of course, highly unethical. So really at the end of the day, there is little difference in my opinion.
I have personally heard them criticized by one guy they interviewed in a story on TWA flight 800 (& I saw the story afterwards.) In spite of everything he told them before, during, and after the interview, they carefully arranged their footage and commentary to paint him as a sort of whistleblower, and the FAA as being unresponsive to concerns about safety.
Frankly, I am not surprised about this. The Flight 800 story was so jacked up from the beginning that no reporter had a leg to stand on. Speculation flew wild. The FAA didn't really have much info until the parts were flung back together. That took months. People on the beach said, "Missile!" There was a person that said that it was hit by a meteorite on the national news. That my friend was one story. Thanks again for the snap judgement. The FAA wasn't talking enough BECASUE THEY WERE STUPID ABOUT IT (and I think they are much better about it now when they made it more of an overt policy to say straight up, "We don't know yet"), so the media went to people who thought they knew. That story was a complete cluster fuck. But if you blamed all of the media on one event, well, it is like blaming all of your engineering buddies (in different e'neering fields too) over the Space Shuttle Challenger Explosion and almost every plane crash, after all, it was engineers that designed the plane, if you start waving around the big finger of blame.
I am sorry your teacher or friend got burned.
Now, about you: I don't know anything about you, but I honestly can't see how you can "catch a pedophile" with your filming.
Once again this is an education in media. Yes we can. And I have literally called the cops on fleeing scumbags. I don't cuff 'em, but I do put them on camera, and I give away their positions and movements.
Did you know that there was an intel group that followed Chritiane Amanpour in the Gulf War? That is because we can slip in places without the smell of bacon on us. We are smarter than you think, and we are fighting for the best and most accurate news every day.
Catch a pedophile with a camera?
That was EXACTLY WHAT I WAS DOING, catching them. I was doing a story on the fact that the police department has known sex offenders that they don't keep tabs on living across the street from elementary schools. IF I DON'T CATCH IT ON TAPE, NOTHING GETS DONE. IF I DO, then they enforce the law that they have been soft on. Also, I try not to shoot pedophile houses, that does no good. I wait and go for the face. So when they go to someone else's neighborhood, he can't swap out faces like houses.
We pressure the police to do their job. Why? Because we have the power and knowhow. Just like E'neers pressure state and federal regualtory boards to make safety standards better, or pass a certain standard.
We go aftter the big fish though, because it is more important. You don't see a lot of crackdown on pot in the media, unless they find six bazillion pounds of it. It just doesn't change anything. But I do "push it" on laws that are important to children, and society as a whole.
Actually, cops come up to me all the time and say "good work, I've been bitching about all these years, and surprise! they just found the funding for it."
As a newsman, I have gone to college, studied hard, attended church, and done all of the other things that everyone else does.
Conversely, people think I eat my young. That I am an asshole instantly, and that I am lying to them all the time. Hmmmm... just like a cop or lawyer, perhaps.
Why most people say that the media is a nasty business is probably because we wouldn't be in someone else's business if it wasn't important. If it wasn't important, you would have little reaction to it. If it is really important, you usually have a nasty, highly emotional reaction to it. Considering most of us have precious little lock down on your thoughts or emotions, most bite the hand that feeds you the information that they didn't like.
Also. we're only human. And most have an idea that we have unlimited time, effort, money, and abilities to dig up their side of the story. No one can. All of life is relative. Truth is the most presious commodity in the world, and I fight for it. SO TAKE EVERYTHING RELATIVE. We are interdisciplinary... we are not an expert in any field other than writing or photography, so we might miss the subtleties of what you are saying.
I'll continue to try to be objective. Please note the strong emphasis on try, because the info comes fast (because this is the toughest job I have ever done, and frankly many people just can't mentally handle it), and it is not perfect. I will continue to keep it in my mind to be objective. That is a promise.
Whereas now, in the US journalists are disliked even more than politicians and lawyers. You guys have quite a challenge in restoring the public's faith in you.
Not even close. People like me just fine. People like the news just fine. It is a bitching outlet, though. Also, "you guys" lumps me.
People just want to know what is going on, and everyone is different. No person even looks at a story the same way. Once you see that, most of the criticisms melt away in a haze of agenda.
I'll dignify this to you although I shouldn't...
on
11 Things About Spider-Man
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Wow. If you were man or woman enough to actually use a monicker out here you could check my file and see that it hasn't changed one bit "anonymous coward."
Also, before you check out and decide to call me a scum sucker, you should ask me how many personal good stories that I have done to save people. Why I get apid so little to help people.
(This is an offtopic rant, but it is snap-judgement cocksuckers like that AC who are usually the ones that I have to get ballistic on, because they are the ones that tell me that I need "to get the hell out of our town" when I am asking for directions to a Child Cancer Telethon or a good story about human triumph.)
So here's a couple of points I would teach to anyone listening out there in slashdot land about the media business:
#1: It is exactly the "media scum" attitude hanging in people's mind that would make a person say scum-sucking scandal-shooter in the first place.
DID HE ASK IF I WAS OUT TRYING TO CATCH A PEDOPHILE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DAY? No, he just assumed it was scandal. Well, then, I suppose it wouldn't matter then, now would it. Unlenss you saw your children playing with said pedophile. Then you might have wanted to pay more attention instead of turning off the TV. I am not here to shoot scandal. I am here to keep the public informed.
It is that same kind of unbased, ridiculous, "media scum," "Geraldo asshole," "assume they are lying" attitude that makes a otherwise rational person try to attack me at something as benign as a street carnival.
PEOPLE THAT MAKE SNAP JUDGEMENTS AND HAUL OFF AND TRY TO BE SEAN PENN WITH THE MEDIA ARE THE REAL PROBLEM. I am just trying to get a few shots in. Not kill anyone or take away their freedoms, just take pictures. However, you would think that I was a criminal. Those that have the most to hide fear the camera the most, and subsequently act the most insane around me. They, for some reason, and on some unconscious level think that when I am pulling out a camera a block away that I am COMING FOR THEM SPECIFICALLY ABOUT SOMETHING TRIVIAL TWENTY YEARS AGO THAT THEY FEEL BAD ABOUT. Then they freak out. Then they threaten you with everything under the sun. Then they punch at me. I was just trying to cross the street.
#2: Nutbags love TV. Consequently, everyone who is mentally unbalanced doesn't walk, but sprints towards the camera, IMMEDIATELY. Then they act like a danger to themselves and others. I cannot help this.
#3: Everyone has an agenda. Period. The more aggressive they get, the more their bad past or real agenda shows. I'm not saying that the gorilla is in charge of the man, but I am saying that everyone has an agenda. It just might not be malicious like what the word "agenda" usually connotates.
Honestly, I don't eat my young. I am not a sub-human. I don't prey on misfortune. I spot problems and tell you about them. Unfortunately, I am not psychic and often spot problems immediately after misfortune. Once again, there is nothing I can do about it. Its the stupid nes that say I am a vulture.
Also, I am paid to get to the heart of controversial matters. I wouldn't be there if it as not somehow important.. unless of course you have a donkey that plays soccer or a waterskiing squirrel.:)
If you notice the only people in the world that consistently blame the media are politicians. If I am the fish that cleans the tank of humanity, then they are my dinner.
I'd like to say that I am not a scandal hound, and I am not a scum sucker, and whoever wrote that note to jab at a stranger needs to write to others like it was their mother that was going to read it.
REASON NUMBER #1.
I am a news videographer (and granted, that is a different designation than commercial photographers) but there is no need to sign a release form for me to shoot a building. But then again, my TV station, like all TV stations has an attorney on retainer for just such an occasion, when someone decides to tempt fate and the Bill of Rights.
That is bullshit. It is a public place. Because there is no release needed then there is no cause to sue over a lack of release. That category falls under public and private view. By the way, any place that doesn't say "NO TRESSPASSING" can be considered public view, within reasonable doubt.
I have punks and even regular people tell me constantly that they will "sue my ass to high heaven for invading their personal privacy." It usually involves their business shortchanging someone or they have done something horrible to others. So I quote me some law on 'em. (I then proceed to explain in tiny detail why they can waste their money on a First Amendment Violation. They usually will tell me that they are going to beat me and take my camera. I casually tell them that I am taping them, if they touch me it is battery and I will report them, camera theft is felony theft on the order of grand theft, and as a professional photographer my material is easily entered into evidence. And then say, "Now if you HADN'T COMMITTED A CRIME, well, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE.")
As a news photographer, I can shoot a camera inside a window showing you holding your dog hostage or whatever as long as a reasonable expectation of privacy is maintained. Reasonable privacy is really broad, at least for the news people.
I dare say there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in Times Square. Probably less of an expectation than ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD. So asking permission to shoot advertising or exterior televisions by its nature is hilarious, due to its intent.
REASON #2:
Spider-Man is a work of fiction. Period. There is no requirement of any member of the film industry to maintain any continuity or realism whatsoever. That is totally a free speech issue. I am surprised that the MPAA hasn't "gone ape shit" on them yet. Even if it was a "documentary" they still don't have a leg to stand on. It is a private work. A private work that they can alter at will, without someone meddling with it.
Never before has there ever been a rule that an artistic work (yes, many of you will argue that a big budget hollywood film is art) has any "must carry" rules to it. Good luck, assholes. You're going to need it. I personally would countersue immediately for "unnecessary usage" of the court system. Maybe there is an Anti-SLAPP out there that can help on this one?
Besides, the blueprints of a building might be copy protected, but you are not going to be infringing to see it in the real freaking world, nor is anyone charging you to see it.
I hope whoever thought this plan up dies a horrible, horrible death and goes straight to a fiery pit. When they get there, they have taxis back over him for eternity under a giant jumbotron that keeps showing "the best of" episodes of She's the Sherriff starring Suzanne Sommers.
Re:Well, I would agree with most of that there...
on
Space Wars
·
· Score: 2
Lying down to fire (sorry, in the rest of the world we understand the distinction between a verb and a past participle)
I'm sorry. I write a whole page, and you nail me on a grammatical mistake... you fucking snob. APPARENTLY I AM A FOOL BECAUSE MY QUICKLY WRITTEN POST HAD A PROBLEM WITH A PAST PARTICIPLE. I'M SORRY.
I guess I was out on the firing range with my M1 Garand friends learning about guns when that lesson came up. Or maybe I was in Boy Scouts, trying to build a bow out of brances and tree bark. Really. I'm serious. Americans still teach very young children survival skills. As a newsman I do stories all the time about how country kids get lost in the woods and wander out days later, and never really look hungry. So laugh all you want at the USA. We're tough little bastards, even at age eight.
The actual point that I was trying to make in the US military are not de facto idiots, like everyone in the world thinks we are to bolster their troop morale. Let the Chinese make bong-rip theories all day. Please don't fall into the trap of constant USA bashing. Then I don't have to constantly defend our foreign-seeming decisions, that are perfectly logical under our reasoning. I assume by your solid grammar that you are from the UK. I would never bash your country. Matter of fact I like the UK a lot. Don't think I don't respect other countries. National sovereignity is what the US is about. How many nations have we tried to get democrtacy into? How much food aid goes to help them out? Please don't give our rivals any more credit than you give the United States. Especially not China, they kill their citizens if they disagree with the government. I just don't see how a lot of paper theory with no back up is going to assure Chinese victory. When you bash, you give credit to our enemies, too. Those enemies are not the Chinese people, they are the Chinese Regime that kills the Chinese people, and all other groups like them.
I don't see a lot of my Jewish friends USA bashing. They know what regimes can do. That is what true friendship is about. If any of our rivals had established themselves as world superpowers,you would have had to get a form double rubber stamped to get enough freedom to use the toilet on a train. However, you don't. And your government that you are sitting under right now is not interested in racial purity, society control, or religious uprising. THAT MY FRIEND IS WHY WE HAVE A BIG ASS ARMY.
In regard to your gun argument: I was under the impression that these weapons were used under different circumstances. One is a rifle, the other a submachinegun.
Unfortunately, that is an enourmous destinction. A submachinegun is made for close fighting, so overall length is extremely imposrtant. Rifles are designed for accuracy more than submachine guns. And currently the military is looking for a replacement, but they are discouraging bullpup rifles. Dig up some gun buddies like me to see what I mean. I have fired an MP5 flash surpressed on a SWAT range. I have fired all sorts of subs, assault rifles (except the AK, which pisses me off that I haven't yet) and even up to the Winchester 700 series police sniper rifles, and I almost got my hands on a McMillan (sp?) sniper rifle one afternoon.
Everyone knows the US has the most advanced military force in the world, and most people realise that this does not always guarantee victory. Why are you getting so uptight trying to prove it does? Is a country's worth measured by its firepower?
No. Its worth is measured (at least on the American yard stick) in its ability to save others from tyranny and oppression. For the most part, the USA has done a upstanding job in that respect.
We can't save the world. But at least we are trying whether you like it or not. If you live in a country like France, Germany, the UK, or nations with similar designations to NATO, you are doing the same thing. Protest all you want. Progress is coming. The citizens want it. They want to decide what is best for them. It is not really all about corporations like most/. nutties argue.
Well, I would agree with most of that there...
on
Space Wars
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Our enemies will move around our military power. Take a looksee at this translation [die.net] of two Chinese colonels writing about our Desert War dominance, and how to circumvent and defeat the US in spite of military superiority.
I believe that you think that some of these weapons are useless or easily circumvented, and most of the rest of the world sees our army as full of "toys."
Toys indeed, if you definition includes things that burrow in ground and blow you up inside rock, track you with your cell phone, passive radar that just listens and never transmits, and all sorts of other nefarious things like that. They are not toys. IF OTHER NATIONS THINK THAT A SMARTBOMB IS A TOY, THEN THEY ARE OUT OF THEIR MINDS. They are up for a rude awakening.
Why is it a small, voluntary service US force always seems to run over a full blown, military controlled, conscripted nation in days? Its got to be the toys! Yeah right.
That is a childish justification for the fact that there are people that have put in billions (yes, freaking billions!) into not only developing these weapons, but coming up with the concepts and designing systems for their best implementation.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS ALL ABOUT THE RESEARCH EDGE. Go ahead, thwart it, Version 2.0 just shipped last week. See if you can crack it now.
Good example-
the trusty M-16 and its variants. Reliable. Cheap. Useful. All other modern nations have gone to guns with bullpup designs (clip is behind the trigger for more streamlined, futuristic look), because they say they are better balanced, shorter designs for guns. Sounds like a great idea. I thought so. They look cool in movies.
Until you learn that you have to not only take the 'dangerous end' of the weapon away from the enemy, but you have to take your trigger hand off of the grip and trigger to reload it. It takes two hands and more time. Also its nearly impossible to reload easily while laying down to fire, and soldiers do that A LOT. Also a bullpup exposes more head and shoulders around a corner when firing.
That idea has brought you such guns as the British SA 80. It looked and fired like it was made by Kenner. It had plastic parts. IT WAS EASILY OUTMATCHED BY A GOOD OL KALASHNIKOV.
Every arms manufacturer wants the M-16 contract, for obvious financial reasons. They hold competitions constantly and try every possible idea. The US military has tight, important standards FOR EVERYTHING. To think that there is a nation that can just up and exploit the weakness of the US tools in five minutes, is well, ridiculous and full of speculation. The difference? The US has not been speculating, they have been testing these things for decades even after they implement them. They know their holes.
If they research the M-16 so deeply and periodically, then what do they do with bleeding edge stuff?
I just don't see those Chinese Colonels reaching any new conclusions that we probably haven't a generation ago, and are actively trying to fix.
I was doing a reinstall of Win 98SE and putting all of my drivers on, getting a new update on my computer's video card.
Guess what? I was putting in my firewall when I noticed someone had already put in some damn.dll programs in while I was roaming for a good firewall on the net to install.
Doh!
So, is two hours a world record or what?
Needless to say, I had to reinstall the little demon OS, because you never know what you got. There was about 2 hours down the drain.
And yes, I know. I shouldn't be running wintendo. Forgive me, monsiegnor.
So who was the employee that got so ticked off at the company that he ratted out his employer to the RIAA? Is there a bounty now on piracy?
...because you know that someone within the company had to tell them. Otherwise the RIAA would have to break in to the corporation to their private servers to even know that.
That would have almost worked. But it should have read like this:
If you would have said that "almost all of the kids in the candy store with a 'specific type of pocket that encourages stealing candy' and were actually, specifically using the pocket to steal candy"... then I would have listened.
Sorry, but when you simplify the argument to something like that, you have to expect to get some real crap for trying to pull the wool over our eyes. If you stated something like it really is, instead of a crappy oversimplification, well, you realize that you have NO ARGUMENT WHATSOEVER.
Here's another great one like this:
"I've the glove does not fit, you must acquit."
Yeah, that also works when the gloves aren't frozen, they aren't of the tight fitting driving variety, and the defendent doesn't have to try to put on stiff tight gloves while wearing rubber gloves beneath to not harm state's evidence.
Get a grip, and try to not justify stealing from a company that gives their customers a fair shake until they steal from it. REMEMBER IT WAS THE BNETD PEOPLE THAT ALLOWED PIRACY TO BE ACCEPTABLE, NOT BLIZZARD, DON'T MAKE BLIZZARD OUT TO BE A BUNCH OF BASTARDS.
You might be surprised how good US TV is compared to the rest of the world. Especially in journalism. Its that whole free press thing. Although I do like the BBC, of course, although they appear to look away from their own problems like everyone else.
Al Jazeera is probably biased as hell. CNN is biased, we all know that. As a newsman, I bet you just by what I have seen of Al Jazeera, that at least CNN makes more of a concerted effort to be less biased. That would be my take of it, but what would I know, I am only a video journalist for the local stations you despise 40+ hours a week.
Exactly. Maybe if the people in US goverment behaved this way we could be still seeing the Twin Towers in the NY skyscape.
Also, we might have seen the sham that is totalitarian communism and fascism in control of most of the world. Kuwait would be a territory of Iraq. The Jews would all be dead, or at least a slave race at best. Latin America would be a warlord's dream. Kings would all be in charge, and those kings would wage the sport of kings, WAR, all the time. The list goes on and on.
By that argument, if we didn't get involved with the Middle East, they would still be dust farmers watching the world march on without them... which IMHO is what they really want us to do, but resent the fact that they enjoy their Western toys, and aren't the big boys that they used to be centuries ago.
Besides, if Saudi Arabia could promote themselves as the preeminent force in the world, would they? Would any culture pass up the opportunity to be the world leader?
How much do you want to bet the poster came from a country that we pulled out of the fire in WWII? All of my friends parents died to save these whiny bastards, that bite the hands of the generation before who paid in full for their fredoms.
Russia just finished its second cross continental pipeline, so I would assume that they are going to be our friends in the oil business rather soon.
Besides, Russians want to move to the United States, not act nice, take our money, and secretly plan to blow it up. That is also a bonus.
Saudi Arabia will not make a bad move against us... other tha secretly spit on us in teh presence of other Arabians. When there are few leaders, they are extremely easy to find and get rid of. Their leaders are only interested in doing things that their religion would kill others for doing, namely chasing international tail, drinking, and living a life of excess that no "divine king" would ever want.
Saudi Arabia's may not be numbered in days or years, but the end of the corrupt kingdom is coming, they have only been this influential because of our influences. We can take those influences away if it gets too hot out there to deal with them. I guarantee that the end of their influence will come long before their oil runs out.
You know, I would just looove to talk about globalism as I know about every injustice in the world personally better than all of you. So I would like to say this... shame on you for not being so informed, not listening to me, and enjoying your lives.
I have important business to attend to. I have to be in front of a Starbucks in the next ten minutes to protest something so inconsequential that no one has ever heard of it. I invite you all to read my useless, over artistic leaflets that make no sense, invite you to feel bad about something, and then give you no solution. Come, share in my carefully crafted, over-thoughtful misery. DID I MENTION I'M AN ARTIST? Okay, I'm just artistic.
Sorry Katz, but no matter how many articles you write to get the punk rock chicks, you'll never be as "indy as me."
http://www.mcfrontalot.com/ Please note: MC Frontalot does not want you to go to his site.
Sounds grrrreat! WOW! This could change everything.
Oh, except the whole 'nanotech' thing.
Everytime I hear a phrase that says, "the process could be improved with nanotech," I immediately think about all of the people that throw up their arms and scream halleluia everytime someone says that they have made the next 'cold fusion.'
If they even speak the words nanotech or cold fusion, it is basically saying, "this is a good idea, but right now our discovery is complete bullshit. Yes, we're bullshitting you."
Some scientist says that some device would be better improved with nanotech.
I would have to respond with "WEEEEEL, for goodness sake, what invention wouldn't be improved with the uncanny abiltity to control every stinkin' molecule?"
You know, with that ability, I could live forever. Get it out of your head. It ain't going to happen. There are not going to be machines run throuhg your body that sweep out your diseases. We have those, they're called white blood cells. All this nanotech bull is great material for science fiction novels and movies. Its great brain candy to think about. I like good bull in my stories and movies. I, however, don't like it in the REAL STINKIN' WORLD, where people do REAL FREAKIN' SCIENCE.
I am going out on a limb, but on the surface this appears to NOT BE A LEGITIMATE STORY.
There are a few great moments several times in the ORIGINAL ROLERBALL where Jonathan E. is pounding his BIG SPIKED glove in anger at "corporate anthem" at the beginning of each game.
Funny thing is, the faces of the rollerballers show how incredibly lame and pointless these songs are.
Kinda like MY face when I read the soulless lyrics of thes horrible, crappy songs.
Slashdot Mirror
there is publicity for this car being left in the open to be stolen, so anyone in the area stealing cars that can pick up a newspaper is going to be on the lookout for it
Yeah, the cops are so incredibly stupid that they are going to put the exact same car on the front of the paper out to catch thieves.
Meanwhile, at a Dunkin' Donuts:
"Hey Steve, I just came up with an idea, I think the criminals have noticed our specific car, and we might need to move all of the electronics to A NEW CAR. That way they won't know that it is the rigged car."
"Buddy, you just made detective."
Mods?
Screw them, I've always seen myself as more of a rocker.
Also, I was never a fan of their big coats and silly little scooters.
Unfortunately, a lot of what you are saying is a flawed argument in response to LordNimon.
Someone asked if he was a psychologist to push his expertise.
I'll up it a little. My best friend is a psychiatrist (big distinction between the two) and he would tell you that LordNimon is absolutely correct about taking obsessions to the "next level." He's spoken to me several times about these kind of behaviors. Also, you'll find extremely few dissenting opinions on his answer among the medical community.
There have been plenty of case studies to back this up. I just can't point you in that direction, and my friend is not a
Yes. After we whittle it down, you and I are both correct. The hardest thing in the news business is not the resources, but the time.
Time, time, time. I just did a story about tax laws and they chopped the meat out of it for time so that we could add another relevant story. Was I pissed, hell yes. Did I think the other story was relevent? HELL YES. So I sucked it up and started whittling away.
Time is THE major difference between the media and a lot of other businesses in the world. Other businesses are not time constrained to the hilt. If you say that the plane will drop out of the sky if I don't get another week, then they give you another week. The world wants to know RIGHT FREAKING NOW.
My timetable is in minutes and seconds. Never hours or days. That is what I meant earlier when I said that many people could not mentally handle it. It is like shooting craps all day, but the difference is that your entire career rides on it... daily. Like I said, it is amazingly difficult. I've seen 35 year old men with money and no dependents quit their high end careers to get into the news game because it is interesting work and their dream to see all that we see, and flame out six weeks later. I'd say the turnover rate on starting employees is about 90 to 95%. It is the stress that really crawls up your ass.
That being said, I was the second in line to go to Afghanistan. Almost made it there. That is something no one else in the world gets to do unless you carry a rifle. And being in a crack house and the govenor's mansion in the same day is rather interesting, no other job can give me that.
I understand your concern about reporting the honest truth. And for the most part we (the collective media we) try our best to give it out, as soon as possible. We do give the truth. As we know it. But the truth we give is the truth of action, not the specifics that we cannot understand. You are a physicist. I have a great friend that is a MRI and elementary particles friend up at Northwestern that I cannot even understand anymore when he talks about his work.
If I did a story about physics I would royally screw it up. If you trieds to lay it out it would be impossible to explain. What would the public find out? Nothing. So we compress it so they don't turn the TV off when one thing comes up that they only have a passing interest in. Their reaction would be something like this.... "Hey, that's neato. Cool." Most info goes out the other ear, but it would stick to the physics enthusiasts and they would seek the specifics.
See, all I can really do is let the world know it is there. I may mess up a little but I generate some interest. When the phone is ringing, dinner is on the stove, the kids are crying, and the TV is blaring, the home audience is not going to get much about it with all of the distractions, but they will know something is happening, and that is what the news does.
Also, my job is on the line with anything I work on. My boss says, "you have one and a half minutes to tell it... make it good. At least make it interesting. Tell me one thing I didn't know about this story that I would be interested in."
That is the pressure of news. It is a curse for having a real interesting job.
Wow. this is totally against my rules to talk to ACs out there, but here goes.
I was surprised to learn that the questions in the interview are generally filmed after the answers. That was what really drove home to me what kind of presentation this really is.
First of all, most major news outlets like 20/20 don't do that. If they do, it is simply because it is that there are not enough crew members to go around or the location is bad for doing a two camera interview. This really doesn't change the answers, unless the journalist changes the question, which is of course, highly unethical. So really at the end of the day, there is little difference in my opinion.
I have personally heard them criticized by one guy they interviewed in a story on TWA flight 800 (& I saw the story afterwards.) In spite of everything he told them before, during, and after the interview, they carefully arranged their footage and commentary to paint him as a sort of whistleblower, and the FAA as being unresponsive to concerns about safety.
Frankly, I am not surprised about this. The Flight 800 story was so jacked up from the beginning that no reporter had a leg to stand on. Speculation flew wild. The FAA didn't really have much info until the parts were flung back together. That took months. People on the beach said, "Missile!" There was a person that said that it was hit by a meteorite on the national news. That my friend was one story. Thanks again for the snap judgement. The FAA wasn't talking enough BECASUE THEY WERE STUPID ABOUT IT (and I think they are much better about it now when they made it more of an overt policy to say straight up, "We don't know yet"), so the media went to people who thought they knew. That story was a complete cluster fuck. But if you blamed all of the media on one event, well, it is like blaming all of your engineering buddies (in different e'neering fields too) over the Space Shuttle Challenger Explosion and almost every plane crash, after all, it was engineers that designed the plane, if you start waving around the big finger of blame.
I am sorry your teacher or friend got burned.
Now, about you: I don't know anything about you, but I honestly can't see how you can "catch a pedophile" with your filming.
Once again this is an education in media. Yes we can. And I have literally called the cops on fleeing scumbags. I don't cuff 'em, but I do put them on camera, and I give away their positions and movements.
Did you know that there was an intel group that followed Chritiane Amanpour in the Gulf War? That is because we can slip in places without the smell of bacon on us. We are smarter than you think, and we are fighting for the best and most accurate news every day.
Catch a pedophile with a camera?
That was EXACTLY WHAT I WAS DOING, catching them. I was doing a story on the fact that the police department has known sex offenders that they don't keep tabs on living across the street from elementary schools. IF I DON'T CATCH IT ON TAPE, NOTHING GETS DONE. IF I DO, then they enforce the law that they have been soft on. Also, I try not to shoot pedophile houses, that does no good. I wait and go for the face. So when they go to someone else's neighborhood, he can't swap out faces like houses.
We pressure the police to do their job. Why? Because we have the power and knowhow. Just like E'neers pressure state and federal regualtory boards to make safety standards better, or pass a certain standard.
We go aftter the big fish though, because it is more important. You don't see a lot of crackdown on pot in the media, unless they find six bazillion pounds of it. It just doesn't change anything. But I do "push it" on laws that are important to children, and society as a whole.
Actually, cops come up to me all the time and say "good work, I've been bitching about all these years, and surprise! they just found the funding for it."
As a newsman, I have gone to college, studied hard, attended church, and done all of the other things that everyone else does.
Conversely, people think I eat my young. That I am an asshole instantly, and that I am lying to them all the time. Hmmmm... just like a cop or lawyer, perhaps.
Why most people say that the media is a nasty business is probably because we wouldn't be in someone else's business if it wasn't important. If it wasn't important, you would have little reaction to it. If it is really important, you usually have a nasty, highly emotional reaction to it. Considering most of us have precious little lock down on your thoughts or emotions, most bite the hand that feeds you the information that they didn't like.
Also. we're only human. And most have an idea that we have unlimited time, effort, money, and abilities to dig up their side of the story. No one can. All of life is relative. Truth is the most presious commodity in the world, and I fight for it. SO TAKE EVERYTHING RELATIVE. We are interdisciplinary... we are not an expert in any field other than writing or photography, so we might miss the subtleties of what you are saying.
I'll continue to try to be objective. Please note the strong emphasis on try, because the info comes fast (because this is the toughest job I have ever done, and frankly many people just can't mentally handle it), and it is not perfect. I will continue to keep it in my mind to be objective. That is a promise.
Whereas now, in the US journalists are disliked even more than politicians and lawyers. You guys have quite a challenge in restoring the public's faith in you.
Not even close. People like me just fine. People like the news just fine. It is a bitching outlet, though. Also, "you guys" lumps me.
People just want to know what is going on, and everyone is different. No person even looks at a story the same way. Once you see that, most of the criticisms melt away in a haze of agenda.
Wow. If you were man or woman enough to actually use a monicker out here you could check my file and see that it hasn't changed one bit "anonymous coward."
:)
Also, before you check out and decide to call me a scum sucker, you should ask me how many personal good stories that I have done to save people. Why I get apid so little to help people.
(This is an offtopic rant, but it is snap-judgement cocksuckers like that AC who are usually the ones that I have to get ballistic on, because they are the ones that tell me that I need "to get the hell out of our town" when I am asking for directions to a Child Cancer Telethon or a good story about human triumph.)
So here's a couple of points I would teach to anyone listening out there in slashdot land about the media business:
#1: It is exactly the "media scum" attitude hanging in people's mind that would make a person say scum-sucking scandal-shooter in the first place.
DID HE ASK IF I WAS OUT TRYING TO CATCH A PEDOPHILE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DAY? No, he just assumed it was scandal. Well, then, I suppose it wouldn't matter then, now would it. Unlenss you saw your children playing with said pedophile. Then you might have wanted to pay more attention instead of turning off the TV. I am not here to shoot scandal. I am here to keep the public informed.
It is that same kind of unbased, ridiculous, "media scum," "Geraldo asshole," "assume they are lying" attitude that makes a otherwise rational person try to attack me at something as benign as a street carnival.
PEOPLE THAT MAKE SNAP JUDGEMENTS AND HAUL OFF AND TRY TO BE SEAN PENN WITH THE MEDIA ARE THE REAL PROBLEM. I am just trying to get a few shots in. Not kill anyone or take away their freedoms, just take pictures. However, you would think that I was a criminal. Those that have the most to hide fear the camera the most, and subsequently act the most insane around me. They, for some reason, and on some unconscious level think that when I am pulling out a camera a block away that I am COMING FOR THEM SPECIFICALLY ABOUT SOMETHING TRIVIAL TWENTY YEARS AGO THAT THEY FEEL BAD ABOUT. Then they freak out. Then they threaten you with everything under the sun. Then they punch at me. I was just trying to cross the street.
#2: Nutbags love TV. Consequently, everyone who is mentally unbalanced doesn't walk, but sprints towards the camera, IMMEDIATELY. Then they act like a danger to themselves and others. I cannot help this.
#3: Everyone has an agenda. Period. The more aggressive they get, the more their bad past or real agenda shows. I'm not saying that the gorilla is in charge of the man, but I am saying that everyone has an agenda. It just might not be malicious like what the word "agenda" usually connotates.
Honestly, I don't eat my young. I am not a sub-human. I don't prey on misfortune. I spot problems and tell you about them. Unfortunately, I am not psychic and often spot problems immediately after misfortune. Once again, there is nothing I can do about it. Its the stupid nes that say I am a vulture.
Also, I am paid to get to the heart of controversial matters. I wouldn't be there if it as not somehow important.. unless of course you have a donkey that plays soccer or a waterskiing squirrel.
If you notice the only people in the world that consistently blame the media are politicians. If I am the fish that cleans the tank of humanity, then they are my dinner.
I'd like to say that I am not a scandal hound, and I am not a scum sucker, and whoever wrote that note to jab at a stranger needs to write to others like it was their mother that was going to read it.
Two major reasons why this is crap:
REASON NUMBER #1.
I am a news videographer (and granted, that is a different designation than commercial photographers) but there is no need to sign a release form for me to shoot a building.
But then again, my TV station, like all TV stations has an attorney on retainer for just such an occasion, when someone decides to tempt fate and the Bill of Rights.
That is bullshit. It is a public place. Because there is no release needed then there is no cause to sue over a lack of release. That category falls under public and private view. By the way, any place that doesn't say "NO TRESSPASSING" can be considered public view, within reasonable doubt.
I have punks and even regular people tell me constantly that they will "sue my ass to high heaven for invading their personal privacy." It usually involves their business shortchanging someone or they have done something horrible to others. So I quote me some law on 'em. (I then proceed to explain in tiny detail why they can waste their money on a First Amendment Violation. They usually will tell me that they are going to beat me and take my camera. I casually tell them that I am taping them, if they touch me it is battery and I will report them, camera theft is felony theft on the order of grand theft, and as a professional photographer my material is easily entered into evidence. And then say, "Now if you HADN'T COMMITTED A CRIME, well, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE HERE.")
As a news photographer, I can shoot a camera inside a window showing you holding your dog hostage or whatever as long as a reasonable expectation of privacy is maintained. Reasonable privacy is really broad, at least for the news people.
I dare say there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in Times Square. Probably less of an expectation than ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD. So asking permission to shoot advertising or exterior televisions by its nature is hilarious, due to its intent.
REASON #2:
Spider-Man is a work of fiction. Period. There is no requirement of any member of the film industry to maintain any continuity or realism whatsoever. That is totally a free speech issue. I am surprised that the MPAA hasn't "gone ape shit" on them yet. Even if it was a "documentary" they still don't have a leg to stand on. It is a private work. A private work that they can alter at will, without someone meddling with it.
Never before has there ever been a rule that an artistic work (yes, many of you will argue that a big budget hollywood film is art) has any "must carry" rules to it. Good luck, assholes. You're going to need it. I personally would countersue immediately for "unnecessary usage" of the court system. Maybe there is an Anti-SLAPP out there that can help on this one?
Besides, the blueprints of a building might be copy protected, but you are not going to be infringing to see it in the real freaking world, nor is anyone charging you to see it.
I hope whoever thought this plan up dies a horrible, horrible death and goes straight to a fiery pit. When they get there, they have taxis back over him for eternity under a giant jumbotron that keeps showing "the best of" episodes of She's the Sherriff starring Suzanne Sommers.
Haven't you seen Goodfellas recently?
Lying down to fire (sorry, in the rest of the world we understand the distinction between a verb and a past participle)
/. nutties argue.
I'm sorry. I write a whole page, and you nail me on a grammatical mistake... you fucking snob. APPARENTLY I AM A FOOL BECAUSE MY QUICKLY WRITTEN POST HAD A PROBLEM WITH A PAST PARTICIPLE. I'M SORRY.
I guess I was out on the firing range with my M1 Garand friends learning about guns when that lesson came up. Or maybe I was in Boy Scouts, trying to build a bow out of brances and tree bark. Really. I'm serious. Americans still teach very young children survival skills. As a newsman I do stories all the time about how country kids get lost in the woods and wander out days later, and never really look hungry. So laugh all you want at the USA. We're tough little bastards, even at age eight.
The actual point that I was trying to make in the US military are not de facto idiots, like everyone in the world thinks we are to bolster their troop morale. Let the Chinese make bong-rip theories all day. Please don't fall into the trap of constant USA bashing. Then I don't have to constantly defend our foreign-seeming decisions, that are perfectly logical under our reasoning. I assume by your solid grammar that you are from the UK. I would never bash your country. Matter of fact I like the UK a lot. Don't think I don't respect other countries. National sovereignity is what the US is about. How many nations have we tried to get democrtacy into? How much food aid goes to help them out? Please don't give our rivals any more credit than you give the United States. Especially not China, they kill their citizens if they disagree with the government. I just don't see how a lot of paper theory with no back up is going to assure Chinese victory. When you bash, you give credit to our enemies, too. Those enemies are not the Chinese people, they are the Chinese Regime that kills the Chinese people, and all other groups like them.
I don't see a lot of my Jewish friends USA bashing. They know what regimes can do. That is what true friendship is about. If any of our rivals had established themselves as world superpowers,you would have had to get a form double rubber stamped to get enough freedom to use the toilet on a train. However, you don't. And your government that you are sitting under right now is not interested in racial purity, society control, or religious uprising.
THAT MY FRIEND IS WHY WE HAVE A BIG ASS ARMY.
In regard to your gun argument:
I was under the impression that these weapons were used under different circumstances. One is a rifle, the other a submachinegun.
Unfortunately, that is an enourmous destinction. A submachinegun is made for close fighting, so overall length is extremely imposrtant. Rifles are designed for accuracy more than submachine guns. And currently the military is looking for a replacement, but they are discouraging bullpup rifles. Dig up some gun buddies like me to see what I mean. I have fired an MP5 flash surpressed on a SWAT range. I have fired all sorts of subs, assault rifles (except the AK, which pisses me off that I haven't yet) and even up to the Winchester 700 series police sniper rifles, and I almost got my hands on a McMillan (sp?) sniper rifle one afternoon.
Everyone knows the US has the most advanced military force in the world, and most people realise that this does not always guarantee victory. Why are you getting so uptight trying to prove it does? Is a country's worth measured by its firepower?
No. Its worth is measured (at least on the American yard stick) in its ability to save others from tyranny and oppression. For the most part, the USA has done a upstanding job in that respect.
We can't save the world. But at least we are trying whether you like it or not. If you live in a country like France, Germany, the UK, or nations with similar designations to NATO, you are doing the same thing. Protest all you want. Progress is coming. The citizens want it. They want to decide what is best for them. It is not really all about corporations like most
Our enemies will move around our military power. Take a looksee at this translation [die.net] of two Chinese colonels writing about our Desert War dominance, and how to circumvent and defeat the US in spite of military superiority.
I believe that you think that some of these weapons are useless or easily circumvented, and most of the rest of the world sees our army as full of "toys."
Toys indeed, if you definition includes things that burrow in ground and blow you up inside rock, track you with your cell phone, passive radar that just listens and never transmits, and all sorts of other nefarious things like that. They are not toys. IF OTHER NATIONS THINK THAT A SMARTBOMB IS A TOY, THEN THEY ARE OUT OF THEIR MINDS. They are up for a rude awakening.
Why is it a small, voluntary service US force always seems to run over a full blown, military controlled, conscripted nation in days? Its got to be the toys! Yeah right.
That is a childish justification for the fact that there are people that have put in billions (yes, freaking billions!) into not only developing these weapons, but coming up with the concepts and designing systems for their best implementation.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS ALL ABOUT THE RESEARCH EDGE. Go ahead, thwart it, Version 2.0 just shipped last week. See if you can crack it now.
Good example-
the trusty M-16 and its variants. Reliable. Cheap. Useful. All other modern nations have gone to guns with bullpup designs (clip is behind the trigger for more streamlined, futuristic look), because they say they are better balanced, shorter designs for guns. Sounds like a great idea. I thought so. They look cool in movies.
Until you learn that you have to not only take the 'dangerous end' of the weapon away from the enemy, but you have to take your trigger hand off of the grip and trigger to reload it. It takes two hands and more time. Also its nearly impossible to reload easily while laying down to fire, and soldiers do that A LOT. Also a bullpup exposes more head and shoulders around a corner when firing.
That idea has brought you such guns as the British SA 80. It looked and fired like it was made by Kenner. It had plastic parts. IT WAS EASILY OUTMATCHED BY A GOOD OL KALASHNIKOV.
Every arms manufacturer wants the M-16 contract, for obvious financial reasons. They hold competitions constantly and try every possible idea. The US military has tight, important standards FOR EVERYTHING. To think that there is a nation that can just up and exploit the weakness of the US tools in five minutes, is well, ridiculous and full of speculation. The difference? The US has not been speculating, they have been testing these things for decades even after they implement them. They know their holes.
If they research the M-16 so deeply and periodically, then what do they do with bleeding edge stuff?
I just don't see those Chinese Colonels reaching any new conclusions that we probably haven't a generation ago, and are actively trying to fix.
I was doing a reinstall of Win 98SE and putting all of my drivers on, getting a new update on my computer's video card.
Guess what? I was putting in my firewall when I noticed someone had already put in some damn
Doh!
So, is two hours a world record or what?
Needless to say, I had to reinstall the little demon OS, because you never know what you got. There was about 2 hours down the drain.
And yes, I know. I shouldn't be running wintendo. Forgive me, monsiegnor.
So who was the employee that got so ticked off at the company that he ratted out his employer to the RIAA? Is there a bounty now on piracy?
Ka-Ching.
That would have almost worked. But it should have read like this:
If you would have said that "almost all of the kids in the candy store with a 'specific type of pocket that encourages stealing candy' and were actually, specifically using the pocket to steal candy"... then I would have listened.
Sorry, but when you simplify the argument to something like that, you have to expect to get some real crap for trying to pull the wool over our eyes. If you stated something like it really is, instead of a crappy oversimplification, well, you realize that you have NO ARGUMENT WHATSOEVER.
Here's another great one like this:
"I've the glove does not fit, you must acquit."
Yeah, that also works when the gloves aren't frozen, they aren't of the tight fitting driving variety, and the defendent doesn't have to try to put on stiff tight gloves while wearing rubber gloves beneath to not harm state's evidence.
Get a grip, and try to not justify stealing from a company that gives their customers a fair shake until they steal from it. REMEMBER IT WAS THE BNETD PEOPLE THAT ALLOWED PIRACY TO BE ACCEPTABLE, NOT BLIZZARD, DON'T MAKE BLIZZARD OUT TO BE A BUNCH OF BASTARDS.
Honestly, whoever gets this one is a single step away from James Bond villany...
He should have countersued.
Made him come to his state and duke it out. Make him spend money on gas and then negotiated it back.
This Novak cat is going to die a lone, miserable exsistence if he doesn't straighten up. Truly a pehtetic thing to do to another human being.
Local newspapers still exist. No reason to believe it would be different for television shows.
Sorry. That is such a simplistic statement that I won't even go into it.
Too bad, you argument has no credibility.
You might be surprised how good US TV is compared to the rest of the world. Especially in journalism. Its that whole free press thing. Although I do like the BBC, of course, although they appear to look away from their own problems like everyone else.
Al Jazeera is probably biased as hell. CNN is biased, we all know that. As a newsman, I bet you just by what I have seen of Al Jazeera, that at least CNN makes more of a concerted effort to be less biased. That would be my take of it, but what would I know, I am only a video journalist for the local stations you despise 40+ hours a week.
Exactly. Maybe if the people in US goverment behaved this way we could be still seeing the Twin Towers in the NY skyscape.
Also, we might have seen the sham that is totalitarian communism and fascism in control of most of the world. Kuwait would be a territory of Iraq. The Jews would all be dead, or at least a slave race at best. Latin America would be a warlord's dream. Kings would all be in charge, and those kings would wage the sport of kings, WAR, all the time. The list goes on and on.
By that argument, if we didn't get involved with the Middle East, they would still be dust farmers watching the world march on without them... which IMHO is what they really want us to do, but resent the fact that they enjoy their Western toys, and aren't the big boys that they used to be centuries ago.
Besides, if Saudi Arabia could promote themselves as the preeminent force in the world, would they? Would any culture pass up the opportunity to be the world leader?
How much do you want to bet the poster came from a country that we pulled out of the fire in WWII? All of my friends parents died to save these whiny bastards, that bite the hands of the generation before who paid in full for their fredoms.
Russia just finished its second cross continental pipeline, so I would assume that they are going to be our friends in the oil business rather soon.
Besides, Russians want to move to the United States, not act nice, take our money, and secretly plan to blow it up. That is also a bonus.
Saudi Arabia will not make a bad move against us... other tha secretly spit on us in teh presence of other Arabians. When there are few leaders, they are extremely easy to find and get rid of. Their leaders are only interested in doing things that their religion would kill others for doing, namely chasing international tail, drinking, and living a life of excess that no "divine king" would ever want.
Saudi Arabia's may not be numbered in days or years, but the end of the corrupt kingdom is coming, they have only been this influential because of our influences. We can take those influences away if it gets too hot out there to deal with them. I guarantee that the end of their influence will come long before their oil runs out.
You know, I would just looove to talk about globalism as I know about every injustice in the world personally better than all of you. So I would like to say this... shame on you for not being so informed, not listening to me, and enjoying your lives.
I have important business to attend to. I have to be in front of a Starbucks in the next ten minutes to protest something so inconsequential that no one has ever heard of it. I invite you all to read my useless, over artistic leaflets that make no sense, invite you to feel bad about something, and then give you no solution. Come, share in my carefully crafted, over-thoughtful misery. DID I MENTION I'M AN ARTIST? Okay, I'm just artistic.
Sorry Katz, but no matter how many articles you write to get the punk rock chicks, you'll never be as "indy as me."
http://www.mcfrontalot.com/ Please note: MC Frontalot does not want you to go to his site.
"Besides all of that, what have the bleedin' Romans ever done for us?"
HOODED MAN IN THE BACK RAISES HAND.
"Oh, Piss off!"
Everyone is talking about how great these systems are, but let's be honest...
I just don't have $300 and then get Halo..
(And then another $300 when your Xbox breaks in 91 days... LOL)
Another $300 and then get GTA3...
And then for over another $200 for a Gamecube to let it sit warmed up and plugged in fot the next Zelda and Mario game.
Everyone is screaming about the one great game, and not screaming about the price to buy the dang systems.
Do I get more karma when I detect the obvious, hilarious, APRIL FOOLS ARTICLE IN SLASHDOT?
AM I THE FIRST?
GIMME SOME CAAAAANDY!
Sounds grrrreat! WOW! This could change everything.
Oh, except the whole 'nanotech' thing.
Everytime I hear a phrase that says, "the process could be improved with nanotech," I immediately think about all of the people that throw up their arms and scream halleluia everytime someone says that they have made the next 'cold fusion.'
If they even speak the words nanotech or cold fusion, it is basically saying, "this is a good idea, but right now our discovery is complete bullshit. Yes, we're bullshitting you."
Some scientist says that some device would be better improved with nanotech.
I would have to respond with "WEEEEEL, for goodness sake, what invention wouldn't be improved with the uncanny abiltity to control every stinkin' molecule?"
You know, with that ability, I could live forever. Get it out of your head. It ain't going to happen. There are not going to be machines run throuhg your body that sweep out your diseases. We have those, they're called white blood cells. All this nanotech bull is great material for science fiction novels and movies. Its great brain candy to think about. I like good bull in my stories and movies. I, however, don't like it in the REAL STINKIN' WORLD, where people do REAL FREAKIN' SCIENCE.
I am going out on a limb, but on the surface this appears to NOT BE A LEGITIMATE STORY.
There are a few great moments several times in the ORIGINAL ROLERBALL where Jonathan E. is pounding his BIG SPIKED glove in anger at "corporate anthem" at the beginning of each game.
Funny thing is, the faces of the rollerballers show how incredibly lame and pointless these songs are.
Kinda like MY face when I read the soulless lyrics of thes horrible, crappy songs.