In most cases they do enough exposition. And if you have watched the right ones you can fill in years of later plots when they're mentioned offhand in the latest episodes. Which is why I say don't bother with anything between Tom Baker and Chris Eccleston.
I can imagine people who didn't see it in the 70s finding it a bit meh. They didn't experience it among the vast sea of storyless, introspective, or exploitative junk that Hollywood movies consisted of at the time. It catalyzed the rebirth of storytelling in movies with strong protagonists, atavistic forces in conflict, and action that was driven by and drove the plot. If they've come to it in about 1981, they've probably seen 10 movies that wouldn't have been made without it, but copped all of its dramatic techniques. Plus they would have been immersed in iteratively improved special effects, leaving them completely underawed instead of galactically blown away by the never-before-seen compositing and motion-control shots like we all were.
Start in the last couple of episodes of the Pertwee era, just so you get a regeneration story, then watch every Tom Baker you can get your hands on, in order.
Then skip until you get to the Ecclestons, so you know who Rose Tyler is (it ought to be called the Rose Tyler era, really), then watch all of the Tennants.
After that you can be itinerant about it, jumping around the story lines. Kind of like a Time Lord.
Frankly, if the Texas Democratic Party can't take the buffoonery of the Texas Republican Party and make votes out of it, then they deserve what they get.
That's kind of like saying the 4th and 5th Amendments are "aiding and abetting a person to break the law".
You're free to speak and to associate. That's what this app does. You're free not to incriminate yourself. That's what this app does. This is true whether you're committing a crime or not.
It's the responsibility of the police to observe you doing it, not the privilege of the police to make you prove it. And if it weren't for the ridiculous "driving is a privilege not a right" rulings, police checkpoints of any kind would be entirely unconstitutional stops, as they are based on no reasonable suspicion.
On the low-power mobile and embedded side x86 is out.
You're making the implicit assumption that this is because it's x86.
It's not.
It's because Intel has decided (because you know they studied it financially from every angle before deciding) that the market isn't profitable enough. Yeah, there's a zillion units being sold and $billions being made, but if it's below Intel's %ROI cutoff line, it's cut off from money, manpower, and technological redevelopment mindspace.
The result of their refusal to dominate the segment is that there are a slew of competitors each taking little pieces of it. And now that handsets are commonplace, the low-hanging fruit are gone and it's not going to get profitable enough ever again for Intel to wade in. Not unless someone there just happens to have a random breakthrough that gives them a big--not small--edge for no effort invested.
Frankly, I bet there's half a dozen people posting here who could start companies to design chips to compete with ARM et al. The low-power side of the industry has always been easier to design and less profitable (which, circularly, is why Intel never made it a bigger deal, since they make a lot more money pushing heavy-duty mainstream low-barrier-to-entry computing).
x86 is a small part of what's in a modern x86 CPU.
There's hardly any good reason to choose anything else over it, either. You can't beat it on performance the way Alpha did. PPC lost its simplicity long ago (and comes with some annoyances that make me wish it would just die).
Intel's latest stuff is the best that ever was. Nobody else does or ever has come close.
It's still being used in certain proprietary big-iron systems. And it still kicks some ass. But it won't supplant the genetic ingrainment of x86. Which itself is hardly x86 any more. Intel is still selling it, but only the foolish are buying it to use in new designs.
If that 4% included one of four silicon wafer manufacturers, then yes. Chip makers buy their wafers from companies that refine the sand and grow the ingots and saw the wafers from them. It's a very specialized business to make the wafers at the tolerances needed for modern chipmaking. Totally not unreasonable for a quarter of the world's capacity to be in one small area.
It's a small part of a short period in the segment of the economy that is directly dependent on new equipment and parts beyond what is in inventory.
It may affect 1% of SKUs, total, directly or once-removed indirectly.
If this has a serious effect on the entire investment community, then capitalism is too friable to be allowed to continue without major and persistent regulation.
Although I would've thought that a few hedge funds going upside-down on their derivatives wagers on the American housing market precipitating a worldwide crash in all equities, the collapse of hundreds of banks, and the near dissolution of a quarter of the world's auto makers would have been enough proof of that.
Pictures I've seen have shown acres-wide piles of debris floating mid-ocean. Houses, crushed by the incoming water and swept away by the outgoing water.
Some shots of whole towns built in little canyons on the shore, nothing left but the occasional foundation or concrete building, and some litter.
Slashdot Mirror
It wasn't a choice between ISS and SSC.
We could have bought 5 SSC's for what it cost to develop and field the F-22.
And, at current estimates, not doing F-35 could have built 80 SSCs.
Never underestimate the sophistry of lobbyists trading off your money for their goals.
Does the OED include "OED"?
Well....
In most cases they do enough exposition. And if you have watched the right ones you can fill in years of later plots when they're mentioned offhand in the latest episodes. Which is why I say don't bother with anything between Tom Baker and Chris Eccleston.
And she was the second-hottest chick in it.
I can imagine people who didn't see it in the 70s finding it a bit meh. They didn't experience it among the vast sea of storyless, introspective, or exploitative junk that Hollywood movies consisted of at the time. It catalyzed the rebirth of storytelling in movies with strong protagonists, atavistic forces in conflict, and action that was driven by and drove the plot. If they've come to it in about 1981, they've probably seen 10 movies that wouldn't have been made without it, but copped all of its dramatic techniques. Plus they would have been immersed in iteratively improved special effects, leaving them completely underawed instead of galactically blown away by the never-before-seen compositing and motion-control shots like we all were.
Nerds can't. Geeks can.
Start in the last couple of episodes of the Pertwee era, just so you get a regeneration story, then watch every Tom Baker you can get your hands on, in order.
Then skip until you get to the Ecclestons, so you know who Rose Tyler is (it ought to be called the Rose Tyler era, really), then watch all of the Tennants.
After that you can be itinerant about it, jumping around the story lines. Kind of like a Time Lord.
But that's a defining characteristic of electorates. It's why the word "idiot" has the etymology it does.
In Soviet Russia, submit button previews you!
Feh. I'm posting from the Earth's mantle on a Motorola Micro-Tac II right now!
Frankly, if the Texas Democratic Party can't take the buffoonery of the Texas Republican Party and make votes out of it, then they deserve what they get.
So the Clovis culture was one day's easy digging away from being the first archaeologists?
That's kind of like saying the 4th and 5th Amendments are "aiding and abetting a person to break the law".
You're free to speak and to associate. That's what this app does. You're free not to incriminate yourself. That's what this app does. This is true whether you're committing a crime or not.
It's the responsibility of the police to observe you doing it, not the privilege of the police to make you prove it. And if it weren't for the ridiculous "driving is a privilege not a right" rulings, police checkpoints of any kind would be entirely unconstitutional stops, as they are based on no reasonable suspicion.
What if it was an app that helped people avoid hate-crime checkpoints?
On the low-power mobile and embedded side x86 is out.
You're making the implicit assumption that this is because it's x86.
It's not.
It's because Intel has decided (because you know they studied it financially from every angle before deciding) that the market isn't profitable enough. Yeah, there's a zillion units being sold and $billions being made, but if it's below Intel's %ROI cutoff line, it's cut off from money, manpower, and technological redevelopment mindspace.
The result of their refusal to dominate the segment is that there are a slew of competitors each taking little pieces of it. And now that handsets are commonplace, the low-hanging fruit are gone and it's not going to get profitable enough ever again for Intel to wade in. Not unless someone there just happens to have a random breakthrough that gives them a big--not small--edge for no effort invested.
Frankly, I bet there's half a dozen people posting here who could start companies to design chips to compete with ARM et al. The low-power side of the industry has always been easier to design and less profitable (which, circularly, is why Intel never made it a bigger deal, since they make a lot more money pushing heavy-duty mainstream low-barrier-to-entry computing).
x86 is a small part of what's in a modern x86 CPU.
There's hardly any good reason to choose anything else over it, either. You can't beat it on performance the way Alpha did. PPC lost its simplicity long ago (and comes with some annoyances that make me wish it would just die).
Intel's latest stuff is the best that ever was. Nobody else does or ever has come close.
It's still being used in certain proprietary big-iron systems. And it still kicks some ass. But it won't supplant the genetic ingrainment of x86. Which itself is hardly x86 any more. Intel is still selling it, but only the foolish are buying it to use in new designs.
Another fucking goatse troll.
If that 4% included one of four silicon wafer manufacturers, then yes. Chip makers buy their wafers from companies that refine the sand and grow the ingots and saw the wafers from them. It's a very specialized business to make the wafers at the tolerances needed for modern chipmaking. Totally not unreasonable for a quarter of the world's capacity to be in one small area.
Who do you think caused the earthquake?
It's a small part of a short period in the segment of the economy that is directly dependent on new equipment and parts beyond what is in inventory.
It may affect 1% of SKUs, total, directly or once-removed indirectly.
If this has a serious effect on the entire investment community, then capitalism is too friable to be allowed to continue without major and persistent regulation.
Although I would've thought that a few hedge funds going upside-down on their derivatives wagers on the American housing market precipitating a worldwide crash in all equities, the collapse of hundreds of banks, and the near dissolution of a quarter of the world's auto makers would have been enough proof of that.
And we'll probably never find most of those.
Pictures I've seen have shown acres-wide piles of debris floating mid-ocean. Houses, crushed by the incoming water and swept away by the outgoing water.
Some shots of whole towns built in little canyons on the shore, nothing left but the occasional foundation or concrete building, and some litter.
If they didn't get out, they're gone.
Haven't you learned?
The only way to win is not to play.
Takes a minute to pump 1000 gallons of kerosene at 30,000 feet.
Takes 6 hours to pump that many joules of excess electrons.
Chemical fuels will be used for performance aircraft for as long as they can be found or synthesized.
Are there a lot of open proxies in Iran?