Re:And we all know what happened to the Trojans
on
Analyzing Palladium
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps even more humorous is the fact that Athena herself fought against the Trojans. Dare I say that M$'s plans may backfire on them in a similar way? Dare we all hope it? From my understanding of this thing, it is so fscist that consumers might just outirhg reject it. Not very many users know the difference between a virus and a trojan, but every user knows what it means when soeone else has access to their computer, and all of their most private files, and none of them like it. This may ultimately do M$ more harm than good. Lets keep those fingers crossed.
well, as someone who has spent a fair amount of time dealing with issues of impartiality in journalism, I think they actually make a fair point. The reason that most of us tune into NPR news is that we KNOW that NPR's strings aren't being pulled by phillip morris, and their ilk. The major selling point of NPR is that it is non-commercial, and if that image is tarnished, they would lstand to lose listeners.
Now, you may ask why that matters if they are non-commercial. Two reasons, the first being that they depend a great deal on donations from individuals, the second being that the people who work for NPR tend to be the altruistic, ethical type. It is damaging to NPR if their impartiality is compromised, yes, but it is far more damaging to a public who can no longer trust one of the few mostly objective news sources left.
The way I read their reaction in this light is a little like Canada's response to a botched Isreali assassination attempt about 5 years ago. The Israeli agents were using Canadian passports, which were (and still are) regarded as one of the safest passports in the world. To protect its image, the Canadian government was forced to lay down some smack. This way, if anyone accused them of taking sides, etc., they could point to actions taken to punish Israel. Likewise, NPR needs to take action yo protect its reputation by ensuring that their name is not used in a way that would lead to their reputation being tarnished.
This may seem stupid to all of us, but from the speaking from the standpoint of an altruistic journalist trying to protect one's good name, NPR has a very good point.
A comp sci professor of mine tells me that there is some federally funded program for putting people through college in exchange for a gaurentee of service. Basically, Uncle Sam will pay for your programming/security training, if you sign a contract saying you'll work for Uncle Sam for a few years after you graduate. As to what this program is called, or how to apply... I have no idea whatsoever, but if you do some digging, you might turn it up (presuming that it actually exists).
One thing I can suggest is to get a computer-realted government job. A friend of mine worked for the state, and they footed the bill for him to get "computer training" at a local college. It didn't exactly amount to a degree, but it basically gives him a minor in CS. That may be a more fruitful search.
I would send them anyway. After all, if she can't overcome the embrassment factor to go to health services and ask for some, the fact that they're free doesn't mean squat. At my college, there were actually student employees at the health center, and I must admit that I would have second thoughts about letting them know that I had any use for contraceptives.
But then again, I was such a total nerd that the only thing I even wanted to use condoms for was protecting wireless mics, and these thoughts of mine only come up upon reflection.:)
send condoms... lots of condoms, and maybe even a book or two on sex. Safety first, afterall.
I haven't seen him called on this yet...
on
The Empire Stumbles
·
· Score: 1
By now everyone seems to have pointed out everyt possible flaw in Katz's thinking from the economics to the marketing, to the appearance that Katz has only read the cliff notes on Joseph Campbell... but something he said caught my attention, and since I haven't seen an answer... Katz: Do we really care precisely how Anakin Skywalker got pissed off and turned to the Dark Side?
The guy at the NYTimes seems to have this strange notion that Star Wars fans don't already know the essentials of the plot, and could actually be surprised by this movie. Really, with an established timeline before and after this movie, how much possibility for surprise can there possibly be, but then again, I for one don't want to be surprised, I want Star Wars.
In the grand scheme of things, Star Wars is not, nor should it be high art. George Lucas is a cinematographic genius, but he is no Bergman, Hitchcock, or Lang. What most people don't seem to catch is that he never pretends to be. He has said in numerous interviews that Star Wars is based on the old movie serials from his youth, and those are inherently melodramatic, bombastic, and completely archetypal battles between good and evil. Is there ever any doubt in are minds that Darth Vader is evil incarnate? No, not until Lucas started listening to his critics with Jedi.
Stars Wars never pretends to be high art, but perhaps something so simple, and yet so appealing is more than high art. Let us not fool ourselves, The Illiad and Beowulf were so popular in their times because they are entertaining; we still read them today because they are inherently good stories. Star Wars is a good story, and no matter what the agenda of the reviewer, or what marketting deals have already been made, Lucas will never let it be otherwise.
Short version: NYTimes reviewer has missed the point by a few parsecs.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps even more humorous is the fact that Athena herself fought against the Trojans. Dare I say that M$'s plans may backfire on them in a similar way? Dare we all hope it? From my understanding of this thing, it is so fscist that consumers might just outirhg reject it. Not very many users know the difference between a virus and a trojan, but every user knows what it means when soeone else has access to their computer, and all of their most private files, and none of them like it. This may ultimately do M$ more harm than good. Lets keep those fingers crossed.
well, as someone who has spent a fair amount of time dealing with issues of impartiality in journalism, I think they actually make a fair point. The reason that most of us tune into NPR news is that we KNOW that NPR's strings aren't being pulled by phillip morris, and their ilk. The major selling point of NPR is that it is non-commercial, and if that image is tarnished, they would lstand to lose listeners.
Now, you may ask why that matters if they are non-commercial. Two reasons, the first being that they depend a great deal on donations from individuals, the second being that the people who work for NPR tend to be the altruistic, ethical type. It is damaging to NPR if their impartiality is compromised, yes, but it is far more damaging to a public who can no longer trust one of the few mostly objective news sources left.
The way I read their reaction in this light is a little like Canada's response to a botched Isreali assassination attempt about 5 years ago. The Israeli agents were using Canadian passports, which were (and still are) regarded as one of the safest passports in the world. To protect its image, the Canadian government was forced to lay down some smack. This way, if anyone accused them of taking sides, etc., they could point to actions taken to punish Israel. Likewise, NPR needs to take action yo protect its reputation by ensuring that their name is not used in a way that would lead to their reputation being tarnished.
This may seem stupid to all of us, but from the speaking from the standpoint of an altruistic journalist trying to protect one's good name, NPR has a very good point.
A comp sci professor of mine tells me that there is some federally funded program for putting people through college in exchange for a gaurentee of service. Basically, Uncle Sam will pay for your programming/security training, if you sign a contract saying you'll work for Uncle Sam for a few years after you graduate. As to what this program is called, or how to apply... I have no idea whatsoever, but if you do some digging, you might turn it up (presuming that it actually exists).
One thing I can suggest is to get a computer-realted government job. A friend of mine worked for the state, and they footed the bill for him to get "computer training" at a local college. It didn't exactly amount to a degree, but it basically gives him a minor in CS. That may be a more fruitful search.
Good luck.
I would send them anyway. After all, if she can't overcome the embrassment factor to go to health services and ask for some, the fact that they're free doesn't mean squat. At my college, there were actually student employees at the health center, and I must admit that I would have second thoughts about letting them know that I had any use for contraceptives.
:)
But then again, I was such a total nerd that the only thing I even wanted to use condoms for was protecting wireless mics, and these thoughts of mine only come up upon reflection.
send condoms... lots of condoms, and maybe even a book or two on sex. Safety first, afterall.
By now everyone seems to have pointed out everyt possible flaw in Katz's thinking from the economics to the marketing, to the appearance that Katz has only read the cliff notes on Joseph Campbell... but something he said caught my attention, and since I haven't seen an answer...
Katz: Do we really care precisely how Anakin Skywalker got pissed off and turned to the Dark Side?
starX: Well... yes, actually.
The guy at the NYTimes seems to have this strange notion that Star Wars fans don't already know the essentials of the plot, and could actually be surprised by this movie. Really, with an established timeline before and after this movie, how much possibility for surprise can there possibly be, but then again, I for one don't want to be surprised, I want Star Wars.
In the grand scheme of things, Star Wars is not, nor should it be high art. George Lucas is a cinematographic genius, but he is no Bergman, Hitchcock, or Lang. What most people don't seem to catch is that he never pretends to be. He has said in numerous interviews that Star Wars is based on the old movie serials from his youth, and those are inherently melodramatic, bombastic, and completely archetypal battles between good and evil. Is there ever any doubt in are minds that Darth Vader is evil incarnate? No, not until Lucas started listening to his critics with Jedi.
Stars Wars never pretends to be high art, but perhaps something so simple, and yet so appealing is more than high art. Let us not fool ourselves, The Illiad and Beowulf were so popular in their times because they are entertaining; we still read them today because they are inherently good stories. Star Wars is a good story, and no matter what the agenda of the reviewer, or what marketting deals have already been made, Lucas will never let it be otherwise.
Short version: NYTimes reviewer has missed the point by a few parsecs.
Didn't I see this a while back in StarCraft?