Er, I agreed with you until your bizarre response. Environmental depredation, overpopulation (especially in lower-tech countries) and the calculable end of energy reserves are serious considerations.
The point is that offworld settlement has to be an option, or, as a species, we'll have a nice built-in "sunset clause" (obPoliticalJab) unlike any of Bush's overtures to martial law.
"Bush's Government" is a pretty straightforward way to refer to "The US Government under the Bush Administration" without wasting time arguing on the Internet.
Houston Astros vs. Texas Rangers. Space-related snideness. Look, it's a quick post, and I think it got my point across. Bush needs a whole staff of fact-checkers to tell him the wrong age for a kid he's discussing in a public address. I didn't remember which Texas baseball team he owned (ownership as a type of financial management). So I chose the funnier one, and guessed wrong.
You can correct without mockery. But thanks for calling me your buddy.
The joke is funnier if I say "Houston Astros". But of course, it's technically true that he couldn't manage them, since he didn't have the opportunity.:)
Bush's government doesn't have the money to pay for his military enterprises.
It lacks the money to provide for basic infrastructure.
At a time when commercial space flight is being touted as the most logical course, Bush is now saying that he wants to send people back to the moon?
I'm all for the new frontier. It would be great if people were inspired about space again. But Bush does not deserve to be the one to get us there. He couldn't even manage the Houston Astros.
"I put my 20-minute workout tape on twice as fast, so it only took ten minutes." -- Ghostbusters
Some professors deliver their lectures. They pay close attention to pacing, they give students time to take notes, they engage students. I wouldn't recommend listening to these profs at high speed, especially if you're taking notes.
Others just drone. I'd fast forward these anyway.
The question really is: is it about the process or the information? Depends on the teaching style, and so should your approach.
On the other hand, it may be worth your ten cents (and their two cents) to text so that you can, as soon as possible, warn your friends about just how bad the movie is.
Again, a movie would have to be pretty frickin' bad to hit that level. I just watched Freddy vs. Jason and enjoyed it enough that I would even tell a friend, unqualified, that it was not worth seeing, let alone text him before the credits are over.
For some PoS like Armageddon or Magnolia (some people liked it, but dear lord not I), the pain goes on for three whole hours and I'd want some catharsis long before that. Warning a friend by texting while I'm still seated in the theatre, without obtrusively talking and bothering my neighbours, is definitely the way to go in such a situation.
If they point out which code is their's, everyone will gladly remove it, and the violators will be caught and punished, assuming there's a record of who checked in the modifications. Anyone who continues building kernels with the stolen source may face hefty lawsuits or prison.
I think that the focus of SCO's complaint is that they've lost business because if the code hadn't been put into Linux in the first place, we would all own VAXen or mainframes, and be running System V, therefore SCO would be reaping big fat bags of money (with dollar signs on it!) from all of our $1000/seat licenses.
Since we stole that mystery code long ago, we can't make it better by replacing it now. Those big bags of money (with dollar signs on it!) are gone for good and we can't make it better. We suck, and must display contrition.
Obviously you're paying no attention to the kids. The kids aren't yet evil. Bran, Sansa, and Arya (though Rickon is still kinda quiet) are all basically good people; not much bad you can say about them.
And how can you dis on people like Loras Tyrell? He never did nothing to nobody, 'cept Renly. Allegedly.
The issue is, the characters are well-drawn enough for readers to make their own decisions about with whom to sympathize. Obviously the Starks are more idealistic than the Lannisters or the Greyjoys, but that doesn't mean that they're the only sympathetic characters.
Try reading a real history book. Find the "good guys" and "bad guys" there. Try reading the Old Testament or any other sacred text -- the heroes and villains are clearly flawed.
Try reading a typical pulp fantasy novel. Try to imagine anything in that book actually happening; try to picture it with your own eyes, or to think of anyone you've ever met who has a personality like a "hero" or "villain" in one of those books.
I'd rather read something I could possibly believe. It's the difference between escapism, and nonsense.
As long as it's already a spoiler thread, I just need to add that when *Jaime* becomes a character perspective, it feels like there aren't many streams left to cross. Jaime could be a *bad, bad guy*, and now we're supposed to sympathize?
And we did. So good a book!
But now, what's next? Who else could they shock us by sympathizing? Melisandre? One of the "Others"? Janos Slynt?
Re:And don't get attached
on
A Game of Thrones
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Also, don't get too used to "hating" any particular character. Even more surprising than who is 'taken out' of the story, is who is gradually 'put into' the story as viewpoints in each successive book.
Book 3 has a doozy of a new perspective. When I saw who it was, my jaw dropped, right in the middle of the Chapters store I was standing in. "How the heck are we supposed to sympathize with *that* character?" How indeed...
It could be any one of a number of them, but if you catch "Lie to Me", "Hush", "The Body", "Becoming", any of 20+ episodes out of the 155 ultimately made, you will be hooked without delay.
If you watch a whole season, you're guaranteed to see three of these "hook" episodes. Not *every* ep of *any* show is perfect, and Seasons 6 and 7 had some clunkers, but most of Buffy was gold.
Honestly. Find any of those eps on any file share engine.
Cowboy Bebop, the cartoon series, is far above and beyond almost any contemporary, in my estimation.
Bebop was a striking series mostly because you aren't *expecting* it to be so frighteningly good. "It's a half-hour cartoon. How could they possibly shock me?" followed by "WHAM!", followed by "what just hit me?"
The movie, on the other hand, carries with it elevated expectations, and it then needs to stand on its own (as a Science Fiction or Animated work) next to the (generally) profound works of Ghibli, and the gleamingly-polished works of Pixar. Cowboy Bebop the Movie, despite being of higher production quality than the television show, isn't as jaw-droppingly superior to its competitors as the half-hour episodes are to its own.
Powerpuff Girls suffered from the same drawback: what is perfectly paced for an 11-minute episode falls flat when stretched to 90 minutes, and darkened in tone considerably.
When turning episodic Sci-Fi into movies, there is the lazy way and the right way. It's like the difference between X-Files -> Fight The Futura and Star Trek (TOS) -> Wrath of Khan. It's a notch up, but the audience is expecting more.
Though, given the stunningly bad crap infiltrating theatres today wearing a cardboard sign labeled "Sci-Fi" like a forged press badge, Cowboy Bebop should blow people's minds anyway.
Between Academia Waltz and Bloom County, Breathed probably has more detractors than fans.
Sort of like Frank Zappa pounding out "Louie Louie" on the grand organ at Albert Hall. A lot of people just recoil from it, and a *lot* of people shoot milk out of their nose.
Not even to think about something is damning. But to be saddened by its victories, to go out of one's way to remember an obscure metaphor for its humourlessness, is encouraging. The phrase "I get it, but I don't think it's funny" tends to be a comment on the reader; at that point, the cartoonists have already won. I'm kidding, I just wanted to make fun of that expression.
They were lumped together in my mind too, but in the "infinitely re-readable" sense. While Calvin and Hobbes has aged somewhat better, you don't have to appreciate *who Ed Meese was* in order to be entertained by Opus' discussion of him. Often the Meadow Critters' understanding of the '80s politics was fairly superficial, which was okay.
It's a good recapitulation of history, especially to read about Cold-War era fears; "The Iron Giant" didn't lose any points from me for being about the '50s, nor "Cradle Will Rock" about the '30s.
But when I read Bloom County or Outland today, I find it even more compelling as a discussion of a political era that could shed some light on today's. With similar attitudes in the Bush Administration II and today's media about what it is to be God-Fearing and Rifle-Toting as in the 1980s, Opus and Milo and Binkley and Oliver... and even Bill... give us Berkeley Breathed's perspective as he was living through it, and we can get a sense of just how similar distant times can be.
Didn't Starcraft look like an "ending" ending? *Spoilers* Tassadar crashed the Gantrithor, blew up the Overmind? Sounds comparatively final to me, but you know, I could be insane.
No, I think that there's always room for stories to continue. Firstly, "World of Warcraft" the MMORPG is continuing after WC3 anyway. Secondly, just because the Burning Legion is all hosed, that doesn't mean that a) The Undead (Arthas!), b) The Orcs (Thrall!) c) The Humans (Jaina!) or d) The Night Elves (Furion! Illidan!) are completely gone. There's lots of potential for each of these stories to continue.
Remember that sometimes the best stories are made not from world-beating threats, but from character interactions.
My point is not that the poster need be pro-Linux. You don't even need to be pro-Slashdot to post on Slashdot. That would be ludicrous.
But just like Free Speech ends where you drown out debate, Slashdot posts should not disparage the entire apparatus of Slashdot altogether! I mean, there's a difference between making a point in a debate and saying "this entire debate is useless."
The parent of this thread was an attempt to stifle debate altogether. That's considered "noise". It was, by definition, trolling. It was certainly off-topic for this discussion. And it was anonymous. No point was being made there.
I defend anyone's right to voice their own opinion, but a comment like "ha" above isn't opinion, it's shouting, stifling and trolling. Glad to see it's been thus labelled.
Someone mod down this troll parent. If you're anti-Slashdot, go post on TeamXBox.com, by-and-for Microsoft Employees.
I think Jordan would do well to consider Open-Source alternatives, as would any country where a) economic resources are at a premium, so populace won't be bent over Microsoft's knee, and b) technical expertise is a conceivable road out of economic backwardness. Clearly, users of Open-Source software have a greater *need* to develop some technical skill in order to use the system, but more than that there's an *opportunity* to develop this skill.
From a US-National-Security standpoint, however, Jordan has been at times adversarial, at times supportive. Giving Microsoft a foothold would mean that all of their privacy-invasive techniques and technologies would be brought to bear on a country with notable proximity to the epicentres of extremist activities (Saudi Arabia, Palestine). Some could conceive of this as a good strategic move, but certainly Roblimo's audience wouldn't have enjoyed this particular slant.
Did Roblimo bring up that they'd more likely than not get big old electronic targets painted on their heads by using MS software?
It's interesting that where CDMA seems to dominate GSM solutions in the US, GSM seems to predominate in Europe.
Similarly, Cable seems to prevail in the US where DSL is catching on in Europe.
Is the difference a matter of infrastructure, or is it related more closely to the types of usage people prefer? Is there a connection between the needs of GSM users and DSL users?
Obvious point of comparison is per-user bandwidth versus number of users at capacity. Can't think of other parallels.
Good point. I agree that The Pretender was more likely the superior show. I haven't seen much about John Doe, but I'm very confused as to how they feel they can surpass the promise inherent in The Pretender (which seemed to be more *fun* anyway).
Couldn't there be some kind of forum review by the workers' supervisors? Couldn't there be "licenses" or some kind of authorization for people to post on forums as "forum people"?
I worked as Tech Support for a while, and people from my division actually rotated duties including E-mail, phones, and newsgroup. It was a very good way to keep in touch with our user base. But unless there was official policy about how support was done, things got chaotic from time to time.
So we had guidelines for forum work. Is that so hard to figure out? Techs shouldn't be giving out "rogue advice" so to speak, they should keep in touch with their employers, but they also shouldn't be absolutely, expressly forbidden from helping people out when they get the chance!
Slashdot Mirror
Er, I agreed with you until your bizarre response. Environmental depredation, overpopulation (especially in lower-tech countries) and the calculable end of energy reserves are serious considerations.
The point is that offworld settlement has to be an option, or, as a species, we'll have a nice built-in "sunset clause" (obPoliticalJab) unlike any of Bush's overtures to martial law.
Man, I was going for a 2:Funny.
"Bush's Government" is a pretty straightforward way to refer to "The US Government under the Bush Administration" without wasting time arguing on the Internet.
Houston Astros vs. Texas Rangers. Space-related snideness. Look, it's a quick post, and I think it got my point across. Bush needs a whole staff of fact-checkers to tell him the wrong age for a kid he's discussing in a public address. I didn't remember which Texas baseball team he owned (ownership as a type of financial management). So I chose the funnier one, and guessed wrong.
You can correct without mockery. But thanks for calling me your buddy.
And oil reserves will last forever. And the environment won't fall apart. And there's plenty of room for everyone.
The joke is funnier if I say "Houston Astros". But of course, it's technically true that he couldn't manage them, since he didn't have the opportunity. :)
Bush's government doesn't have the money to pay for his military enterprises.
It lacks the money to provide for basic infrastructure.
At a time when commercial space flight is being touted as the most logical course, Bush is now saying that he wants to send people back to the moon?
I'm all for the new frontier. It would be great if people were inspired about space again. But Bush does not deserve to be the one to get us there. He couldn't even manage the Houston Astros.
"I put my 20-minute workout tape on twice as fast, so it only took ten minutes." -- Ghostbusters
Some professors deliver their lectures. They pay close attention to pacing, they give students time to take notes, they engage students. I wouldn't recommend listening to these profs at high speed, especially if you're taking notes.
Others just drone. I'd fast forward these anyway.
The question really is: is it about the process or the information? Depends on the teaching style, and so should your approach.
Who put a Bengal Tiger in the Kaiser's latrine?
It's the Sneak, isn't it?
Yes, it's definitely the sneak.
He's dastardly,
he loves catastrophe,
his schemes are masterly,
takes tea at half-past-three...
It wasn't that funny when you posted it on AICN either.
But at least you got me to listen to "Mope" again. That's a funny song.
No, he'll do the reverse with one of his creations, not one of his non-creations.
He will give someone else's "anti-BTVS" TV series and straighten it out of an unsuccessful feature film.
On the other hand, it may be worth your ten cents (and their two cents) to text so that you can, as soon as possible, warn your friends about just how bad the movie is.
Again, a movie would have to be pretty frickin' bad to hit that level. I just watched Freddy vs. Jason and enjoyed it enough that I would even tell a friend, unqualified, that it was not worth seeing, let alone text him before the credits are over.
For some PoS like Armageddon or Magnolia (some people liked it, but dear lord not I), the pain goes on for three whole hours and I'd want some catharsis long before that. Warning a friend by texting while I'm still seated in the theatre, without obtrusively talking and bothering my neighbours, is definitely the way to go in such a situation.
So he's actually stated that SCO's case is based on huge chunks. That's great, that's really great. "Hey, everyone, look at our huge chunks."
Huge chunks of code or perhaps of a browner substance, more like bovine digestive waste in nature?
If they point out which code is their's, everyone will gladly remove it, and the violators will be caught and punished, assuming there's a record of who checked in the modifications. Anyone who continues building kernels with the stolen source may face hefty lawsuits or prison.
I think that the focus of SCO's complaint is that they've lost business because if the code hadn't been put into Linux in the first place, we would all own VAXen or mainframes, and be running System V, therefore SCO would be reaping big fat bags of money (with dollar signs on it!) from all of our $1000/seat licenses.
Since we stole that mystery code long ago, we can't make it better by replacing it now. Those big bags of money (with dollar signs on it!) are gone for good and we can't make it better. We suck, and must display contrition.
Obviously you're paying no attention to the kids. The kids aren't yet evil. Bran, Sansa, and Arya (though Rickon is still kinda quiet) are all basically good people; not much bad you can say about them.
And how can you dis on people like Loras Tyrell? He never did nothing to nobody, 'cept Renly. Allegedly.
The issue is, the characters are well-drawn enough for readers to make their own decisions about with whom to sympathize. Obviously the Starks are more idealistic than the Lannisters or the Greyjoys, but that doesn't mean that they're the only sympathetic characters.
Try reading a real history book. Find the "good guys" and "bad guys" there. Try reading the Old Testament or any other sacred text -- the heroes and villains are clearly flawed.
Try reading a typical pulp fantasy novel. Try to imagine anything in that book actually happening; try to picture it with your own eyes, or to think of anyone you've ever met who has a personality like a "hero" or "villain" in one of those books.
I'd rather read something I could possibly believe. It's the difference between escapism, and nonsense.
As long as it's already a spoiler thread, I just need to add that when *Jaime* becomes a character perspective, it feels like there aren't many streams left to cross. Jaime could be a *bad, bad guy*, and now we're supposed to sympathize?
And we did. So good a book!
But now, what's next? Who else could they shock us by sympathizing? Melisandre? One of the "Others"? Janos Slynt?
Also, don't get too used to "hating" any particular character. Even more surprising than who is 'taken out' of the story, is who is gradually 'put into' the story as viewpoints in each successive book.
Book 3 has a doozy of a new perspective. When I saw who it was, my jaw dropped, right in the middle of the Chapters store I was standing in. "How the heck are we supposed to sympathize with *that* character?" How indeed...
You only need to watch one episode.
It could be any one of a number of them, but if you catch "Lie to Me", "Hush", "The Body", "Becoming", any of 20+ episodes out of the 155 ultimately made, you will be hooked without delay.
If you watch a whole season, you're guaranteed to see three of these "hook" episodes. Not *every* ep of *any* show is perfect, and Seasons 6 and 7 had some clunkers, but most of Buffy was gold.
Honestly. Find any of those eps on any file share engine.
Cowboy Bebop, the cartoon series, is far above and beyond almost any contemporary, in my estimation.
Bebop was a striking series mostly because you aren't *expecting* it to be so frighteningly good. "It's a half-hour cartoon. How could they possibly shock me?" followed by "WHAM!", followed by "what just hit me?"
The movie, on the other hand, carries with it elevated expectations, and it then needs to stand on its own (as a Science Fiction or Animated work) next to the (generally) profound works of Ghibli, and the gleamingly-polished works of Pixar. Cowboy Bebop the Movie, despite being of higher production quality than the television show, isn't as jaw-droppingly superior to its competitors as the half-hour episodes are to its own.
Powerpuff Girls suffered from the same drawback: what is perfectly paced for an 11-minute episode falls flat when stretched to 90 minutes, and darkened in tone considerably.
When turning episodic Sci-Fi into movies, there is the lazy way and the right way. It's like the difference between X-Files -> Fight The Futura and Star Trek (TOS) -> Wrath of Khan. It's a notch up, but the audience is expecting more.
Though, given the stunningly bad crap infiltrating theatres today wearing a cardboard sign labeled "Sci-Fi" like a forged press badge, Cowboy Bebop should blow people's minds anyway.
Ilan
Between Academia Waltz and Bloom County, Breathed probably has more detractors than fans.
Sort of like Frank Zappa pounding out "Louie Louie" on the grand organ at Albert Hall. A lot of people just recoil from it, and a *lot* of people shoot milk out of their nose.
Not even to think about something is damning. But to be saddened by its victories, to go out of one's way to remember an obscure metaphor for its humourlessness, is encouraging. The phrase "I get it, but I don't think it's funny" tends to be a comment on the reader; at that point, the cartoonists have already won. I'm kidding, I just wanted to make fun of that expression.
They were lumped together in my mind too, but in the "infinitely re-readable" sense. While Calvin and Hobbes has aged somewhat better, you don't have to appreciate *who Ed Meese was* in order to be entertained by Opus' discussion of him. Often the Meadow Critters' understanding of the '80s politics was fairly superficial, which was okay.
It's a good recapitulation of history, especially to read about Cold-War era fears; "The Iron Giant" didn't lose any points from me for being about the '50s, nor "Cradle Will Rock" about the '30s.
But when I read Bloom County or Outland today, I find it even more compelling as a discussion of a political era that could shed some light on today's. With similar attitudes in the Bush Administration II and today's media about what it is to be God-Fearing and Rifle-Toting as in the 1980s, Opus and Milo and Binkley and Oliver... and even Bill... give us Berkeley Breathed's perspective as he was living through it, and we can get a sense of just how similar distant times can be.
I'd say it aged well.
Didn't Starcraft look like an "ending" ending? *Spoilers* Tassadar crashed the Gantrithor, blew up the Overmind? Sounds comparatively final to me, but you know, I could be insane.
No, I think that there's always room for stories to continue. Firstly, "World of Warcraft" the MMORPG is continuing after WC3 anyway. Secondly, just because the Burning Legion is all hosed, that doesn't mean that a) The Undead (Arthas!), b) The Orcs (Thrall!) c) The Humans (Jaina!) or d) The Night Elves (Furion! Illidan!) are completely gone. There's lots of potential for each of these stories to continue.
Remember that sometimes the best stories are made not from world-beating threats, but from character interactions.
My point is not that the poster need be pro-Linux. You don't even need to be pro-Slashdot to post on Slashdot. That would be ludicrous.
But just like Free Speech ends where you drown out debate, Slashdot posts should not disparage the entire apparatus of Slashdot altogether! I mean, there's a difference between making a point in a debate and saying "this entire debate is useless."
The parent of this thread was an attempt to stifle debate altogether. That's considered "noise". It was, by definition, trolling. It was certainly off-topic for this discussion. And it was anonymous. No point was being made there.
I defend anyone's right to voice their own opinion, but a comment like "ha" above isn't opinion, it's shouting, stifling and trolling. Glad to see it's been thus labelled.
Someone mod down this troll parent. If you're anti-Slashdot, go post on TeamXBox.com, by-and-for Microsoft Employees.
I think Jordan would do well to consider Open-Source alternatives, as would any country where a) economic resources are at a premium, so populace won't be bent over Microsoft's knee, and b) technical expertise is a conceivable road out of economic backwardness. Clearly, users of Open-Source software have a greater *need* to develop some technical skill in order to use the system, but more than that there's an *opportunity* to develop this skill.
From a US-National-Security standpoint, however, Jordan has been at times adversarial, at times supportive. Giving Microsoft a foothold would mean that all of their privacy-invasive techniques and technologies would be brought to bear on a country with notable proximity to the epicentres of extremist activities (Saudi Arabia, Palestine). Some could conceive of this as a good strategic move, but certainly Roblimo's audience wouldn't have enjoyed this particular slant.
Did Roblimo bring up that they'd more likely than not get big old electronic targets painted on their heads by using MS software?
It's interesting that where CDMA seems to dominate GSM solutions in the US, GSM seems to predominate in Europe.
Similarly, Cable seems to prevail in the US where DSL is catching on in Europe.
Is the difference a matter of infrastructure, or is it related more closely to the types of usage people prefer? Is there a connection between the needs of GSM users and DSL users?
Obvious point of comparison is per-user bandwidth versus number of users at capacity. Can't think of other parallels.
Good point. I agree that The Pretender was more likely the superior show. I haven't seen much about John Doe, but I'm very confused as to how they feel they can surpass the promise inherent in The Pretender (which seemed to be more *fun* anyway).
Couldn't there be some kind of forum review by the workers' supervisors? Couldn't there be "licenses" or some kind of authorization for people to post on forums as "forum people"?
I worked as Tech Support for a while, and people from my division actually rotated duties including E-mail, phones, and newsgroup. It was a very good way to keep in touch with our user base. But unless there was official policy about how support was done, things got chaotic from time to time.
So we had guidelines for forum work. Is that so hard to figure out? Techs shouldn't be giving out "rogue advice" so to speak, they should keep in touch with their employers, but they also shouldn't be absolutely, expressly forbidden from helping people out when they get the chance!