Re:In the beginning was the THOUGHT
on
Going Cyberpunk
·
· Score: 1
Oh sure, you could use your voice. But that's only a very small step. What I meant was that the true power of the technology wouldn't be unleased until you had a direct mental link.
A voice activiated chip is essentially no different from a command line, but a thought? Now that's a whole nother ball game.
In the beginning was the THOUGHT
on
Going Cyberpunk
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Now what REALLY matters is the interface. It's not much good to have a computer wired to your cortex is all you can do is type on your brain's command line.
What will make this take off is a thought-processor. An interface device that allows the computer to read your mind. The real challange will be in signal filtering; I don't want to speak for anyone else, but I think about a lot of random crap during the day. How to distinguish legitimate commands from my daydreaming about travel or movies or p0rn?
Whoever invents this will make Einstein look like a small time celebrity.
Funny that you mention it... I've been tuning in recently to TNN's TNG broadcasts, and remembering how good, and how BAD Trek can be. Some episodes are funny, spooky, interesting or downright cool, but seeing it now as an adult, its not nearly as cool as I remember it being when I was a kid.
The Best of Both Worlds may have been better than most of the movies, but half the time the script didn't live up. The chemistry of TNG had that special something that later series tried to capture with little success, but it DIDN'T have the awesome writing of later series.
Late-season voayger had some fantastic writers at the helm, and as for DS9, a decade after TNG, I'll say that it's severly underrated. Never had Trek ventured so much into politics and religion, never had individuals had so powerful motivations and messages. DS9 had better characters and a deeper milieu than TNG. But because there was no space opera, no flying around and blasting aliens, it wasn't as successful.
Nevermind, I guess I'll buy the DVDS. But that's just my 2 cents.
Good thing. I despise outlook. I work at a tech support department at a medium sized college, and we officially support netscape (not much of a better choice) but outlook attracts email worms like a neon light attracts bugs. After the hundreth box that I had to zero or get our net engineer to block I'd love to see something more secure. I'm using Eudora right now.
Also, I'd love to see popular email programs support background encryption, something that happened behind the scenes without the users notice, so even the most inept id10t could handle it. It's ridiculous that 90% of the world is sending it's email around in cleartext. Are we just begging the FBI or the NSA to read our minds?
What are you talking about? To begin with, the concept of "Good Movie" is pretty subjective. Diffrent people like diffrent things.
I for one am a visual/director lover, and this is where Scott delivers. 1492 was BEAUTIFUL, Thelma & Louise, Someone to Watch Over Me, and the newer ones such as Black Hawk Down and Gladitor are equally spectacular.
This is what makes BR famous, not the dialogue, not the acting (although its good) it's the atmosphere, the visuals.
Ridley Scott is a master at delivering eye candy on steroids. This is what makes him a great director.
The trick is to find the balance between visual flair and substance of acting and script.
Look at Spielburg for example, no art, no style, but great movies. Two of his movies even come close to Scott's in terms of cinematography. I'm thinking of Schindler's List and The Color Purple. But I have to say that Spielburg has made more good movies than Scott.
Sometimes, sometimes, Scott achives the perfect mixture of art and substance, such as Gladiator and Blade Runner and Alien. His work is certainly hit and miss, but when he hits....wow.
Somewhere along the line, people forgot that ownership of an object meant something. Corporations have been using this to their advantage ever since. If I legitimatly buy a product, why is there any legal issue to be resolved in my selling it to another person, as long as this object isn't duplicated in the meantime?
Now of course, this brings up the even larger discussion about the legitimacy of copyright law to begin with. I'm unclear on how creation implies ownership... Take the case of geneticly modified creatures. Can a corporation really create and then OWN all resulting creatures? What if these beings have minds of their own? I doubt a super-rat made in labratory test tube would take kindly to being owned body and soul by it's so called "creators." (Don't get me started about the legitimacy of THAT word.)
But let me get back to my question of ownership. Inanimate objects are capable of being possessed, not simply because they can't argue (unlike slaves for example) but because they have no will. If you possess, do you not also own? Yet in our society, somehow ownership is still retained by the corporation. The end user is, of course, relegated to use. I don't know that this makes much sense. One of the basic, fundamental principles of humanity is the idea that things have innate value. I would argue, that this value comes from the idea of possession, that you somehow own the object, and thus it is valuble.
Did you know that the vast majority of land pollution is on publicly held land? What is owned by everyone is valued by no one, as I once heard. Because ownership by everyone isn't true ownership. One of the most powerful things I've ever seen was to go to a poor neighborhood in my city and have someone point out to me the houses that were owned, and the houses that had renters. The home-owners took 10 times as much care of their houses, even though they were very poor. (They had been helped to lease and own these houses through a new city program.) The change in atmosphere was striking and profound. If it's mine, I'm not going to mess it up!
With software, EULAs are ridiculous. With art...(or life) I don't know. But the digital age has certainly brought challenges to our economic systems.
I know that he's from New Zealand, but it IS New Line Cinema, which, last time I checked could be reasonalby referred to as "Hollywood." Secondly, the diffrence between a relativly small film like Heavenly Cretures and something like LotR is ENORMOUS. He is almost unknown when it comes to making blockbuster films. Frankly, it makes me even more impressed with him that New Line would hand him $300 million. I hope that this was because they think he's a great director and not because they simply has too much cash laying around.
All I can say is that with the release of each passing trailer I become more impressed with Peter Jackson. Considering he's practicly unknown and had $300 Million dropped in his lap I was expecting nothing less than a disaster. But When I started seeing footage I was impressed. Look at some of the camera direction and cinematography that went into some of those shots in the latest trailer. Something as simple as Frodo reading under a tree was given a very artistic, moving camera touch. I've always appreciated artistic directorial styles. Look at Ridley Scott or Kubrick Vs. Spielburg. The first two are ARTISTS, and the movies they make (made in Kubrick's case) each carry the hallmarks of great artistry. Spielburg, on the other hand has never used a very interesting canvas. (There are some HUGE exceptions to this such as the Color Purple or Shindler's List) He gets good scripts and makes solid movies. What will make or break Peter Jackson will be his ARTISTRY. LotR is not a book that could be rendered in a bland style. It's simply too complex, too rich, too magnificent on it's own account. In translation to the big screen Jackson will have to pull out some of those visual tricks to make LotR not only a great book, but a great MOVIE.
If he pulls this off, he'll be considered one of the next great director of American film. If he doesn't, they'll be people lining up to piss on his grave. I sure wouldn't want to be in his shoes...
I think the release dates are the same. The trailer out in the US has Dec. 19th on it, so it shouldn't be before yours. I think this may be true in most countries. Successive release dates don't make much sense to me.
The spelling I always remember from the early nineties was "e-mail." The lowercase "e" may have more to say about the hackers involved then the intended form. It's not like grammer matters too much to the people on IRC...
Ah, the beauty of email lies in its wonderful flexability and ease of use. No dead trees and no stamps. It's just as easy to send a 1,000 line message as a 5 line one. Our only job now is to make sure that it stays out of the evil hands of the United States Postal Service...
Some of the best games ever are the truly dusty ones. PCGamer released a CD not too long ago with some fantastic oldies that run well on todays hardware. Here I'm thinking Wing Commander, XCom and The Secret of Monkey Island among others. I spent money for The Ultima Collection awhile back and it was the best $30 I have ever given up. Even if you have mem or hardware problems, remember that there are some cool people who have reprogrammed games to run on modern hardware (Ultima 7 for example can now run under WinME) and one can always grab MoSlow or an emulator if you're desperate.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh sure, you could use your voice. But that's only a very small step. What I meant was that the true power of the technology wouldn't be unleased until you had a direct mental link.
A voice activiated chip is essentially no different from a command line, but a thought? Now that's a whole nother ball game.
Now what REALLY matters is the interface. It's not much good to have a computer wired to your cortex is all you can do is type on your brain's command line.
What will make this take off is a thought-processor. An interface device that allows the computer to read your mind. The real challange will be in signal filtering; I don't want to speak for anyone else, but I think about a lot of random crap during the day. How to distinguish legitimate commands from my daydreaming about travel or movies or p0rn?
Whoever invents this will make Einstein look like a small time celebrity.
Funny that you mention it... I've been tuning in recently to TNN's TNG broadcasts, and remembering how good, and how BAD Trek can be. Some episodes are funny, spooky, interesting or downright cool, but seeing it now as an adult, its not nearly as cool as I remember it being when I was a kid.
The Best of Both Worlds may have been better than most of the movies, but half the time the script didn't live up. The chemistry of TNG had that special something that later series tried to capture with little success, but it DIDN'T have the awesome writing of later series.
Late-season voayger had some fantastic writers at the helm, and as for DS9, a decade after TNG, I'll say that it's severly underrated. Never had Trek ventured so much into politics and religion, never had individuals had so powerful motivations and messages. DS9 had better characters and a deeper milieu than TNG. But because there was no space opera, no flying around and blasting aliens, it wasn't as successful.
Nevermind, I guess I'll buy the DVDS. But that's just my 2 cents.
Good thing. I despise outlook. I work at a tech support department at a medium sized college, and we officially support netscape (not much of a better choice) but outlook attracts email worms like a neon light attracts bugs. After the hundreth box that I had to zero or get our net engineer to block I'd love to see something more secure. I'm using Eudora right now.
Also, I'd love to see popular email programs support background encryption, something that happened behind the scenes without the users notice, so even the most inept id10t could handle it. It's ridiculous that 90% of the world is sending it's email around in cleartext. Are we just begging the FBI or the NSA to read our minds?
What are you talking about? To begin with, the concept of "Good Movie" is pretty subjective. Diffrent people like diffrent things.
I for one am a visual/director lover, and this is where Scott delivers. 1492 was BEAUTIFUL, Thelma & Louise, Someone to Watch Over Me, and the newer ones such as Black Hawk Down and Gladitor are equally spectacular.
This is what makes BR famous, not the dialogue, not the acting (although its good) it's the atmosphere, the visuals. Ridley Scott is a master at delivering eye candy on steroids. This is what makes him a great director.
The trick is to find the balance between visual flair and substance of acting and script.
Look at Spielburg for example, no art, no style, but great movies. Two of his movies even come close to Scott's in terms of cinematography. I'm thinking of Schindler's List and The Color Purple. But I have to say that Spielburg has made more good movies than Scott.
Sometimes, sometimes, Scott achives the perfect mixture of art and substance, such as Gladiator and Blade Runner and Alien. His work is certainly hit and miss, but when he hits....wow.
Somewhere along the line, people forgot that ownership of an object meant something. Corporations have been using this to their advantage ever since. If I legitimatly buy a product, why is there any legal issue to be resolved in my selling it to another person, as long as this object isn't duplicated in the meantime?
Now of course, this brings up the even larger discussion about the legitimacy of copyright law to begin with. I'm unclear on how creation implies ownership... Take the case of geneticly modified creatures. Can a corporation really create and then OWN all resulting creatures? What if these beings have minds of their own? I doubt a super-rat made in labratory test tube would take kindly to being owned body and soul by it's so called "creators." (Don't get me started about the legitimacy of THAT word.)
But let me get back to my question of ownership. Inanimate objects are capable of being possessed, not simply because they can't argue (unlike slaves for example) but because they have no will. If you possess, do you not also own? Yet in our society, somehow ownership is still retained by the corporation. The end user is, of course, relegated to use. I don't know that this makes much sense. One of the basic, fundamental principles of humanity is the idea that things have innate value. I would argue, that this value comes from the idea of possession, that you somehow own the object, and thus it is valuble.
Did you know that the vast majority of land pollution is on publicly held land? What is owned by everyone is valued by no one, as I once heard. Because ownership by everyone isn't true ownership. One of the most powerful things I've ever seen was to go to a poor neighborhood in my city and have someone point out to me the houses that were owned, and the houses that had renters. The home-owners took 10 times as much care of their houses, even though they were very poor. (They had been helped to lease and own these houses through a new city program.) The change in atmosphere was striking and profound. If it's mine, I'm not going to mess it up!
With software, EULAs are ridiculous. With art...(or life) I don't know. But the digital age has certainly brought challenges to our economic systems.
I know that he's from New Zealand, but it IS New Line Cinema, which, last time I checked could be reasonalby referred to as "Hollywood." Secondly, the diffrence between a relativly small film like Heavenly Cretures and something like LotR is ENORMOUS. He is almost unknown when it comes to making blockbuster films. Frankly, it makes me even more impressed with him that New Line would hand him $300 million. I hope that this was because they think he's a great director and not because they simply has too much cash laying around.
All I can say is that with the release of each passing trailer I become more impressed with Peter Jackson. Considering he's practicly unknown and had $300 Million dropped in his lap I was expecting nothing less than a disaster. But When I started seeing footage I was impressed. Look at some of the camera direction and cinematography that went into some of those shots in the latest trailer. Something as simple as Frodo reading under a tree was given a very artistic, moving camera touch. I've always appreciated artistic directorial styles. Look at Ridley Scott or Kubrick Vs. Spielburg. The first two are ARTISTS, and the movies they make (made in Kubrick's case) each carry the hallmarks of great artistry. Spielburg, on the other hand has never used a very interesting canvas. (There are some HUGE exceptions to this such as the Color Purple or Shindler's List) He gets good scripts and makes solid movies. What will make or break Peter Jackson will be his ARTISTRY. LotR is not a book that could be rendered in a bland style. It's simply too complex, too rich, too magnificent on it's own account. In translation to the big screen Jackson will have to pull out some of those visual tricks to make LotR not only a great book, but a great MOVIE.
If he pulls this off, he'll be considered one of the next great director of American film. If he doesn't, they'll be people lining up to piss on his grave. I sure wouldn't want to be in his shoes...
I think the release dates are the same. The trailer out in the US has Dec. 19th on it, so it shouldn't be before yours. I think this may be true in most countries. Successive release dates don't make much sense to me.
The spelling I always remember from the early nineties was "e-mail." The lowercase "e" may have more to say about the hackers involved then the intended form. It's not like grammer matters too much to the people on IRC...
Ah, the beauty of email lies in its wonderful flexability and ease of use. No dead trees and no stamps. It's just as easy to send a 1,000 line message as a 5 line one. Our only job now is to make sure that it stays out of the evil hands of the United States Postal Service...
Some of the best games ever are the truly dusty ones. PCGamer released a CD not too long ago with some fantastic oldies that run well on todays hardware. Here I'm thinking Wing Commander, XCom and The Secret of Monkey Island among others. I spent money for The Ultima Collection awhile back and it was the best $30 I have ever given up. Even if you have mem or hardware problems, remember that there are some cool people who have reprogrammed games to run on modern hardware (Ultima 7 for example can now run under WinME) and one can always grab MoSlow or an emulator if you're desperate.