The biggest highlight for me is getting rid of the fat pervert in the MSN butterfly wings, and replacing him with this improved model
I suspect this has more to do with a Las Vegas law that requires all convention floor presenters to hire and present at least one booth-babe. Granted - it might make the MSN commercials a bit better if they continued with this theme. But not likely.
Although... it would make the MSN "can little Jimmy look at porn?" commercial a bit more entertaining.
There's a reason we've been hearing since 1998 that Linux will "overtake Windows on the desktop," but it's never happened and never will with its current mindset.
I'm sure the number of compatible software titles has nothing to do with it. Its all because the average user doesn't know what to do when they find "GNOME, KDE, WindowMaker, FluxBox" in a pulldown menu.
These are some interesting figures. And, for the most part, they seem to be fairly accurate. However, they don't tell the entire story.
For another view of NASA's funding, one should read the recent CAIB (Columbia Accident Investigation Board) Report. Of specific interest is portions of Chapter 5: From Challenger to Columbia. Read Section 5.3 An Agency Trying To Do Too Much with Too Little. In one of the charts is some very simular figures. But the report goes deeper in analyzing the buying power of that budget as well as some of the politics and ear-marking that limits what can be done with those funds.
If you're going to use it [song, movie, application, media of sorts] then it's obviously of value to you. If you didn't create it then you're not entitled to it [unless the author gives permission]. Therefore you have stolen the value of the media from the author.
One way to relax is taking a drive in the country. Get in some fresh air. Enjoy the scenery.
Now - I paid for the car and fuel. And my taxes pay for the road. But what about the scenery? Am I stealing from the land owners? By your example, are they not somehow entitled to something since they are providing some form of value?
I wish this continual flamewar would end, but frankly, I believe (mod me down if you wish) that most hostility comes from linux users. If you find some bsd folks here a little touchy, considering the amount of trolling every bsd announcment gets, it is a small miracle that people still come here for bsd news, that they are not as bitter as one would expect (but than, they - warning, flamebait! - seems to be more mature.
I don't think its so easy to point to the source of hostility.
Around '97 I was becoming interested in Unix/like systems. So I got myself an old 486 and was trying to decide to load it up with - FreeBSD or Linux. I was coming from a very Windows-centric viewpoint, so I asked around for advice. One friend suggested Linux (Slackware to be exact). Then I went to chat up the folks at the ISP I had a part-time helldesk job.
The ISP in question was almost an entirely BSD shop. They were great believers in FreeBSD and, of course, suggested it. When I asked them about Linux I almost got my ear chewed off - and not with helpful reasons why to pick one over the other. I was shocked at how much animosity they had for the system.
I can understand animosity towards Windows and Microsoft. I have shared some of the experiences that build up that contempt. But I can't understand why there is this friction between BSD and Linux users. Maybe its the old "Ford vs. Chevy" thing. Or maybe I just haven't experienced things as a BSD fan.
A few months ago, I was in my local theater waiting for the movie to start. The lights dim. The screen flickers. And where we usually start with a selection of previews for movies the studios would like us to see... I was treated to 20 mins of commercials (another rant for a different time).
At the tail end of these commercials was a heartening look at an industry stuntman. He talked about movies. He talked about his work. He talked about the risks he and his fellow stuntmen take to bring us exciting action in the movies. And he warned us that when we download a movie, we're stealing from him. Yep. Download a movie and you've all but made his work... his risks... his sacrifice worthless.
The message is clear. The MPAA wants us to know that downloading movies eliminates jobs. It hurts people like this particular stuntman. It takes away his job. Downloading is theft.
Of course, we have to wonder what this stuntman thinks about the massive battle scenes in the Lord of the Rings series. Sure. Motion capture plays a heavy part in the current technology. But you only need so many stuntment in a digital studio to generate the data needed for that. And what about the day when motion capture is no longer needed - when the actions of generic stunts have been long since captured, added to a database, and available on CDROM/DVD for a few hundred dollars? What happens to the job of the noble stuntman?
It seems that CGI too, is theft.
Or not.
Re:You know... things just don't amaze me.
on
Message in a Battle
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
To be honest, I found the closest being FF:Spirits Within. Crappy movie, but you have to admit the graphics were outstanding.
I also thought the graphics in Final Fantasy were interesting. But they went from hot to cold. Some scenes were fluid. Some were... robotic.
All in all, I thought Shrek had more "real" looking characters than FF. In fact, I remember a comment from the animators saying they had to conciously work to make sure their characters didn't look too real - this being a fairy tale and all.
Since there are not many deaths in the amateur rocketry community, I'm fairly sure I know which incident this was. In fact, it is the only amateur-rocket-related death I know of.
It may be the same. This happened in a Houston, TX suberb. I don't know the details and what little I have been told came from skeptical (and completely misunderstanding) former coworkers and employer of the individual mentioned.
Remember the unidentified "Blam" sort of noise that created such an uproar on the space station a few weeks ago?
Well maybe we already have an X-prize winner and they have not yet claimed the prize.
Look... an astronaut trying to cover up "misuse of government resources" charge when his Quake game was uncovered by his headphones slipping from the laptop sound jack doesn't count. Carmack can't claim the X-Prize for launching a rocket in space - whether he programmed to rocketlauncher or not.
As long as NASA is the only serious space agency, progress will be slow and safe. By letting individuals and small groups take risks that NASA is unwilling or unable to take, progress can be expected much sooner.
"Slow and safe"? What? Have you been sleeping through the history of NASA? Heck - even if you limit your perspective to recent history and manned exploration... you're still facing some rather noteworthy disasters. Challenger. Columbia.
While NASA may do a lot to minimize the risks, they have hardly made space travel (manned or otherwise) "safe".
Should Carmack be able to buy rocket fuel? Sure, if he can store it safely.
Good point. One of my consulting gigs came about when the regular admin killed himself working on a rocket engine. Partially blew himself up in the backyard. Died in his wife's arms.
It could have been worse. He could have hurt someone else too (I have no idea how competent the guy was with this stuff).
Now... I appreciate the drive that makes someone want to work with that stuff (unlike some of the admin's former coworkers). But at the same time, its no toy. The stuff is dangerous. To those who work with it and those who just happen to be in the area at the wrong time.
Yes, but Kuwait's oil is not in the hand of the US to pay for its presence in a strategically perfect location. Comes in handy, doesn't it?
But then - the Kuwaiti oil is going to be cheaper than water for US forces if that helps keep them in-country. Kuwait has also been working towards providing facilities and other logistical support for US forces stationed there. The cost of maintaining a presence in Kuwait is going to be considerably cheaper than almost any other location in the world.
Kuwait does not have a strong military - either in equipment or experience. They generally like having US forces keeping the sanctity of their borders.
You do realize that the US military is going to keep a permanent force in Iraq, don't you? Like Germany and Japan, Iraq is going to be our "friend" in the new American theater of interest (that is, the Middle East).
Its very likely the US will maintain a military presence for some time. It will certainly want to protect its interests in the region. And the prospect of a stable, secular government in Iraq would definately be in the US' interest.
Once Iraq contains US bases, we won't need to rely on Saudia Arabia, supercarriers, or flights over Turkey....only the subservience of the country we kindly liberated.
Keep in mind that the US already has military bases in that area with the blessings of a country glad for its liberation. Kuwait.
Let's turn it arround. Let's imagine Iraqis conquered the US, Bush goes into hiding, they take over various governmental functions. All over the country, Red Blooded Americans start uprising. Not because of Bush, but because there are Iraqis running our country.
I think I understand what you're trying to say. And sure, the capture of Saddam will not immediately end violence in the area. But your anology is incorrect.
Iraq is not the US. The US culture is very different than Iraqi culture. The people are different - and so are their experiences and history. The two governments are entirely different in attitude and structure. This includes how that government was formed, who was put in to what positions and why, and individual loyalties.
There are basic simularities between people. But that does not mean you can simply take one set of events, transplant them artificially in to a new environment, and then expect to gain any insight towards the culture and politics involved in the origional events.
If more people thought, "Well what would an American do if the situation were reversed?" And stopped thinking like imperialists, then I think there would be far less blood spilt in the Cradle of Civilization.
Because what... the Middle East was the bastion of peace before the US showed up?
Good points. But for the sake of conversation, I'd like to make some counter-points...
doubtful. not all the opposition is saddam supporters. there are islamic terrorists that want to setup another afghanstan, probably some shiites wanting to setup a iran-type islamic gov't, maybe some sunni's and maybe some kurds.
At the same time, Saddam was a symbol. Capturing him is also symbolic - that this regime is not going to return. This may hearten the Iraqi people. And those who feared such a return and kept silent while resistance / terrorists operated amoung them.
And it isn't the attacks that are keeping us there, we have to be there through the setup of the country and to fix a lot of things we broke in a couple of wars (and even more things saddam broke through neglect).
Actually - I have to disagree with this. The longer these attacks keep up, the longer US and its allies will remain in Iraq. True - the goal is to rebuild Iraq, not wipe out insurgants. But Iraq can not be rebuilt while the infrastructure of a new government is picked apart by assasinations and sabotage.
However I think the cold emotionless snapping of the infants neck was quite spine-chilling. Sick, sure but it was a Cylon doing it with no emotion, but more as an experiment. If she would so coldly experiment with a baby's neck, then she would surely be capable of coldly experimenting with some guy's emotions and private parts.
Except - it didn't seem to be done coldly. The Blonde Cylon looked guilty at that sickening crunch. But because we are human, we empathize with the infant's death. Look at the scene from a different angle. The Blonde walks up to a stranger and admirs their shiny new widget. She pokes at it curiously. As she's playing with a knob, it snaps. She pulls back both suprised and felling guilty... then slinks off in to the crowd before the widget's owner realizes what happened.
Secondly, she seems fairly emotional with Baltar. Sure - not warm. Not friendly. But certainly driven... and concerned about "love", of all things. Just because the girl is manipulative, doesn't mean she is "cold" per se. And it doesn't mean her actions are purly driven by experimentation.
Also, at least a couple times it's hinted at by the Cylons that their motivation might be, somehow... religious, as weird as that seems. I can't remember the exact lines, but I swear that this idea was there.
It seems fairly plain that the Cylons have religion. And, at that, they seem to have picked up some form of human religion. There are two major themes expressed during the two "mini-series" (read: pilot) episodes.
The first is our blonde bombshell Cylon. She is rather serious about her religious beliefs and slightly affronted when mocked about having them. And then she says something very interesting: "God is love." Sounds Christian. And it could explain her preoccupation with Baltar loving her.
I believe some have misidentified the Cylon's actions as trying to mimic that which they wish to destroy - man. They want no such thing. But they do want to be one with God. First, man was made in God's image - simple enough to follow (well - OK... not THAT simple). But the next step to being one with God is to love. Again - "God is love." And that is where our fembot's preoccupation comes from.
The second insight to Cylon religious zeal comes from the arms cache scene. Here, the "arms dealer" Cylon introduces the idea of man paying for his sins. And, in fact, paying this debt at the hands of the Cylons. This is further reinforced by the Cylon's dying threat that Adama (and man in general) can no longer run from what they have done. And by that, I believe he's not talking about creating the Cylons. He is talking about all of man's sins (keep in mind his mentioning man clubbing each other like savages early on).
So what is the Cylon religion? Its based on Human religion - picked up during their progress towards sentience. Unfortunately for us, it seems they took too much of our self-lothing nature to heart. They decided they were God's tools and the method of visiting retribution and punishment on man for his sins. And then went about that business. But at the same time, that religion also provides a roadmap to becoming one with God. And that includes adopting many of Man's characteristics (although presumably not all of them).
(although I also remember there being someone else who did a study on fooling a broad range of biometric sensors).
ExtremeTech did an interesting bit on some of the available consumer biometric devices circa '02. Its also interesting to note that apparently Siemens did their own testing based on this article.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect this has more to do with a Las Vegas law that requires all convention floor presenters to hire and present at least one booth-babe. Granted - it might make the MSN commercials a bit better if they continued with this theme. But not likely.
Although... it would make the MSN "can little Jimmy look at porn?" commercial a bit more entertaining.
Maybe I should use an emoticon or a [SARCASM] tag.
I'm sure the number of compatible software titles has nothing to do with it. Its all because the average user doesn't know what to do when they find "GNOME, KDE, WindowMaker, FluxBox" in a pulldown menu.
These are some interesting figures. And, for the most part, they seem to be fairly accurate. However, they don't tell the entire story.
For another view of NASA's funding, one should read the recent CAIB (Columbia Accident Investigation Board) Report. Of specific interest is portions of Chapter 5: From Challenger to Columbia. Read Section 5.3 An Agency Trying To Do Too Much with Too Little. In one of the charts is some very simular figures. But the report goes deeper in analyzing the buying power of that budget as well as some of the politics and ear-marking that limits what can be done with those funds.
I'm not sure that's a bad thing. After all, China is. And that is no worker's paradise (propoganda aside).
Cool. Now how do I remove these components from my current Win2K or future WinXP install?
I thought that was "trespassing".
One way to relax is taking a drive in the country. Get in some fresh air. Enjoy the scenery.
Now - I paid for the car and fuel. And my taxes pay for the road. But what about the scenery? Am I stealing from the land owners? By your example, are they not somehow entitled to something since they are providing some form of value?
I don't think its so easy to point to the source of hostility.
Around '97 I was becoming interested in Unix/like systems. So I got myself an old 486 and was trying to decide to load it up with - FreeBSD or Linux. I was coming from a very Windows-centric viewpoint, so I asked around for advice. One friend suggested Linux (Slackware to be exact). Then I went to chat up the folks at the ISP I had a part-time helldesk job.
The ISP in question was almost an entirely BSD shop. They were great believers in FreeBSD and, of course, suggested it. When I asked them about Linux I almost got my ear chewed off - and not with helpful reasons why to pick one over the other. I was shocked at how much animosity they had for the system.
I can understand animosity towards Windows and Microsoft. I have shared some of the experiences that build up that contempt. But I can't understand why there is this friction between BSD and Linux users. Maybe its the old "Ford vs. Chevy" thing. Or maybe I just haven't experienced things as a BSD fan.
apt-get update :)
...are you trying to say that actors steal too?
A few months ago, I was in my local theater waiting for the movie to start. The lights dim. The screen flickers. And where we usually start with a selection of previews for movies the studios would like us to see... I was treated to 20 mins of commercials (another rant for a different time).
At the tail end of these commercials was a heartening look at an industry stuntman. He talked about movies. He talked about his work. He talked about the risks he and his fellow stuntmen take to bring us exciting action in the movies. And he warned us that when we download a movie, we're stealing from him. Yep. Download a movie and you've all but made his work... his risks... his sacrifice worthless.
The message is clear. The MPAA wants us to know that downloading movies eliminates jobs. It hurts people like this particular stuntman. It takes away his job. Downloading is theft.
Of course, we have to wonder what this stuntman thinks about the massive battle scenes in the Lord of the Rings series. Sure. Motion capture plays a heavy part in the current technology. But you only need so many stuntment in a digital studio to generate the data needed for that. And what about the day when motion capture is no longer needed - when the actions of generic stunts have been long since captured, added to a database, and available on CDROM/DVD for a few hundred dollars? What happens to the job of the noble stuntman?
It seems that CGI too, is theft.
Or not.
I also thought the graphics in Final Fantasy were interesting. But they went from hot to cold. Some scenes were fluid. Some were... robotic.
All in all, I thought Shrek had more "real" looking characters than FF. In fact, I remember a comment from the animators saying they had to conciously work to make sure their characters didn't look too real - this being a fairy tale and all.
It may be the same. This happened in a Houston, TX suberb. I don't know the details and what little I have been told came from skeptical (and completely misunderstanding) former coworkers and employer of the individual mentioned.
Look... an astronaut trying to cover up "misuse of government resources" charge when his Quake game was uncovered by his headphones slipping from the laptop sound jack doesn't count. Carmack can't claim the X-Prize for launching a rocket in space - whether he programmed to rocketlauncher or not.
"Slow and safe"? What? Have you been sleeping through the history of NASA? Heck - even if you limit your perspective to recent history and manned exploration... you're still facing some rather noteworthy disasters. Challenger. Columbia.
While NASA may do a lot to minimize the risks, they have hardly made space travel (manned or otherwise) "safe".
Good point. One of my consulting gigs came about when the regular admin killed himself working on a rocket engine. Partially blew himself up in the backyard. Died in his wife's arms.
It could have been worse. He could have hurt someone else too (I have no idea how competent the guy was with this stuff).
Now... I appreciate the drive that makes someone want to work with that stuff (unlike some of the admin's former coworkers). But at the same time, its no toy. The stuff is dangerous. To those who work with it and those who just happen to be in the area at the wrong time.
But then - the Kuwaiti oil is going to be cheaper than water for US forces if that helps keep them in-country. Kuwait has also been working towards providing facilities and other logistical support for US forces stationed there. The cost of maintaining a presence in Kuwait is going to be considerably cheaper than almost any other location in the world.
Kuwait does not have a strong military - either in equipment or experience. They generally like having US forces keeping the sanctity of their borders.
Its very likely the US will maintain a military presence for some time. It will certainly want to protect its interests in the region. And the prospect of a stable, secular government in Iraq would definately be in the US' interest.
Keep in mind that the US already has military bases in that area with the blessings of a country glad for its liberation. Kuwait.
I think I understand what you're trying to say. And sure, the capture of Saddam will not immediately end violence in the area. But your anology is incorrect.
Iraq is not the US. The US culture is very different than Iraqi culture. The people are different - and so are their experiences and history. The two governments are entirely different in attitude and structure. This includes how that government was formed, who was put in to what positions and why, and individual loyalties.
There are basic simularities between people. But that does not mean you can simply take one set of events, transplant them artificially in to a new environment, and then expect to gain any insight towards the culture and politics involved in the origional events.
Because what... the Middle East was the bastion of peace before the US showed up?
At the same time, Saddam was a symbol. Capturing him is also symbolic - that this regime is not going to return. This may hearten the Iraqi people. And those who feared such a return and kept silent while resistance / terrorists operated amoung them.
Actually - I have to disagree with this. The longer these attacks keep up, the longer US and its allies will remain in Iraq. True - the goal is to rebuild Iraq, not wipe out insurgants. But Iraq can not be rebuilt while the infrastructure of a new government is picked apart by assasinations and sabotage.
Except - it didn't seem to be done coldly. The Blonde Cylon looked guilty at that sickening crunch. But because we are human, we empathize with the infant's death. Look at the scene from a different angle. The Blonde walks up to a stranger and admirs their shiny new widget. She pokes at it curiously. As she's playing with a knob, it snaps. She pulls back both suprised and felling guilty... then slinks off in to the crowd before the widget's owner realizes what happened.
Secondly, she seems fairly emotional with Baltar. Sure - not warm. Not friendly. But certainly driven... and concerned about "love", of all things. Just because the girl is manipulative, doesn't mean she is "cold" per se. And it doesn't mean her actions are purly driven by experimentation.
(it also doesn't mean she's a good girlfriend
It seems fairly plain that the Cylons have religion. And, at that, they seem to have picked up some form of human religion. There are two major themes expressed during the two "mini-series" (read: pilot) episodes.
The first is our blonde bombshell Cylon. She is rather serious about her religious beliefs and slightly affronted when mocked about having them. And then she says something very interesting: "God is love." Sounds Christian. And it could explain her preoccupation with Baltar loving her.
I believe some have misidentified the Cylon's actions as trying to mimic that which they wish to destroy - man. They want no such thing. But they do want to be one with God. First, man was made in God's image - simple enough to follow (well - OK... not THAT simple). But the next step to being one with God is to love. Again - "God is love." And that is where our fembot's preoccupation comes from.
The second insight to Cylon religious zeal comes from the arms cache scene. Here, the "arms dealer" Cylon introduces the idea of man paying for his sins. And, in fact, paying this debt at the hands of the Cylons. This is further reinforced by the Cylon's dying threat that Adama (and man in general) can no longer run from what they have done. And by that, I believe he's not talking about creating the Cylons. He is talking about all of man's sins (keep in mind his mentioning man clubbing each other like savages early on).
So what is the Cylon religion? Its based on Human religion - picked up during their progress towards sentience. Unfortunately for us, it seems they took too much of our self-lothing nature to heart. They decided they were God's tools and the method of visiting retribution and punishment on man for his sins. And then went about that business. But at the same time, that religion also provides a roadmap to becoming one with God. And that includes adopting many of Man's characteristics (although presumably not all of them).
ExtremeTech did an interesting bit on some of the available consumer biometric devices circa '02. Its also interesting to note that apparently Siemens did their own testing based on this article.
It seems that these sorts of sensors can be fooled using a geletin finger.