That the best way to insure the success of your dirty tricks campaign is to broadcast it loudly and publicly so everyone knows, especially the party you are pulling your shenanigans against. If anything if this campaign does gain traction, the likely outcome is that public votes for Palin will be tossed and Republicans will resort to an election by delegates only, which will completely eradicate these efforts and deny the common citizens their illusion of democracy.
Our government and corporations stand idly by while China infiltrates our military, government and corporate networks, commits blatant acts of corporate espionage, places unfair regulations on foreign companies operations within their country and now pulls blatant protectionist laws to stifle competition.
But nothing will be done because China is the largest emerging economy on the planet and no one can afford to pass up a piece of that pie. Back in the day the US and other nations would be slinging trade embargos left and right and playing hard ball. Today, we're so weak and poor we just bend over and take it.
Steve Jobs is using it as a warehouse to store his massive shuriken collection. As you recall, he threw an enormous shit fit when Tokyo airport security wouldn't allow him to board his own private jet with a couple particularly rare specimens.
His raging tantrum over a couple throwing stars doesn't seem so childish now does it?
Truer than you think. I was posting a Go To Bed thread about an hour after the redneck techno and color theme were added. The post never went through because boards.4chan was down
I know that resentment rides high on Slashdot over Lucas' prequel efforts, but Ridley Scott is a Director/Producer of a whole other calibre. Franky, I'm hard pressed to name a bad film by Scott... sure, some movies such as Kingdom of Heaven and Hannibal come to mind, but they were very watchable and had many redeeming qualities beyond just action and effects. Also keep in mind that Scott is responsible for both Alien and Blade Runner, two of most memorable and defining sci-fi efforts in cinematic history, and he did them back to back. And most importantly, Scott's entire portfolio is very diverse in genre and subject matter. Unlike Lucas, he is a truly imaginative and gifted director and not one to take up a project to make a buck or milk a franchise.
Personally, I see lots of potential for these prequels to be nothing short of fantastic. The telling of the story of the Space Jockey and the origins of the Xeno-Morph has all sorts of potential, as does the telling of the 1st encounter and discovery of the Xeno-Morph by Weyland-Yutani. These stories aren't those of a true prequel in the Star Wars sense, those were stories that closely followed an existing story arc around a small set of characters. Here, we have a whole other set of stories only loosely related to the stories we already know.
So give Scott some slack, you know you're going to see these movies in the theatre no matter what the reviews say and you know that with Scott at the helm, there will be a decent plot and story line and that the visuals and world will be stunning and engaging.
Why can't the Space Jockey specie be human-like? After all the Space Jockey had a humanoid appearance. I think it's entirely possible to do this story without a single human and have it be extremely engaging to the audience. All that're required is for the characters to be able to have complex dialogue and human characteristics that we can relate to.
However, I'm sure human's would have to be involved at some point to explain how Wayland-Yutani gained knowledge of the crash site and the existence of the xeno-morph, but having humans as the creator of the xeno-morph and/or the space jockey makes no sense since it would completely contradict humanities' hellbent quest to obtain the xeno-morph, which was a major plot point of all the Alien Franchises.
Reality TV is what's going on. SciFi has always had big overhead, from writers, props and makeup and CGI. The SyFy channel is merely following the same formula ABC and NBC are following: kill of interesting shows for cheap Reality TV crap. I'm looking forward to the premiere of Extreme Ghost Wrestlers this Fall
What's wrong with Eureka? it's a fun show that doesn't take itself too seriously, I always viewed it as a sci-fi sitcom. Granted, I haven't seen the last season since I cut cable in favor of streaming, but seasons 1 - 3 were ok by me.
It's 4% of their worldwide staff, and as I stated, they were definitely over-hiring. That is, hiring just for the sake of it, to deny those employees to their competitors and to add to their braintrust. Statistically, you just can't retain them all.
I'm not saying they are terrible workers, just that having consulted scores of dotComs in the SV area, I know for a fact that yahoo was on a warm body hunt and that these are likely to be the lower echelon of those warm bodies.
Anyway, my post wasn't to disparage these workers but to question the overwhelming eagerness of other employers to hire them. I'd look past the Yahoo name on their resume and look to what they did, how they contributed, what they can contribute and what skills they have, just as with any other candidate.
Been seeing these ads myself on Craigslist and really don't understand it. The place is a cube farm, and while I know there's some knowledgeable people there, I highly doubt the braintrust in this layoff has any real appeal. Also, I know for a fact that they OVER HIRED from 2004 - 2007 because I was getting up to 5 calls a day from on-site and 3rd party recruiters for Yahoo, to the point that I wrote them a letter asking them to place me on whatever list they had for non-interested parties. That request actually did seem to work since the calls ceased. But it was common knowledge that they were hiring pretty much any warm body they could get their hands on.
If anything, I'd probably steer clear of these laid-off workers since I'm pretty sure it's a separation of the wheat from the chaff. With the sort of hiring practices they engage in, picking up a bunch of sub-par workers is all but assured and it's only wise to jettison them when you no longer have a need for extra warm bodies or need to make room for new candidates to take their place
They are a corporation and have a self-interest governed by a hive-mind that has no sense of personal accountability other than demonstration of positive advancement of the corporate agenda.
Google has made it quite clear that they want to know every last thing about you and are working on finding ways to collect all your personal data, privacy be damned. This is why I only use GMail for public email and run my own mail server, why I refuse to use GoogleDocs, why I will never use ChromeOS. These "free" apps and services come at a great hidden cost in terms of privacy, and that cost is too high IMO.
I'm not hating upon Google and do make limited use of their services. But they are far from golden in my eyes and I am very wary of them.
While this is better than the blobby pixels we usually get for such remote planetary bodies, I don't consider this an "image" appreciable to the lay person. It just shows fuzzy dots around a larger fuzzy region and to this lay person at least does not conclusively show that these "objects" are indeed exo-planets. Who's to say they aren't some other, wholly unrelated celestial body? And what information does this sort of "image" convey even to professional astronomers?
If a horde of scientists can argue for months about whether or not Pluto is really a planet then rule that it is not, why can't this same group rule on what constitutes an "image". Perhaps different classifications of images needs to be established, ranging from "Blobby Pixels" to "HD Photograph". You might argue that this is ridiculous, but I think it would be a good thing to set such standards since it would serve to measure our telescopic and imaging technology and allow us to benchmark our abilities to image across vast distances. With such measurements, we could then possibly derive a comparative rate of advancement to predict when we might be able to image further into the universe which in turn might help us plan objectives further out into the future.
I would recommend keeping the kids offline as much as possible. Wikipedia and Google can lead you to a wealth of information, but the distractions online are endless. Also, the information on most sites is questionable. Besides, the library will have many kid activities that helps socialise them with others which is just as helpful as the books they have in helping shape your child's mind. So while the internet is a tool, it should be kept as a secondary utility for watching informative how-to videos on youtube and getting cliff-notes from wikipedia and other sites.
So here's what to do: Get your kid to the library, provide them a library card and let them go to the library whenever they want. Here's what not to do: DO NOT FORCE them to go, DO NOT give them assignments, DO NOT make yourself a part of it
If you want to assist them or steer them towards self-education fine, but do it by LISTENING to them when they choose to talk to you, then ASKING them intelligent questions about what they are talking about. Try to get them to run out of answers about what they talking about so they are hungry to learn more FOR THEIR own edification. But, take it no further. Structuring it, controlling it or tampering with it in any way takes the "self" part and throws it right out the window and will likely kill whatever interest your kid has in it because now you're a part of it and their freedom is diminished. When the parent becomes directly involved, no matter how good the intention, what was once a fun hobby for the kid can quickly become yet another form of "school" or chore.
Also, their interests may come and go or change entirely, I know they did for me. Entire subjects would change after I exhausted them or they became boring. Sometimes entire months would go by where I would only read fiction and play with friends and watch TV. But, then I'd get going on something and take up that interest. So don't expect it to be consistant.. let the kid guide his interests freely.
Most importantly, if your kid just isn't into it and would rather play with friends or watch TV, so be it. Let it be. Remember: The majority of people are not inclined for rigorous self-education, in fact, I'd say it's a trait of a select minority.
No, IBM cancelled the PowerPC line because Apple wasn't moving enough chips to justify keeping the fabs going for it. Instead, they focused on Cell.
IBM pushed hard to convince Apple to move to Cell since having both Sony and Apple on board would have guaranteed more sales for them, but Apple went with Intel. If any undercutting was done, it was Intel undercutting AMD to seal the deal with Apple. Either way, Apple's move from PowerPC was forced.
What's even more interesting is that in 2005 IBM and Sony tried to sway Jobs to migrate to Cell after IBM essentially called it a day on consumer line of POWER processors (PowerPC). As I recall, Sony even offered to build a PS3 emulator for the OS X platform to sweeten the deal. However, Jobs was reluctant to have the Apple brand compared in anyway to a gaming console, Cell Blades in the server room be damned.
Fast forward to 2010, Apple migrated to x86 chips, have had huge success with their mac-mini server, but have just killed their XServe line, largely because it lost it's excellent clustering features when they went x86. Apple could be wiping the floor in the grid and super computing market with low cost mac minis. Instead, they are off on the sideline still not able to play with the big boys.
Slashdot Mirror
That the best way to insure the success of your dirty tricks campaign is to broadcast it loudly and publicly so everyone knows, especially the party you are pulling your shenanigans against. If anything if this campaign does gain traction, the likely outcome is that public votes for Palin will be tossed and Republicans will resort to an election by delegates only, which will completely eradicate these efforts and deny the common citizens their illusion of democracy.
Our government and corporations stand idly by while China infiltrates our military, government and corporate networks, commits blatant acts of corporate espionage, places unfair regulations on foreign companies operations within their country and now pulls blatant protectionist laws to stifle competition.
But nothing will be done because China is the largest emerging economy on the planet and no one can afford to pass up a piece of that pie.
Back in the day the US and other nations would be slinging trade embargos left and right and playing hard ball. Today, we're so weak and poor we just bend over and take it.
Steve Jobs is using it as a warehouse to store his massive shuriken collection. As you recall, he threw an enormous shit fit when Tokyo airport security wouldn't allow him to board his own private jet with a couple particularly rare specimens.
His raging tantrum over a couple throwing stars doesn't seem so childish now does it?
Truer than you think. I was posting a Go To Bed thread about an hour after the redneck techno and color theme were added.
The post never went through because boards.4chan was down
What's in your wallet?
A very interesting read for those who are interested in finding out what came of this:
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2010/Mar/142
I know that resentment rides high on Slashdot over Lucas' prequel efforts, but Ridley Scott is a Director/Producer of a whole other calibre. Franky, I'm hard pressed to name a bad film by Scott... sure, some movies such as Kingdom of Heaven and Hannibal come to mind, but they were very watchable and had many redeeming qualities beyond just action and effects. Also keep in mind that Scott is responsible for both Alien and Blade Runner, two of most memorable and defining sci-fi efforts in cinematic history, and he did them back to back. And most importantly, Scott's entire portfolio is very diverse in genre and subject matter. Unlike Lucas, he is a truly imaginative and gifted director and not one to take up a project to make a buck or milk a franchise.
Personally, I see lots of potential for these prequels to be nothing short of fantastic. The telling of the story of the Space Jockey and the origins of the Xeno-Morph has all sorts of potential, as does the telling of the 1st encounter and discovery of the Xeno-Morph by Weyland-Yutani. These stories aren't those of a true prequel in the Star Wars sense, those were stories that closely followed an existing story arc around a small set of characters. Here, we have a whole other set of stories only loosely related to the stories we already know.
So give Scott some slack, you know you're going to see these movies in the theatre no matter what the reviews say and you know that with Scott at the helm, there will be a decent plot and story line and that the visuals and world will be stunning and engaging.
Why can't the Space Jockey specie be human-like? After all the Space Jockey had a humanoid appearance.
I think it's entirely possible to do this story without a single human and have it be extremely engaging to the audience.
All that're required is for the characters to be able to have complex dialogue and human characteristics that we can relate to.
However, I'm sure human's would have to be involved at some point to explain how Wayland-Yutani gained knowledge of the crash site and the existence of the xeno-morph, but having humans as the creator of the xeno-morph and/or the space jockey makes no sense since it would completely contradict humanities' hellbent quest to obtain the xeno-morph, which was a major plot point of all the Alien Franchises.
True, considering they fired the entire team, very little value is left aside from the user base.
Reality TV is what's going on. SciFi has always had big overhead, from writers, props and makeup and CGI.
The SyFy channel is merely following the same formula ABC and NBC are following: kill of interesting shows for cheap Reality TV crap.
I'm looking forward to the premiere of Extreme Ghost Wrestlers this Fall
What's wrong with Eureka? it's a fun show that doesn't take itself too seriously, I always viewed it as a sci-fi sitcom.
Granted, I haven't seen the last season since I cut cable in favor of streaming, but seasons 1 - 3 were ok by me.
It's 4% of their worldwide staff, and as I stated, they were definitely over-hiring. That is, hiring just for the sake of it, to deny those employees to their competitors and to add to their braintrust. Statistically, you just can't retain them all.
I'm not saying they are terrible workers, just that having consulted scores of dotComs in the SV area, I know for a fact that yahoo was on a warm body hunt and that these are likely to be the lower echelon of those warm bodies.
Anyway, my post wasn't to disparage these workers but to question the overwhelming eagerness of other employers to hire them. I'd look past the Yahoo name on their resume and look to what they did, how they contributed, what they can contribute and what skills they have, just as with any other candidate.
Been seeing these ads myself on Craigslist and really don't understand it. The place is a cube farm, and while I know there's some knowledgeable people there, I highly doubt the braintrust in this layoff has any real appeal. Also, I know for a fact that they OVER HIRED from 2004 - 2007 because I was getting up to 5 calls a day from on-site and 3rd party recruiters for Yahoo, to the point that I wrote them a letter asking them to place me on whatever list they had for non-interested parties. That request actually did seem to work since the calls ceased. But it was common knowledge that they were hiring pretty much any warm body they could get their hands on.
If anything, I'd probably steer clear of these laid-off workers since I'm pretty sure it's a separation of the wheat from the chaff. With the sort of hiring practices they engage in, picking up a bunch of sub-par workers is all but assured and it's only wise to jettison them when you no longer have a need for extra warm bodies or need to make room for new candidates to take their place
They are a corporation and have a self-interest governed by a hive-mind that has no sense of personal accountability other than demonstration of positive advancement of the corporate agenda.
Google has made it quite clear that they want to know every last thing about you and are working on finding ways to collect all your personal data, privacy be damned. This is why I only use GMail for public email and run my own mail server, why I refuse to use GoogleDocs, why I will never use ChromeOS.
These "free" apps and services come at a great hidden cost in terms of privacy, and that cost is too high IMO.
I'm not hating upon Google and do make limited use of their services.
But they are far from golden in my eyes and I am very wary of them.
If Assange goes missing and Moore puts on another 90lbs, I think we can chalk this up as the most expensive Take-Out meal ever
go back to 4chan faggot
While this is better than the blobby pixels we usually get for such remote planetary bodies, I don't consider this an "image" appreciable to the lay person. It just shows fuzzy dots around a larger fuzzy region and to this lay person at least does not conclusively show that these "objects" are indeed exo-planets. Who's to say they aren't some other, wholly unrelated celestial body? And what information does this sort of "image" convey even to professional astronomers?
If a horde of scientists can argue for months about whether or not Pluto is really a planet then rule that it is not, why can't this same group rule on what constitutes an "image". Perhaps different classifications of images needs to be established, ranging from "Blobby Pixels" to "HD Photograph". You might argue that this is ridiculous, but I think it would be a good thing to set such standards since it would serve to measure our telescopic and imaging technology and allow us to benchmark our abilities to image across vast distances. With such measurements, we could then possibly derive a comparative rate of advancement to predict when we might be able to image further into the universe which in turn might help us plan objectives further out into the future.
Who else is all for a "do over" on their 2002 screw up?
As much as I am afraid to ask... /please don't be a rule 34
WTF is a budgie?
used panties
I would recommend keeping the kids offline as much as possible. Wikipedia and Google can lead you to a wealth of information, but the distractions online are endless. Also, the information on most sites is questionable. Besides, the library will have many kid activities that helps socialise them with others which is just as helpful as the books they have in helping shape your child's mind. So while the internet is a tool, it should be kept as a secondary utility for watching informative how-to videos on youtube and getting cliff-notes from wikipedia and other sites.
So here's what to do: Get your kid to the library, provide them a library card and let them go to the library whenever they want.
Here's what not to do: DO NOT FORCE them to go, DO NOT give them assignments, DO NOT make yourself a part of it
If you want to assist them or steer them towards self-education fine, but do it by LISTENING to them when they choose to talk to you, then ASKING them intelligent questions about what they are talking about. Try to get them to run out of answers about what they talking about so they are hungry to learn more FOR THEIR own edification. But, take it no further. Structuring it, controlling it or tampering with it in any way takes the "self" part and throws it right out the window and will likely kill whatever interest your kid has in it because now you're a part of it and their freedom is diminished. When the parent becomes directly involved, no matter how good the intention, what was once a fun hobby for the kid can quickly become yet another form of "school" or chore.
Also, their interests may come and go or change entirely, I know they did for me. Entire subjects would change after I exhausted them or they became boring. Sometimes entire months would go by where I would only read fiction and play with friends and watch TV. But, then I'd get going on something and take up that interest. So don't expect it to be consistant.. let the kid guide his interests freely.
Most importantly, if your kid just isn't into it and would rather play with friends or watch TV, so be it. Let it be.
Remember: The majority of people are not inclined for rigorous self-education, in fact, I'd say it's a trait of a select minority.
No, IBM cancelled the PowerPC line because Apple wasn't moving enough chips to justify keeping the fabs going for it. Instead, they focused on Cell.
IBM pushed hard to convince Apple to move to Cell since having both Sony and Apple on board would have guaranteed more sales for them, but Apple went with Intel. If any undercutting was done, it was Intel undercutting AMD to seal the deal with Apple. Either way, Apple's move from PowerPC was forced.
What's even more interesting is that in 2005 IBM and Sony tried to sway Jobs to migrate to Cell after IBM essentially called it a day on consumer line of POWER processors (PowerPC). As I recall, Sony even offered to build a PS3 emulator for the OS X platform to sweeten the deal. However, Jobs was reluctant to have the Apple brand compared in anyway to a gaming console, Cell Blades in the server room be damned.
Fast forward to 2010, Apple migrated to x86 chips, have had huge success with their mac-mini server, but have just killed their XServe line, largely because it lost it's excellent clustering features when they went x86. Apple could be wiping the floor in the grid and super computing market with low cost mac minis. Instead, they are off on the sideline still not able to play with the big boys.
How much Intarweb must cary befoer send Intarweb teh bill?
Well, look at it as a service for those who wish to OWN an unlocked phone but lack the know-how. Stretching the law or not, he was within his rights.