Thank God. One more reply that missed my point was gonna kill me. I am so glad that you got it, 'cause that means a few others had to.
But I wasn't being flippant or karma whoring. I'm serious. The statement was idiotic. It was pointing out something totally obvious and doing so to mislead. While the device is not inherently evil, certain human institutions have proven throughout history that they cannot be trusted and need to kept on a tight leash. I have no fear of the TPM chip. I have fear of how it will be employed. That is all that matters- how it will be used. So to point out that it is not inherently good or bad, the way it was done in the article, proves the bias of the author, in my mind.
And I'm not a privacy nut. Not by any stretch. But this is too easily abused, like the atomic bomb. And I agree an atomic bomb can be a good tool. But quite frankly, with my knowledge of human history, I would much rather they weren't around.
Well, primarily I chose the comparison to make the point you are making. I just didn't spell it all out. This chip is something that would ultimately do more harm than good, as far as I am concerned. That is why I chose to compare it to a bomb.
But the point still stands, that any inanimate device can do nothing until a human being employs it in some act. A gun, a pen, a car, a pool- you name it, they all just sit there and do nothing until someone interacts with them. Yes it is harder to use some things for good, than others, but that doesn't change the underlying fact that they are inanimate objects. That means they aren't animated. They don't do anything.
I shouldn't even say this part, but I'll throw it out there. A gun can also do a lot of good. I have personally witnessed a gun saving a life. I was with a friend who was an off duty officer and we were washing his truck. In the street by the car wash, there was an accident. The man who was hit came out of his car with a ball bat and proceeded to go after the other guy. My friend ran out, drew his weapon and brought the whole thing to a halt. And saved a persons life. Police all over the world use guns every day to do good.
Depends on how you use it. If I took the big german family bible my family keeps and beat someone to death with it, that would be bad. If I was in a plane crash in the Andes and used the Necronomicon to cook up dead passengers to save the living, that would be a good use.
Otherwise it's just bound paper sitting there until someone picks it up and does something with it.
Ultimately the TPM itself isn't inherently evil or good.
I'd like to hear of any inanimate object that is inherently evil or good. Nuclear bombs aren't inherently evil or good, it's just how you use them. Otherwise they just sit there.
I have the space trilogy but I've only read it once, since as you say, it is terrible.
My favorite Lewis books are those that are not fictional at all, but I think screwtape is novel enough that I liked it a lot. And that is not to say that I don't like Narnia, it just isn't in the same league as say, The Abolition of Man.
This is difficult for me to imagine, though I know these people exist. When Aslan was dead on the table and Lucy was crying over him, this lady behind me whispered to her child, 'She'll use her potion to cure him.' I was stunned. Stunned that a grown woman did not know how this was going to turn out.
But anyway, my guess (and this is hard because I'm trying to imagine myself never having read these books repeatedly) is that if I saw this film for the first time, as an adult, I wouldn't care much for it. Neat creatures, but a rather simplistic rushed story. Very good for kids but too light and easy for my tastes.
But its context is important. As I mentioned in my journal, I about blew a fuse on the way out of the theater when I overheard a grown man comment that it was a rip-off of never ending story.
No - I'm not all that old or ignorant of the context, and in a lot of other places I've mentioned just what you say here. In fact I had to re-read the comment (I've made a few in this thread) because I thought I did mention that it was helpful for that very reason... but I must have done it somewhere else.
My freshman year of college, in a small school, my prof was obsessed with Lewis. Everything we did revolved around him in one way or another. The class could have been more accurately described as C.S. Lewis 101 rather than English 101. We read "Surprised By Joy" and did a lot of other research into his life and work. I vividly remember the day she spent most of a class complaining about how when she visited Oxford it was all about Tolkein.
I shouldn't feel the need to defend myself- call it a character flaw if you will. But you are totally right in what you say, other than the part that I did not realize this myself. In fact I mentioned it to my wife on the way out of the theater.
I've been thinking about this since I saw it, and as I've been reading this thread. I liked the film and wouldn't say poorly done, but I think that you have pegged the biggest weakness. By staying so true to the events of the book it loses a little something. The book can narrate a lot of fealing, thoughts and emotions. A film needs to show events to explain that kind of thing.
Interestingly enough the film begins with a scene not in the book at all that does a lot to set up some of how things will work out. But from then on, as you say, you get the books events but not all the book's depth. Now I still liked the film as I've said, and I don't think the books are so deep, that you are missing that much. I think some of the film's weaknesses are the book's weaknesses too. (I've always thought Clive's fiction was his weakest work~ Screwtape Letters excepted)
I think you hit the nail on the head. To have been a better film would have required more deviation from the text. This makes me rethink some of my frustration with the LoTR films. I loved them too, and now maybe I wont be so hard on some of the revisions.
the only one that really stood out to me was the mountain background that you list as #1. I think the tech hasn't really caught up on close-ups with vast back-grounds yet. The rest I didn't notice so much, but I don't have a really critical eye for a lot of that stuff either.
I think it is because you read the book when you were young. We recently read the book with our kids, so it was pretty fresh in our minds when my wife and I saw it. I was surprised by how closely the film stuck to the book. Of course the book lends itself well to film, I think, as opposed to longer and more complex works.
I think though what you may have missed is a lot of the inner dialogue that you get in the book was not in the film. It downplayed Aslan a bit I think, since we don't get to 'hear' how the children feal about him. They did a decent job I think, acting wise, but I'm not sure a film can display the complex ideas conveyed in the book in that regard. Maybe deviating further from the text would have allowed them to be more true to the ideas, if not the events, I'm not sure.
But I do really think that on the whole the film has most of the books strengths as well as its weaknesses.
I have no idea why you've been modded down- it's a valid question.
My wife and I saw a preview showing last Monday. We recently finished reading this book to our kids so it was still pretty fresh in our minds.
The extent to which it is true to the book is pretty great. About the only really big deviation I saw is mentioned in the first response to this question. They really tamed things down in regards to blood and especially so in the sacrafice of Aslan. But looking at the intended audience and the rating this is understandable.
I wrote it up in my journal after we saw it and to sum up my impression, if you liked the book, I think you'll like the film. If you didn't like the book, I doubt you will like the film. If you were indifferent to the book, you might like the film due to all the fantastic creatures. I thought the effects were pretty incredible.
The beginning of the film deviates slightly from the book, but I think it is also a good choice in that, at the time the book came out, the reason for the children leaving London would have been understood. For children today a little explanation is probably helpful.
and it is easy to do. I'd start with the inverter first and then if that doesn't do it, look at replacing the light. There was an ask slashdot about obtaining lcd parts a while back. You can read good info. in that thread.
I also wrote up a journal entry when I fixed my dad's laptop, but I can't find it. (Note to self, do better job with titles)
I was nervous the first time I replaced a laptop inverter - but it was cake. The best place I found to buy the hp inverter I needed was ebay.
I guess the problem is that the American-style Protestant is really just not that smart.
You do realize just how large that group is and how many brilliant people are in it? Right? You're just being inflamatory to get a reaction or something maybe.
As for americans flocking to the Roman catholic church. Well after all the lawsuits are done for the vast number of boys molested in the country, if they can manage all the bad press and get people to forget. Maybe. (This is not a slam against the Catholic church, just the reality of the current situation)
if that is strong language, I don't want to read the 'soft' letters that are usually written. She lays out the reasons they want things the way they are and asks for the change to be reconsidered. After reading the summary I was expecting something more egregious.
There are a lot of folks here with a wide range of experience. Someone please explain to me why I should think this is a big deal.
My sources tell me that this has been in heavy use by the CIA for some time, at secret installations in Eastern Europe. I guess, it took time to ramp up for Iraq as there was an expected increase in vocabulary. Apparently for the CIA the device merely had to handle screaming and whimpering of the word 'No' for the various languages in use.
I have a machine at home that is an old system running Windows 98 - because of a couple apps that I have to use and they only run on windows. It is flaky as all get out and last night as I dealt with its hiccups and what nots I thought, 'I would love to run XP on this, but there is no way I'm paying for it'. If I could upgrade the OS but not shell out any cash, I'd be all over that.
Maybe I've read "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" too many times, but why would people be spending time on the surface if they did not need too? Wouldn't it make more sense to be spending more time below the surface?
Right. People will read what they want to read and it has been that way for a long time. It isn't like there are millions of people out there right now who are reading the classics because they have no other option. And they are not all just waiting for this to ocme out so they can finally stop.
I don't think it will be encouraged by anyone outside of the company trying to profit from it. This is purely a marketing strategy and I think it will fall flat on its face. The only success it may see is creating a little buzz- like right now.
the net impact of this will be nil. What person who was going to read some classic piece of literature is going to forego that experience after checking out the text message summary?
And who will go read the real thing after getting one of these?
In fact I also will go out on a limb and predict that this marketing ploy by the cell phone company will fail. Kids will not want these phones and that will greatly overwhelm the couple idiot parents who might think this would be a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank God. One more reply that missed my point was gonna kill me. I am so glad that you got it, 'cause that means a few others had to.
But I wasn't being flippant or karma whoring. I'm serious. The statement was idiotic. It was pointing out something totally obvious and doing so to mislead. While the device is not inherently evil, certain human institutions have proven throughout history that they cannot be trusted and need to kept on a tight leash. I have no fear of the TPM chip. I have fear of how it will be employed. That is all that matters- how it will be used. So to point out that it is not inherently good or bad, the way it was done in the article, proves the bias of the author, in my mind.
And I'm not a privacy nut. Not by any stretch. But this is too easily abused, like the atomic bomb. And I agree an atomic bomb can be a good tool. But quite frankly, with my knowledge of human history, I would much rather they weren't around.
Well, primarily I chose the comparison to make the point you are making. I just didn't spell it all out. This chip is something that would ultimately do more harm than good, as far as I am concerned. That is why I chose to compare it to a bomb.
But the point still stands, that any inanimate device can do nothing until a human being employs it in some act. A gun, a pen, a car, a pool- you name it, they all just sit there and do nothing until someone interacts with them. Yes it is harder to use some things for good, than others, but that doesn't change the underlying fact that they are inanimate objects. That means they aren't animated. They don't do anything.
I shouldn't even say this part, but I'll throw it out there. A gun can also do a lot of good. I have personally witnessed a gun saving a life. I was with a friend who was an off duty officer and we were washing his truck. In the street by the car wash, there was an accident. The man who was hit came out of his car with a ball bat and proceeded to go after the other guy. My friend ran out, drew his weapon and brought the whole thing to a halt. And saved a persons life. Police all over the world use guns every day to do good.
Depends on how you use it. If I took the big german family bible my family keeps and beat someone to death with it, that would be bad. If I was in a plane crash in the Andes and used the Necronomicon to cook up dead passengers to save the living, that would be a good use.
Otherwise it's just bound paper sitting there until someone picks it up and does something with it.
Ultimately the TPM itself isn't inherently evil or good.
I'd like to hear of any inanimate object that is inherently evil or good. Nuclear bombs aren't inherently evil or good, it's just how you use them. Otherwise they just sit there.
I have the space trilogy but I've only read it once, since as you say, it is terrible.
My favorite Lewis books are those that are not fictional at all, but I think screwtape is novel enough that I liked it a lot. And that is not to say that I don't like Narnia, it just isn't in the same league as say, The Abolition of Man.
This is difficult for me to imagine, though I know these people exist. When Aslan was dead on the table and Lucy was crying over him, this lady behind me whispered to her child, 'She'll use her potion to cure him.' I was stunned. Stunned that a grown woman did not know how this was going to turn out.
But anyway, my guess (and this is hard because I'm trying to imagine myself never having read these books repeatedly) is that if I saw this film for the first time, as an adult, I wouldn't care much for it. Neat creatures, but a rather simplistic rushed story. Very good for kids but too light and easy for my tastes.
But its context is important. As I mentioned in my journal, I about blew a fuse on the way out of the theater when I overheard a grown man comment that it was a rip-off of never ending story.
No - I'm not all that old or ignorant of the context, and in a lot of other places I've mentioned just what you say here. In fact I had to re-read the comment (I've made a few in this thread) because I thought I did mention that it was helpful for that very reason... but I must have done it somewhere else.
My freshman year of college, in a small school, my prof was obsessed with Lewis. Everything we did revolved around him in one way or another. The class could have been more accurately described as C.S. Lewis 101 rather than English 101. We read "Surprised By Joy" and did a lot of other research into his life and work. I vividly remember the day she spent most of a class complaining about how when she visited Oxford it was all about Tolkein.
I shouldn't feel the need to defend myself- call it a character flaw if you will. But you are totally right in what you say, other than the part that I did not realize this myself. In fact I mentioned it to my wife on the way out of the theater.
I've been thinking about this since I saw it, and as I've been reading this thread. I liked the film and wouldn't say poorly done, but I think that you have pegged the biggest weakness. By staying so true to the events of the book it loses a little something. The book can narrate a lot of fealing, thoughts and emotions. A film needs to show events to explain that kind of thing.
Interestingly enough the film begins with a scene not in the book at all that does a lot to set up some of how things will work out. But from then on, as you say, you get the books events but not all the book's depth. Now I still liked the film as I've said, and I don't think the books are so deep, that you are missing that much. I think some of the film's weaknesses are the book's weaknesses too. (I've always thought Clive's fiction was his weakest work~ Screwtape Letters excepted)
I think you hit the nail on the head. To have been a better film would have required more deviation from the text. This makes me rethink some of my frustration with the LoTR films. I loved them too, and now maybe I wont be so hard on some of the revisions.
the only one that really stood out to me was the mountain background that you list as #1. I think the tech hasn't really caught up on close-ups with vast back-grounds yet. The rest I didn't notice so much, but I don't have a really critical eye for a lot of that stuff either.
I think it is because you read the book when you were young. We recently read the book with our kids, so it was pretty fresh in our minds when my wife and I saw it. I was surprised by how closely the film stuck to the book. Of course the book lends itself well to film, I think, as opposed to longer and more complex works.
I think though what you may have missed is a lot of the inner dialogue that you get in the book was not in the film. It downplayed Aslan a bit I think, since we don't get to 'hear' how the children feal about him. They did a decent job I think, acting wise, but I'm not sure a film can display the complex ideas conveyed in the book in that regard. Maybe deviating further from the text would have allowed them to be more true to the ideas, if not the events, I'm not sure.
But I do really think that on the whole the film has most of the books strengths as well as its weaknesses.
I have no idea why you've been modded down- it's a valid question.
My wife and I saw a preview showing last Monday. We recently finished reading this book to our kids so it was still pretty fresh in our minds.
The extent to which it is true to the book is pretty great. About the only really big deviation I saw is mentioned in the first response to this question. They really tamed things down in regards to blood and especially so in the sacrafice of Aslan. But looking at the intended audience and the rating this is understandable.
I wrote it up in my journal after we saw it and to sum up my impression, if you liked the book, I think you'll like the film. If you didn't like the book, I doubt you will like the film. If you were indifferent to the book, you might like the film due to all the fantastic creatures. I thought the effects were pretty incredible.
The beginning of the film deviates slightly from the book, but I think it is also a good choice in that, at the time the book came out, the reason for the children leaving London would have been understood. For children today a little explanation is probably helpful.
It is not a bad time to revisit this thread
and it is easy to do. I'd start with the inverter first and then if that doesn't do it, look at replacing the light. There was an ask slashdot about obtaining lcd parts a while back. You can read good info. in that thread.
I also wrote up a journal entry when I fixed my dad's laptop, but I can't find it. (Note to self, do better job with titles)
I was nervous the first time I replaced a laptop inverter - but it was cake. The best place I found to buy the hp inverter I needed was ebay.
I guess the problem is that the American-style Protestant is really just not that smart.
You do realize just how large that group is and how many brilliant people are in it? Right? You're just being inflamatory to get a reaction or something maybe.
As for americans flocking to the Roman catholic church. Well after all the lawsuits are done for the vast number of boys molested in the country, if they can manage all the bad press and get people to forget. Maybe. (This is not a slam against the Catholic church, just the reality of the current situation)
87 comments - and not a one mentioning Red Barchetta? What is wrong with you people?
The big yellow ball in the center is the sun!
That line always killed me, but yeah - this is a new approach to solar power.
if that is strong language, I don't want to read the 'soft' letters that are usually written. She lays out the reasons they want things the way they are and asks for the change to be reconsidered. After reading the summary I was expecting something more egregious.
There are a lot of folks here with a wide range of experience. Someone please explain to me why I should think this is a big deal.
My sources tell me that this has been in heavy use by the CIA for some time, at secret installations in Eastern Europe. I guess, it took time to ramp up for Iraq as there was an expected increase in vocabulary. Apparently for the CIA the device merely had to handle screaming and whimpering of the word 'No' for the various languages in use.
wont do it.
I have a machine at home that is an old system running Windows 98 - because of a couple apps that I have to use and they only run on windows. It is flaky as all get out and last night as I dealt with its hiccups and what nots I thought, 'I would love to run XP on this, but there is no way I'm paying for it'. If I could upgrade the OS but not shell out any cash, I'd be all over that.
unfortunately where I live most homes don't have basements and even if they did, it wouldn't matter. I'm the dad.
Maybe I've read "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" too many times, but why would people be spending time on the surface if they did not need too? Wouldn't it make more sense to be spending more time below the surface?
Right. People will read what they want to read and it has been that way for a long time. It isn't like there are millions of people out there right now who are reading the classics because they have no other option. And they are not all just waiting for this to ocme out so they can finally stop.
I don't think it will be encouraged by anyone outside of the company trying to profit from it. This is purely a marketing strategy and I think it will fall flat on its face. The only success it may see is creating a little buzz- like right now.
the net impact of this will be nil. What person who was going to read some classic piece of literature is going to forego that experience after checking out the text message summary?
And who will go read the real thing after getting one of these?
In fact I also will go out on a limb and predict that this marketing ploy by the cell phone company will fail. Kids will not want these phones and that will greatly overwhelm the couple idiot parents who might think this would be a good idea.