People like science, and will watch anything they can grasp. If a channel not only dedicates itself to presenting truly in-depth scientific shows, but also brings them up-to-date on the background science that leads to it and can give people reasons why it is useful science, they will watch.
One of the reasons people keep watching the same kinds of shows they do on the Discovery channel is that the topics are usually that which they have the background on already and so can grasp. I watched Cosmos when it originally aired during my first year of high school, and I had only the barest inkling of the topics he covered, but Sagan presented each episode in a way that helped me get up to speed quickly on what he was talking about before he fed out the hard science. In effect, making it all pretty easy science.
A hard science channel won't succeed if it's not willing to get people up to speed on the topics like that. If you want a channel that just dumps hard data on people's laps that they have no background information on, no, I don't think it will succeed.
I think that's part of unelecting him: remembering just how crooked an election it was that got him there in the first place. It all counts, and it all helps.
Ditto on that. I've always heard it was primarily republicans abroad, not democrats. People vacationing out of country and military personnel stationed overseas make up the bulk of U.S. citizens abroad, and they are primarily republican.
How you treat your old company reflects upon you as a person, not on what sort of company they are. Leaving is all you should do. Accept the job offer, submit a polite 2-weeks notice and make your transition out of the company as professional as possible. If they ask, don't give them details as to why you're leaving, just say your skills were badly desired by this other company and they made you a terrific offer you couldn't pass up. They'll get the message that perhaps they should have treated you better, and without the insult that can often lead to ugliness. If there is going to be ugliness, let it start with them, don't be the provocateur.
Remember, how YOU treat them is reflective of the sort of person YOU are. They can't change who you are for better or for worse.
Ask youself: what sort of person are you? Act according to your answer.
I enjoyed a couple of his films, but they were very clearly, at least to me, the work of someone who was still learning (Clerks, Mallrats, Chasing Amy and Dogma). I mean, I could never make a movie, so clearly he is very skilled compared to me and most people. But there is just so much wonderful filmmaking talent out there; I don't understand the fixation on Kevin Smith. His attitude is pretty moderate regarding Hollywood compared to people like Sayles or Waters. His talent comes nowhere near Almodovar or Besson. I am not knocking him; god knows I would suck at making films, and perhaps he has a brilliant future. But right now it just seems like he is a little behind the curve. I don't understand the attraction to him from a fan's point of view.
As a Kevin Smith fan, perhaps you could explain why you are a Kevin Smith fan in the first place? I'm not a hater or anything, I like a couple of his movies. He just seems so... sophomoric. Like a guy who's learning how to write screenplays and make movies, and has learned enough to actually make them, but isn't terribly talented or inspired or anything; more like he's just got a couple of stock characters he made up in high school and now he makes movies with them. What's the real attraction to him as a fan?
I've heard that giving away all your money will make you rich, too. If you give it all away, that leaves a "cash deficit" which will create an "opportunity" for you to generate more money to replace it. As you gain more and more of these opportunities, eventually you will have so many ways of generating money that your income is basically unlimited. It's brilliant, it really is.
But there is also a lot of redundancy, and you can create routes on-the-fly at any time. At best, terrorists could slow down segments of the internet, but you'd pretty much have to destroy the planet itself to take it all down.
I'm curious to see how much success they'll have. The internet was, after all, designed explicitly for the purpose of continued operation through attacks on the network.
He actually just said "leading" which, if any single person could be called "leading" would probably be him. Without his kernel, we would all probably not even know who SCO was.
Slashdot's credibility as a place of discussion is going to sink fast if they continue attempt to pass off advertisements as real topics worthy of discussion.
What a great segment to have by the short hairs: people stupid enough to download and install this. Require them to enter valid credit card numbers which charge them for the products advertised unless they "opt out" and you have the pinnacle of marketing genius.
Slashdot Mirror
People like science, and will watch anything they can grasp. If a channel not only dedicates itself to presenting truly in-depth scientific shows, but also brings them up-to-date on the background science that leads to it and can give people reasons why it is useful science, they will watch.
One of the reasons people keep watching the same kinds of shows they do on the Discovery channel is that the topics are usually that which they have the background on already and so can grasp. I watched Cosmos when it originally aired during my first year of high school, and I had only the barest inkling of the topics he covered, but Sagan presented each episode in a way that helped me get up to speed quickly on what he was talking about before he fed out the hard science. In effect, making it all pretty easy science.
A hard science channel won't succeed if it's not willing to get people up to speed on the topics like that. If you want a channel that just dumps hard data on people's laps that they have no background information on, no, I don't think it will succeed.
When do you think gmail will support Konqueror?
Making money? I hate it already!
I think that's part of unelecting him: remembering just how crooked an election it was that got him there in the first place. It all counts, and it all helps.
I always thought it was selective ballot counting and oppressing minority voters that won Bush Florida.
Ditto on that. I've always heard it was primarily republicans abroad, not democrats. People vacationing out of country and military personnel stationed overseas make up the bulk of U.S. citizens abroad, and they are primarily republican.
Or so I thought.
If your goal is to give the finger to management, then you've answered the question.
How you treat your old company reflects upon you as a person, not on what sort of company they are. Leaving is all you should do. Accept the job offer, submit a polite 2-weeks notice and make your transition out of the company as professional as possible. If they ask, don't give them details as to why you're leaving, just say your skills were badly desired by this other company and they made you a terrific offer you couldn't pass up. They'll get the message that perhaps they should have treated you better, and without the insult that can often lead to ugliness. If there is going to be ugliness, let it start with them, don't be the provocateur.
Remember, how YOU treat them is reflective of the sort of person YOU are. They can't change who you are for better or for worse.
Ask youself: what sort of person are you? Act according to your answer.
Why can't we all just stop using their services? Just use other registrars and don't use any root server they manage. What's all the fuss?
I enjoyed a couple of his films, but they were very clearly, at least to me, the work of someone who was still learning (Clerks, Mallrats, Chasing Amy and Dogma). I mean, I could never make a movie, so clearly he is very skilled compared to me and most people. But there is just so much wonderful filmmaking talent out there; I don't understand the fixation on Kevin Smith. His attitude is pretty moderate regarding Hollywood compared to people like Sayles or Waters. His talent comes nowhere near Almodovar or Besson. I am not knocking him; god knows I would suck at making films, and perhaps he has a brilliant future. But right now it just seems like he is a little behind the curve. I don't understand the attraction to him from a fan's point of view.
As a Kevin Smith fan, perhaps you could explain why you are a Kevin Smith fan in the first place? I'm not a hater or anything, I like a couple of his movies. He just seems so ... sophomoric. Like a guy who's learning how to write screenplays and make movies, and has learned enough to actually make them, but isn't terribly talented or inspired or anything; more like he's just got a couple of stock characters he made up in high school and now he makes movies with them. What's the real attraction to him as a fan?
I've heard that giving away all your money will make you rich, too. If you give it all away, that leaves a "cash deficit" which will create an "opportunity" for you to generate more money to replace it. As you gain more and more of these opportunities, eventually you will have so many ways of generating money that your income is basically unlimited. It's brilliant, it really is.
But there is also a lot of redundancy, and you can create routes on-the-fly at any time. At best, terrorists could slow down segments of the internet, but you'd pretty much have to destroy the planet itself to take it all down.
continued operation through attacks on the network
I never said it was designed to stop an attack. I said it was designed for continued operation through attacks on the network. See my quote above?
I'm curious to see how much success they'll have. The internet was, after all, designed explicitly for the purpose of continued operation through attacks on the network.
I'll see your +1 Redundant and raise you a point for posting absolutely nothing of value. Dumbass.
He actually just said "leading" which, if any single person could be called "leading" would probably be him. Without his kernel, we would all probably not even know who SCO was.
Slashdot's credibility as a place of discussion is going to sink fast if they continue attempt to pass off advertisements as real topics worthy of discussion.
Strike one, Slashdot.
Clever product advertisement wrapped neatly into small slashdot article.
What a great segment to have by the short hairs: people stupid enough to download and install this. Require them to enter valid credit card numbers which charge them for the products advertised unless they "opt out" and you have the pinnacle of marketing genius.
You would think, eh? Yet, not a damn thing will happen. Watch.
+5 Ironic
...don't fix it.
Seriously. We don't have to coat everything in 50 feet of kevlar, spaced 100 feet apart and communicating with 1GB encryption keys.
Unencrypted broadcasting modem: scales well and very cost-effective.
You can't just edit PostScript directly?
I'll see your +1 Troll and raise you a point for posting absolutely nothing of value. Dumbass.