Frankly, even the rabidly fundamentalist anti-evolution junkies are aware that evolution is widely accepted in the scientific community. [...] I agree; this has to be ignorance, not religious zealotry. 'Is evolution well-supported by evidence and widely accepted within the scientific community?'
They answer "NO!" at the first half of the question and never take the rest into account.
Luckily I had not yet deleted the old ftp'ed zip file and I gave them to my friends. Despite all the hassles I never thought I had the right to demand MusicMatch to put back the line-in encoding functionality. It is their product, they do what they think is the best for them. What gave them the right? The customer is always right. If they get enough people clamouring for them to fix this downgrade, then people less lucky then you can use it in the future.
How did it come to be that a usefull feature should be removed? Did they decide that not capitalising on their investment in feature development made good business sense? Or did some group pressure them to give their customers less digital freedom? Who gave them the right to demand it?
If google regularly revises its images on google maps They do, the images for my city used to have higher resolutions, but a bunch of clouds obscuring parts of it, now there's less resolution, but no clouds.
So if you see anything good on there, take a screenshot, because it might not be there next time you look.
I don't understand [...] my money. It's not charity if you're taking money against someone's will to pay for it. I'm living in this hot-ass desert called Phoenix [...] Where's my government check for not being a burden on the rest of the country? Hey, just give me half what you gave those Katrina people and I'll STILL be saving you money. My bills are higher anyway so I can pay for my A/C. [...] Some people say that blaming Katrina victims is like blaming a rape victim [..] Rape squads; think about it. Who the hell modded that insightfull and why?
Oops. Didn't make the connection between "armed thugs" and "piracy". I thought you were talking about the story that's been the top of the news for the past week, which, depending on which side you want to take, is either about armed UK thugs boarding ("inspecting") merchant ships or about Iranian thugs taking UK hostages. Ah. That'll learn me to be subtle on the intertubes.
I'm sure a lot of people share your schoolyard mentality, though, and will use the lawlessness of our governments as an excuse to commit all sorts of crime. What in the hell are you blabering about??? When did I say anything about the lawlessness of anyone's government??? I said I oppose calling people bad names to make them look bad, like calling someone a pirate when they don't forcibly board ships to steal them or their cargo, but instead copied a song without paying for it. THAT is schoolyard mentality.
I think the headline should have read "Pirate File Sharing to Remain/Become legal in EU". I don't think even the EU would outlaw companies' internal fileservers. And I think that when armed thugs stop commandeering ships at sea we can start allowing ourselves to use the propagandist terminology prefered by the intellectual property oligopolies.
In the meantime, I'll use "pirate" ironically when referring to file sharing.
why is it I suspect there may be a little more to the story? Massachusetts is a 1-party state with virtually *no* oversight (see Big Dig). Cronyism runs rampant and unchecked. Which is probably why they were so confident they'd get the contract in the first place. Obviously, with all the money they shoved in those brown envelopes, the people mde the wrong choice when they didn't pick them.
Diebold was so confident they'd win, that they now suspect foul play. If AutoMARK machines were indeed picked not based on superiority but instead based on under-the-table transactions between AutoMARK and the State, then that's not cool. If Diebold wants to invest money into investigating that possibility, then I say let them. 1- Maybe the reason they were so confident they'd get it was that they give under-the-table money to make sure that happens.
2- The reason for picking the other machine was that it did not discriminate between disabled voters and others, whereas Die(all your votes are belong to us)bold had different ballots for real people and the undermench.
They're not investigating a wrong, they suing to enforce their monopoly.
People should be allowed to smoke in public. The government should not interfere. People should be allowed NOT to smoke. The government needs to regulate your right to harm yourself VS my right not to be harmed by you.
If charities can not raise enough money to help you, you do not deserve help. You fail at causality.
stoners who founded Apple and the American video game industry (supposedly, back in the day at Atari, the security guards' main role was to warn the programmers if any cops were coming so they could hide their stash). That explains a lot:)
We already have to deal with intoxicated people operating cars, planes, and other potentially lethal machinery. How much worse would things be if now, in addition to those, you've got people high on ecstasy or marijuana? What about heroin? Would bystander deaths double? Triple? Some of the effects of these drugs make alcohol pale in comparison. Isn't that ADORABLE? You actually think no one's driving high on meth right now! Ah, it must be wonderfull to retain such a child-like gullibility.
Please don't call Missoula a small town, it is one of the largest cities in Montana. I've lived in small towns before, Missoula is not one. I've never heard of missoula before. According to it's chamber of commerce, it had a population under 50k in 96. My rule is, if there's a university with more student than your town has citizens, yours is a small town.
So, fine - the right of all able-bodied males between ages 17-45 to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Sounds good to me. Sucl it, kids, cripples, old folk and women!
Did you want colour blind test images, or people with colour blindness? The latter, I'm wondering if you guys see the two images as identical (or near enough). That would depend on the types of color blindness that correspond to the mice's point of view, of course.
My sincerest apologies. Really wasn't the intention =( No sweat, I just glimpsed enough to stop reading before I knew too much:) It's just something you might want to consider trying to avoid in the future.
I have no idea how someone with color blindness sees them, since I only have some red/green deficiency. But why rely on a description when you can try for yourself, with numerous forms of color blindness. Neat! Thanks for the information.
DVDs were successful due to the drastic improvement in convenience and picture quality over VHS, despite the DRM. VCRs had as much DRM as DVDs by then.
But the book and movie were made together, and are supposed to go together, it was an artistic experiment.
Not true. The movie was written first. It was inspired by Clarke's "The Sentinel" and Borges' "The Aleph", but while the actual writing was done by Clarke, Kubrick demanded so many rewrites that Clarke himself admits that he didn't really write 2001 -- Kubrick did. The book was based on Clarke's understanding of what was going on in the movie, but the two stories are not the same, because (among other things) Kubrick is not Clarke. It's like saying that you have to watch Blade Runner to understand Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Yes, both works are strongly related, but they're not designed as a unitary whole, and treating them as such will lead you astray.
2001: A Space Odyssey is a science-fiction narrative, produced in 1968 as both a film (directed by Stanley Kubrick) and a novel (written by Arthur C. Clarke). Both projects are based on a screenplay developed by Clarke and Kubrick in collaboration, which was loosely based on Clarke's 1950 short story "The Sentinel" and incorporated elements from various other Clarke stories. Although the film has become more famous due to its groundbreaking visual effects and ambiguous, abstract nature, the movie and book were meant to complement each other and are equal in importance.
# Stanley Kubrick initially approached Arthur C. Clarke by saying that he wanted to make "the proverbial good science-fiction movie". Clarke suggested that "The Sentinel", a short story he wrote in 1948, story would provide a suitable premise. Clarke had written the story for a BBC competition, but it didn't even make the shortlist. "The Sentinel" corresponds only to the relatively short part of the movie that takes place on the moon.
# The screenplay was written primarily by Stanley Kubrick and the novel primarily by Arthur C. Clarke, each working simultaneously and also providing feedback to the other. As the story went through many revisions, changes in the novel were taken over into the screenplay and vice versa. It was also unclear whether film or novel would be released first; in the end it was the film. Kubrick was to have been credited as second author of the novel, but in the end was not. It is believed that Kubrick deliberately withheld his approval of the novel as to not hurt the release of the film.
I very much enjoyed Primer. Definitely not Hollywood =) Interresting, haven't seen it, and now I kinda resent you for linking to a spoiler-laden wiki page;)
Scholastic, the book's US publisher, also "translated" the original book into American English. Terry Pratchett's books have received the same treatment. I suspect that it is a common practice. It is too bad. Something is always lost when the work is translated. Even if it is translated from english to english. It's called "localization", I don't find it inherently good or bad, it depends on the quality of the process. For example, Samurai Pizza Cats was, I suspect, better in the zany english dub than in the original, but most other anime dubs at the time sucked very much.
Then again, I took me a good while to figure out that "lorry" meant "truck"... I dunno if that means a localization would have made it easier to understand or made me dumber for not learning what a lorry is. Now I can watch Doctor Who and not be confused when there's a van involved. Learning FTW!
Slashdot Mirror
I agree; this has to be ignorance, not religious zealotry. 'Is evolution well-supported by evidence and widely accepted within the scientific community?'
They answer "NO!" at the first half of the question and never take the rest into account.
If they get enough people clamouring for them to fix this downgrade, then people less lucky then you can use it in the future.
How did it come to be that a usefull feature should be removed? Did they decide that not capitalising on their investment in feature development made good business sense? Or did some group pressure them to give their customers less digital freedom? Who gave them the right to demand it?
So if you see anything good on there, take a screenshot, because it might not be there next time you look.
When did I say anything about the lawlessness of anyone's government???
I said I oppose calling people bad names to make them look bad, like calling someone a pirate when they don't forcibly board ships to steal them or their cargo, but instead copied a song without paying for it. THAT is schoolyard mentality.
In the meantime, I'll use "pirate" ironically when referring to file sharing.
</taunt>
Obviously, with all the money they shoved in those brown envelopes, the people mde the wrong choice when they didn't pick them.
[end unsupported accusations]
2- The reason for picking the other machine was that it did not discriminate between disabled voters and others, whereas Die(all your votes are belong to us)bold had different ballots for real people and the undermench.
They're not investigating a wrong, they suing to enforce their monopoly.
The government needs to regulate your right to harm yourself VS my right not to be harmed by you. If charities can not raise enough money to help you, you do not deserve help. You fail at causality.
Ah, it must be wonderfull to retain such a child-like gullibility.
My rule is, if there's a university with more student than your town has citizens, yours is a small town.
</big-city smugness>
That would depend on the types of color blindness that correspond to the mice's point of view, of course.
It's just something you might want to consider trying to avoid in the future.
What do those graphics look like to you?
Not true. The movie was written first. It was inspired by Clarke's "The Sentinel" and Borges' "The Aleph", but while the actual writing was done by Clarke, Kubrick demanded so many rewrites that Clarke himself admits that he didn't really write 2001 -- Kubrick did. The book was based on Clarke's understanding of what was going on in the movie, but the two stories are not the same, because (among other things) Kubrick is not Clarke. It's like saying that you have to watch Blade Runner to understand Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Yes, both works are strongly related, but they're not designed as a unitary whole, and treating them as such will lead you astray.
2001: A Space Odyssey is a science-fiction narrative, produced in 1968 as both a film (directed by Stanley Kubrick) and a novel (written by Arthur C. Clarke). Both projects are based on a screenplay developed by Clarke and Kubrick in collaboration, which was loosely based on Clarke's 1950 short story "The Sentinel" and incorporated elements from various other Clarke stories. Although the film has become more famous due to its groundbreaking visual effects and ambiguous, abstract nature, the movie and book were meant to complement each other and are equal in importance.# Stanley Kubrick initially approached Arthur C. Clarke by saying that he wanted to make "the proverbial good science-fiction movie". Clarke suggested that "The Sentinel", a short story he wrote in 1948, story would provide a suitable premise. Clarke had written the story for a BBC competition, but it didn't even make the shortlist. "The Sentinel" corresponds only to the relatively short part of the movie that takes place on the moon.
# The screenplay was written primarily by Stanley Kubrick and the novel primarily by Arthur C. Clarke, each working simultaneously and also providing feedback to the other. As the story went through many revisions, changes in the novel were taken over into the screenplay and vice versa. It was also unclear whether film or novel would be released first; in the end it was the film. Kubrick was to have been credited as second author of the novel, but in the end was not. It is believed that Kubrick deliberately withheld his approval of the novel as to not hurt the release of the film.
Then again, I took me a good while to figure out that "lorry" meant "truck"... I dunno if that means a localization would have made it easier to understand or made me dumber for not learning what a lorry is. Now I can watch Doctor Who and not be confused when there's a van involved. Learning FTW!