I always like to ask right-wingers ranting about games and sex causing social decline, "Yeah! I mean, do you know what's happened to rates of violent youth crime and teen pregancny in the last ten years?" They always answer that they're at unprecedented levels, and then are thrown off when I tell them that they've actually been falling quite steadily. Teen pregancy is even at its lowest rate since we began taking statistics in the '40s, down from the all-time high in 1991.
As a "right-winger", I have to say that I am not surprised at all by these statistics. The past ten years have shown a rise in morality among youth. The government has begun teaching abstinence from sex while dating, and it is catching hold in the youth culture as well. There has been a quiet mini-revolution that, while not as radical as the revolution of the 60's, has had a profound impact on our country.
The younger generations have sensed all of the failures of the baby boomer philosophy, and they are quietly fighting back with more emphasis on faithful relationships, family, and respect for one another. The baby-boom generation neglected their children while they pursued money and/or worthy causes. In the end, their children cared more for their grandparents than their own parents. I fear the baby-boom generation is facing a very lonely future when they retire. If their children show as little interest in their parents as they showed them, who will visit them when they are moved into retirement homes?
The next generation has seen these repercussions and recognizing the need to poor more time (not money) into their own children's lives. They understand that in order for our lives to be better, we need to show respect for one another. They have seen that "free" sex is not free as AIDS, HIV, herpes, and other sexually transmitted diseases have run wild. They also see the empty relationships that result, and they want something better. They are not doing this by holding demonstrations or having rallies, but merely by changing their own lives to reflect the values they see as important. More and more, people are seeking happiness in relationships and community than in personal acheivement or pleasure.
As I look at the next generation, I see a reason to hope.
ps. Sex does not damage society. A cheapened view of sex and relationships where the opposite sex is seen merely as an object to be used in pursuit of pleasure -- this is what can destroy a society. Sex is a beautiful expression of devotion and affection, and in that context, it can actually strengthen and provide stability to society.
They didn't lose everything, but rather most of the sets they had used in previous films (Chicken Run, Wrong Trousers). A great loss for sure, but they are not sunk as a company. From the article:
"Even though it is a precious and nostalgic collection and valuable to the company, in light of other tragedies, today isn't a big deal," he said.
That really does put it in perspective. Nonetheless, I feel for the guys and wish them all of the best going forward. They have consistently put out quality entertainment.
Have you ever heard of FogBugz? It solves many of the appearance and usability problems you were talking about. I have used it previously, and it worked very well for my company. It is also very easy on the eyes and has a clean interface (though it is not free). I am curious how this tool compares to Bugzilla since my experience with it is extremely limited. Is the ease-of-use of FogBugz worth the price? Are there major features missing here that Bugzilla lacks?
It has to do with the fact that he is a dangerous neo-con with absolutely no regard for the opinions or suffering or others. (emphasis added)
This is complete hogwash. You can no more prove this "fact" than the original poster can prove that Bush is only attacked because he is a Christian. How do you argue against the fact that Bush has spent more on the poor than even Bill Clinton (now before you bash the Fox News link, are the stats stated within false?). Now you can call Bush incompetent for his FEMA appointment and slow reaction. You can question his decision to go to war in Iraq (but remember that congress backed him on it). I personnally don't like the way he spends money like a teenager at the mall with their daddy's credit card. But you cannot make the claim that he doesn't care.
Have you spoken with him personnally? Do you know the reasoning behind his decisions? Have you seen his personnal reaction on receiving the news that another American soldier has died in Iraq? No, neither of us have. We cannot see what is going on in his heart. We have only his actions, and even those we don't see directly but rather through biased reporting -- whether it be CNN, FOX News, ABC or the BBC. The fact that he has called for so much spending for the poor and aid for hurricane victims would argue strongly that he does seem to regard the well-being of people -- or at least the "opinion" of the American public. I think that Bush cares very much about people, but like many caring people in this world, the way in which he tries to express it is flawed.
There are a lot of things that Bush has done that can be considered bad, but not caring is not one of them. Can you be absolutely sure that you actually care more?
I agree completely with you, but I was actually referring to the part in the first combat scene where droids land on Obi-wan's fighter (why not just blow up his ship) and start poking holes in his ship. With a simple wave of his hand, he could have sent all of those droids sailing into space, but instead Anakin swooped down his fighter and knocked the droids off with his wing.
R2D2 was very annoying throughout these opening sequences too (although not quite as completely pointless and annoying as C3P0 throughout the prequels). And what happened to his rockets in the episodes 4-6 anyway?! He took a serious step backwards in his capabilities in the next movie. It might have been better if both R2D2 and C3P0 had simply sat out on these movies.
While I agree with your post (and the Funny moderation), I found the deleted scenes in Episode II rather interesting. After watching the additional scenes between Amidala and Anakin (deleted), I began to understand their relationship a little more, and it almost started to make a little more sense. I then realized that George Lucas and company had actually taken out most of the character development and heart and left us with action, action, action. They said as much in the commentary between takes, and it became glaringly obvious that they did not really understand how to tell a good story (let alone develop a good romance). I am not saying that the deleted scenes were "great", but they would have helped make the story stronger by helping you care for the characters.
Now would the deleted scenes have actually made it a better movie (a very difficult task)? At least I would have had a little easier time buying the relationship between a successful, mature, older woman and a young, impulsive, whiny brat (a little more maturity came out for Anakin in the deleted scenes -- you caught a few more glimpses of why she might actually fall for him). Unfortunately, I don't see any additional footage helping with Revenge of the Sith. It had enough problems with what was there that could not be fixed by adding new material (why oh why did Obi Wan not just use the force to clear off the droids poking holes in his ship?... why oh why did the enemy not just use warheads in the tips of their missles?... why oh why couldn't they have hired a good screenplay writer? etc.).
All I can say is I am sorry for the next generation of people who are introduced to the entertainment marketplace. We who have so long been able to enjoy CDs as they were originally defined, CDs that would play in our cars, would play in our home entertainment centers, and on our computers. It seems that era may be ending. Sigh.
Not at all. The era that will be ending is the monopoly of the RIAA and the degradation of "mainstream" music. I really cannot see this effort they are trying to push through working in the marketplace. There are far too many CD players out in the market right now and far too little talent in the mainstream outlets for people to start wholesale replacement of their players so they can purchase and listen to DRM CD's. One of the problems for the industry is that the CD works too well. Other than the MP3 (which also is already out and popular in the wild), they cannot find a medium to make CD's obsolete. How do you get better than perfect sound (well, at least perfect for 99% of the population who can't tell the difference)?
With the formation of iTunes and similar outlets along with the momentum of the marketplace, I cannot see their efforts succeeding long term. Eventually, the grassroots independent labels will rise to higher prominence in the market's eyes because their music will be more creative and people will be able to play their music on their existing systems. I don't know about you, but I will NOT be spending more money just to listen to CD's I don't really need -- especially when their are other options. And there is certainly a lot of money to be made here by those who don't want to follow the DRM path. Where there is demand, you know the supplies will be coming soon.
We are likely seeing the end of an era. It is the end of the RIAA era.
Re:And yet Europe seems to be doing fine
on
Pornified
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
But personally, I'm more worried about how quickly we had gangs of thugs running through New Orleans. (And yet Europe seems to be doing fine)
Disasters bring out the best and the worst in people, and hurricane Katrina was a prime example of this. When was the last time Europe faced a disaster of this magnitude? Next time the Netherlands are hit by a category 4 hurricane that levels their dikes and floods their cities, then we will see exactly how well Europe fares. May it never be!
Besides, your logic is flawed anyway in regards to "liberated" sex since New Orleans is one of the most "liberated" cities in the United States, by your definition. Sex is very prominently and openly demonstrated in Marti Gra, and yet "we had gangs of thugs running through New Orleans". By your logic, there should have been fewer thugs and gangs.
Please understand: I am not trying to imply that the problems were a result of that lifestyle -- it is difficult for any of us to say that our communities would react any better to such dire circumstances.
The thing that impresses me with Google is that they are not a "one hit wonder". Yeah, their search engine is very impressive, but it could disappear within five years. Has anyone checked out Gmail lately? Or Google Maps? Or any of the other products they have been coming out with? Google is producing web software that is technically excellent and extremely usable.
In my mind, Gmail's biggest strengths are not in its massive size or even the searching capabilities. It is all of the little touches that make things easier: automatic popup of contacts as I start typing, tracking conversations by e-mail, keyboard shortcuts, saving e-mail sent from 3rd party software -- all of the little touches that make it a joy to use.
Why do I bring this up? This is not just the strengths of a single product, but it is indicative of the level of quality and eye for detail that defines the company of Google. They know how to make great software -- from a technological viewpoint as well as user experience. Microsoft may be able to kill parts of Google (ie. certain products), but they will have a difficult time keeping this great company down. If one app gets killed, they can always come out with a new one. The strength of a company is not in its products but in the quality of their people, and right now, it looks like Google has the very best.
No, Ballmer, I think Google will be around for quite a while.
I understand that a lot of the plot points were pretty much known (or strongly suspected), but did he have to painstakingly list all of the link-ups. He might as well have quoted the movie for us verbatim. There is virtually nothing new to see other than the visuals. I would much rather have ready a review that focused on the quality of the film rather than its spelled out contents. It lessens the emotional impact of the final film.
Oh absolutely! I don't take my son to see anything at this point. I would even think strongly about taking him to a Pixar film. I am talking about my wife and I going out on a "date". When you have a family, such events become increasingly more rare and therefore more precious. I want to make sure that when I take the time and effort to see a film that it is worthy of all of that time and effort. Will Star Wars fit that bill? I am still holding out a bit. Personally, I am more excited about Serenity at this point. If it is anything like the series, the writing will be excellent.
For those who moderated me a troll, look again at this "review". Over half of it are blatant spoilers that expose exactly what happens in the film. While there are a couple comments regarding some of the production elements, they are far overshadowed by plot points. This is a sloppy, inconsiderate review. I am not being a "purist" on this critique. Episode 3 could very well be the best of the three prequels, and the special effects may just sway me to plunk down eight bucks for it. However, this review stinks. Talk about the high quality production, the beautiful score, the well scripted/acted/choreographed scenes (I hope!), the mood and feel. Don't give away the entire movie! Am I truly that far off on this?
Quite honestly, I don't know. I am married with a young son and another little one on the way. We are lucky if we make it to four movies a year. Given our limited opportunities, I like to maximize the experience. Given that all of my questions have been answered, it will probably come down to whether my wife wants to see it or not. Probably not -- at least until it comes out on video.
Well, I was already debating skipping out on this film, and now I have absolutely no reason to see it. This isn't a review. This isn't a review with "a few spoilers". This is a book report that summarizes how the story ends. Quite honestly, I think this is the worst "review" I have ever laid eyes on. It completely gives away all of the powerful scenes in the movie without really talking about the quality of the movie. Kevin Smith certainly should stick to his day job (even that is debatable) and leave the commentary to the professionals.
It's amazing that this giant of an airplane is actually bigger than the legendary Spruce Goose. It's amazing how technology has progressed from a rudimentary wooden substructure to this bleeding edge aluminum/steel airframe.
It should be noted that the technology existed to build a plane out of aluminum when the Spruce Goose was created. The reason that it was made out of wood was so as not to deplete the metals that were used to make weapons in World War II due to shortages of supplies. Later Hughes' stubbornly refused to change to aluminum when the metal shortage was lessoned. Check out this site for the story.
I think we would both agree that what you said should be the case, but the question is whether once this law is in place, will it actually perform this way in the real world? If homosexuality is the only reason that a candidate is being refused for a pastorate (because they are not fit for the job), will this be considered discrimination? This is probably the biggest concern behind the fight against this law. Is it justified? IANAL, so I cannot really say for sure, but it is a legitimate concern that should be considered. Once a law falls into the hands of lawyers, there is no end to the places they can take it if there is even a little bit of wiggle room.
Homosexuality is neither a choice (that's long ago been proven scientifically)
There have been studies that seem to indicate this, however the methods and sample populations used make their conclusions dubious at best (a high number of known criminals, for example)
Furthermore, as it's entirely unrelated to capacity to perform most any given job or what have you, there is no reason that discrimination on the basis of sexual preference should be permissable.
Here you come to the real crux of the matter. It is entirely related to the job of a pastor. Think about it. Most Christian churches in this country teach that homosexuality is a sin akin to drunkenness, marital infidelity, and stealing. Just as you would not want to hire a pastor who was a drunk because he would be a bad example to the congregation, so you would not want to hire someone whose lifestyle exhibits what the church teaches as a moral wrong. This law would make it impossible for churches to reject candidates whose lifestyles are those of a homosexual despite the fact that it is opposition to their religious teachings (protected by the constitution) and really common sense. Do you want to hire someone who actively stands for something your organization is expressly against?
To put it another way, would you want to hire a development manager that encouraged their developers to write slow, unmanagable code?
The Bible expressly teaches that elders (pastors are considered elders in most churches) of a church should lead lives that are "beyond reproach". This means that whether the candidate's lifestyle is characterized by being a habitual liar, glutton, drunk, adulterer, or homosexual, they are disqualified from service in the church.
On another note, it should be added that homosexuals can qualify as elders if they do not practice homosexuality. I have listed many other sins to make the point that we all are flawed and tempted to what the Bible teaches as wrong, but just because you are tempted to behave in such a way does not mean that you must behave as such. The proclamations in the Bible are not any stronger against homosexuality than any other sin. There is no room for "homo-phobia" in Christianity. The expectations for those tempted toward homosexuality are no different than those who are tempted to cheat or steal. Both are expected to live lives of repentance and obedience to scripture if they are to seek a pastorate or elder.
This "green religion" clamping down on progress reminds me of the Church crackdowns on science during the Reformation.
Not to get too off topic, but your statement could be understood to mean that the crackdowns on science were a result of the Reformation. The Reformation actually had a very positive impact on science. While not covered nearly as well as the Renaissance in our education system today (religious bias perhaps?), the Reformation had huge impacts on music, art, science, and philosophy that finally brought Europe out of the dark ages. You could even say that the Renaissance may never have happened without the Reformation opening the door.
The crackdowns on science came from the Roman Catholic church during the dark ages and the early Reformation. They did not want to lose their power base, and free thought was a threat to their system.
It is interesting that today most people have such a negative view on religion when it was, in fact, the Christians of the Reformation that have built the scientific framework that allowed the world we live in today. Although sadly there is a lot of misinformation and bad science coming from the Christian community today, one need not reject religion to embrace science. Without the faith in an orderly Creator, we never would have developed the science based on an orderly universe. Just because some circles use religion for wrong purposes does not necessarily make that religion wrong.
You might be on to something there. *sigh* I think I had better just stay away from Slashdot for the weekend to recover my sanity. Google Gulp was an amusing find this morning, but Slashdot has effectively destroyed any enjoyment I may have received from the day.
Oooookay. This is getting really bad. Realizing that the April Fool's jokes are failing, the best "real" news item they can come up with is one that is months old and not all that interesting to begin with.
Oh well. At least they're trying (and there aren't that many hours left until tomorrow).;-)
I also consider "Troops" to be one of the best Star Wars fan films, but another great show is Duality. It has a great fight scene, good special effects, and a clever ending proving that "Troops" was not the last word in fan films. Highly recommended.
I call troll. A comment like this is completely baseless. While the management of EDS may have issues, I know many people who work there. They are some of the best, most intelligent programmers I know, and at least one of them is a huge Debian fan. I would also wager that they could code circles around you without even breaking a sweat.
And really, this goes for Microsoft too. Look, I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, and I constantly find myself frustrated and angry with their products (ie. Visual Studio 2003). However, the people that work there are no slouches. When you consider that the upper management insists that they maintain backward compatibility with code of questionable design and nearly infinite complexity, it is downright astounding that their software products work as well as they do. I have to stop and remind myself of this fact. Their programmers have to be good to make all of the broken pieces work together.
Remember, these programmers are not all that different from us. They have the same interests and hobbies, and at home, they may very well be running their own Linux server farm. But they have to make money somehow, and these big companies give them great perks and the security that comes with a large, established company. Go ahead and hate the management (marketing?) and their hair-brained decisions, but remember that we are all far more alike than we would care to contemplate.
Re:This sounds great but...
on
IE7 Details Emerge
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Is anyone else screaming WHAT ABOUT CSS?!
This was mentioned in the article, and it is not exactly great news:
Partner sources say Microsoft is wavering on the extent to which it plans to support CSS2 with IE 7.0. Developers have been clamoring for Microsoft to update its CSS support to support the latest W3C standards for years. But Microsoft is leaning toward adding some additional CSS2 support to IE 7.0, but not embracing the standard in its entirety, partners say.
Which features are they not going to support? Given my experience with them, it will probably be the very ones that I would actually like to use.:-) Why is it that they are so loathe to adopt standards? Is their code that flaky, or is it truly their monopolistic tendencies?
All of you who are immediately attacking the idea saying "haven't we done this before" are missing the point. This is not just redirected light. It is transporting the light through fiberoptic cables and transferring that energy through regular light fixtures. This would allow solar power to light internal rooms that don't have windows. It also will generate electricity for other internal applications beyond light.
This technology would allow businesses to retrofit their buildings with solar light without having to do heavy remodelling to add skylights (the old way of doing it). This can be especially difficult for multi-floored buildings with internal rooms. Please read about the technology before immediately dismissing it as "nothing new".
Slashdot Mirror
As a "right-winger", I have to say that I am not surprised at all by these statistics. The past ten years have shown a rise in morality among youth. The government has begun teaching abstinence from sex while dating, and it is catching hold in the youth culture as well. There has been a quiet mini-revolution that, while not as radical as the revolution of the 60's, has had a profound impact on our country.
The younger generations have sensed all of the failures of the baby boomer philosophy, and they are quietly fighting back with more emphasis on faithful relationships, family, and respect for one another. The baby-boom generation neglected their children while they pursued money and/or worthy causes. In the end, their children cared more for their grandparents than their own parents. I fear the baby-boom generation is facing a very lonely future when they retire. If their children show as little interest in their parents as they showed them, who will visit them when they are moved into retirement homes?
The next generation has seen these repercussions and recognizing the need to poor more time (not money) into their own children's lives. They understand that in order for our lives to be better, we need to show respect for one another. They have seen that "free" sex is not free as AIDS, HIV, herpes, and other sexually transmitted diseases have run wild. They also see the empty relationships that result, and they want something better. They are not doing this by holding demonstrations or having rallies, but merely by changing their own lives to reflect the values they see as important. More and more, people are seeking happiness in relationships and community than in personal acheivement or pleasure.
As I look at the next generation, I see a reason to hope.
ps. Sex does not damage society. A cheapened view of sex and relationships where the opposite sex is seen merely as an object to be used in pursuit of pleasure -- this is what can destroy a society. Sex is a beautiful expression of devotion and affection, and in that context, it can actually strengthen and provide stability to society.
They didn't lose everything, but rather most of the sets they had used in previous films (Chicken Run, Wrong Trousers). A great loss for sure, but they are not sunk as a company. From the article:
That really does put it in perspective. Nonetheless, I feel for the guys and wish them all of the best going forward. They have consistently put out quality entertainment.
Have you ever heard of FogBugz? It solves many of the appearance and usability problems you were talking about. I have used it previously, and it worked very well for my company. It is also very easy on the eyes and has a clean interface (though it is not free). I am curious how this tool compares to Bugzilla since my experience with it is extremely limited. Is the ease-of-use of FogBugz worth the price? Are there major features missing here that Bugzilla lacks?
This is complete hogwash. You can no more prove this "fact" than the original poster can prove that Bush is only attacked because he is a Christian. How do you argue against the fact that Bush has spent more on the poor than even Bill Clinton (now before you bash the Fox News link, are the stats stated within false?). Now you can call Bush incompetent for his FEMA appointment and slow reaction. You can question his decision to go to war in Iraq (but remember that congress backed him on it). I personnally don't like the way he spends money like a teenager at the mall with their daddy's credit card. But you cannot make the claim that he doesn't care.
Have you spoken with him personnally? Do you know the reasoning behind his decisions? Have you seen his personnal reaction on receiving the news that another American soldier has died in Iraq? No, neither of us have. We cannot see what is going on in his heart. We have only his actions, and even those we don't see directly but rather through biased reporting -- whether it be CNN, FOX News, ABC or the BBC. The fact that he has called for so much spending for the poor and aid for hurricane victims would argue strongly that he does seem to regard the well-being of people -- or at least the "opinion" of the American public. I think that Bush cares very much about people, but like many caring people in this world, the way in which he tries to express it is flawed.
There are a lot of things that Bush has done that can be considered bad, but not caring is not one of them. Can you be absolutely sure that you actually care more?
I agree completely with you, but I was actually referring to the part in the first combat scene where droids land on Obi-wan's fighter (why not just blow up his ship) and start poking holes in his ship. With a simple wave of his hand, he could have sent all of those droids sailing into space, but instead Anakin swooped down his fighter and knocked the droids off with his wing.
R2D2 was very annoying throughout these opening sequences too (although not quite as completely pointless and annoying as C3P0 throughout the prequels). And what happened to his rockets in the episodes 4-6 anyway?! He took a serious step backwards in his capabilities in the next movie. It might have been better if both R2D2 and C3P0 had simply sat out on these movies.
While I agree with your post (and the Funny moderation), I found the deleted scenes in Episode II rather interesting. After watching the additional scenes between Amidala and Anakin (deleted), I began to understand their relationship a little more, and it almost started to make a little more sense. I then realized that George Lucas and company had actually taken out most of the character development and heart and left us with action, action, action. They said as much in the commentary between takes, and it became glaringly obvious that they did not really understand how to tell a good story (let alone develop a good romance). I am not saying that the deleted scenes were "great", but they would have helped make the story stronger by helping you care for the characters.
Now would the deleted scenes have actually made it a better movie (a very difficult task)? At least I would have had a little easier time buying the relationship between a successful, mature, older woman and a young, impulsive, whiny brat (a little more maturity came out for Anakin in the deleted scenes -- you caught a few more glimpses of why she might actually fall for him). Unfortunately, I don't see any additional footage helping with Revenge of the Sith. It had enough problems with what was there that could not be fixed by adding new material (why oh why did Obi Wan not just use the force to clear off the droids poking holes in his ship?... why oh why did the enemy not just use warheads in the tips of their missles?... why oh why couldn't they have hired a good screenplay writer? etc.).
Not at all. The era that will be ending is the monopoly of the RIAA and the degradation of "mainstream" music. I really cannot see this effort they are trying to push through working in the marketplace. There are far too many CD players out in the market right now and far too little talent in the mainstream outlets for people to start wholesale replacement of their players so they can purchase and listen to DRM CD's. One of the problems for the industry is that the CD works too well. Other than the MP3 (which also is already out and popular in the wild), they cannot find a medium to make CD's obsolete. How do you get better than perfect sound (well, at least perfect for 99% of the population who can't tell the difference)?
With the formation of iTunes and similar outlets along with the momentum of the marketplace, I cannot see their efforts succeeding long term. Eventually, the grassroots independent labels will rise to higher prominence in the market's eyes because their music will be more creative and people will be able to play their music on their existing systems. I don't know about you, but I will NOT be spending more money just to listen to CD's I don't really need -- especially when their are other options. And there is certainly a lot of money to be made here by those who don't want to follow the DRM path. Where there is demand, you know the supplies will be coming soon.
We are likely seeing the end of an era. It is the end of the RIAA era.
Disasters bring out the best and the worst in people, and hurricane Katrina was a prime example of this. When was the last time Europe faced a disaster of this magnitude? Next time the Netherlands are hit by a category 4 hurricane that levels their dikes and floods their cities, then we will see exactly how well Europe fares. May it never be!
Besides, your logic is flawed anyway in regards to "liberated" sex since New Orleans is one of the most "liberated" cities in the United States, by your definition. Sex is very prominently and openly demonstrated in Marti Gra, and yet "we had gangs of thugs running through New Orleans". By your logic, there should have been fewer thugs and gangs.
Please understand: I am not trying to imply that the problems were a result of that lifestyle -- it is difficult for any of us to say that our communities would react any better to such dire circumstances.
The thing that impresses me with Google is that they are not a "one hit wonder". Yeah, their search engine is very impressive, but it could disappear within five years. Has anyone checked out Gmail lately? Or Google Maps? Or any of the other products they have been coming out with? Google is producing web software that is technically excellent and extremely usable.
In my mind, Gmail's biggest strengths are not in its massive size or even the searching capabilities. It is all of the little touches that make things easier: automatic popup of contacts as I start typing, tracking conversations by e-mail, keyboard shortcuts, saving e-mail sent from 3rd party software -- all of the little touches that make it a joy to use.
Why do I bring this up? This is not just the strengths of a single product, but it is indicative of the level of quality and eye for detail that defines the company of Google. They know how to make great software -- from a technological viewpoint as well as user experience. Microsoft may be able to kill parts of Google (ie. certain products), but they will have a difficult time keeping this great company down. If one app gets killed, they can always come out with a new one. The strength of a company is not in its products but in the quality of their people, and right now, it looks like Google has the very best.
No, Ballmer, I think Google will be around for quite a while.
I understand that a lot of the plot points were pretty much known (or strongly suspected), but did he have to painstakingly list all of the link-ups. He might as well have quoted the movie for us verbatim. There is virtually nothing new to see other than the visuals. I would much rather have ready a review that focused on the quality of the film rather than its spelled out contents. It lessens the emotional impact of the final film.
Oh absolutely! I don't take my son to see anything at this point. I would even think strongly about taking him to a Pixar film. I am talking about my wife and I going out on a "date". When you have a family, such events become increasingly more rare and therefore more precious. I want to make sure that when I take the time and effort to see a film that it is worthy of all of that time and effort. Will Star Wars fit that bill? I am still holding out a bit. Personally, I am more excited about Serenity at this point. If it is anything like the series, the writing will be excellent.
For those who moderated me a troll, look again at this "review". Over half of it are blatant spoilers that expose exactly what happens in the film. While there are a couple comments regarding some of the production elements, they are far overshadowed by plot points. This is a sloppy, inconsiderate review. I am not being a "purist" on this critique. Episode 3 could very well be the best of the three prequels, and the special effects may just sway me to plunk down eight bucks for it. However, this review stinks. Talk about the high quality production, the beautiful score, the well scripted/acted/choreographed scenes (I hope!), the mood and feel. Don't give away the entire movie! Am I truly that far off on this?
Quite honestly, I don't know. I am married with a young son and another little one on the way. We are lucky if we make it to four movies a year. Given our limited opportunities, I like to maximize the experience. Given that all of my questions have been answered, it will probably come down to whether my wife wants to see it or not. Probably not -- at least until it comes out on video.
Well, I was already debating skipping out on this film, and now I have absolutely no reason to see it. This isn't a review. This isn't a review with "a few spoilers". This is a book report that summarizes how the story ends. Quite honestly, I think this is the worst "review" I have ever laid eyes on. It completely gives away all of the powerful scenes in the movie without really talking about the quality of the movie. Kevin Smith certainly should stick to his day job (even that is debatable) and leave the commentary to the professionals.
It should be noted that the technology existed to build a plane out of aluminum when the Spruce Goose was created. The reason that it was made out of wood was so as not to deplete the metals that were used to make weapons in World War II due to shortages of supplies. Later Hughes' stubbornly refused to change to aluminum when the metal shortage was lessoned. Check out this site for the story.
I think we would both agree that what you said should be the case, but the question is whether once this law is in place, will it actually perform this way in the real world? If homosexuality is the only reason that a candidate is being refused for a pastorate (because they are not fit for the job), will this be considered discrimination? This is probably the biggest concern behind the fight against this law. Is it justified? IANAL, so I cannot really say for sure, but it is a legitimate concern that should be considered. Once a law falls into the hands of lawyers, there is no end to the places they can take it if there is even a little bit of wiggle room.
There have been studies that seem to indicate this, however the methods and sample populations used make their conclusions dubious at best (a high number of known criminals, for example)
Here you come to the real crux of the matter. It is entirely related to the job of a pastor. Think about it. Most Christian churches in this country teach that homosexuality is a sin akin to drunkenness, marital infidelity, and stealing. Just as you would not want to hire a pastor who was a drunk because he would be a bad example to the congregation, so you would not want to hire someone whose lifestyle exhibits what the church teaches as a moral wrong. This law would make it impossible for churches to reject candidates whose lifestyles are those of a homosexual despite the fact that it is opposition to their religious teachings (protected by the constitution) and really common sense. Do you want to hire someone who actively stands for something your organization is expressly against? To put it another way, would you want to hire a development manager that encouraged their developers to write slow, unmanagable code?
The Bible expressly teaches that elders (pastors are considered elders in most churches) of a church should lead lives that are "beyond reproach". This means that whether the candidate's lifestyle is characterized by being a habitual liar, glutton, drunk, adulterer, or homosexual, they are disqualified from service in the church.
On another note, it should be added that homosexuals can qualify as elders if they do not practice homosexuality. I have listed many other sins to make the point that we all are flawed and tempted to what the Bible teaches as wrong, but just because you are tempted to behave in such a way does not mean that you must behave as such. The proclamations in the Bible are not any stronger against homosexuality than any other sin. There is no room for "homo-phobia" in Christianity. The expectations for those tempted toward homosexuality are no different than those who are tempted to cheat or steal. Both are expected to live lives of repentance and obedience to scripture if they are to seek a pastorate or elder.
Not to get too off topic, but your statement could be understood to mean that the crackdowns on science were a result of the Reformation. The Reformation actually had a very positive impact on science. While not covered nearly as well as the Renaissance in our education system today (religious bias perhaps?), the Reformation had huge impacts on music, art, science, and philosophy that finally brought Europe out of the dark ages. You could even say that the Renaissance may never have happened without the Reformation opening the door.
The crackdowns on science came from the Roman Catholic church during the dark ages and the early Reformation. They did not want to lose their power base, and free thought was a threat to their system.
It is interesting that today most people have such a negative view on religion when it was, in fact, the Christians of the Reformation that have built the scientific framework that allowed the world we live in today. Although sadly there is a lot of misinformation and bad science coming from the Christian community today, one need not reject religion to embrace science. Without the faith in an orderly Creator, we never would have developed the science based on an orderly universe. Just because some circles use religion for wrong purposes does not necessarily make that religion wrong.
You might be on to something there. *sigh* I think I had better just stay away from Slashdot for the weekend to recover my sanity. Google Gulp was an amusing find this morning, but Slashdot has effectively destroyed any enjoyment I may have received from the day.
Oooookay. This is getting really bad. Realizing that the April Fool's jokes are failing, the best "real" news item they can come up with is one that is months old and not all that interesting to begin with.
Oh well. At least they're trying (and there aren't that many hours left until tomorrow). ;-)
I also consider "Troops" to be one of the best Star Wars fan films, but another great show is Duality. It has a great fight scene, good special effects, and a clever ending proving that "Troops" was not the last word in fan films. Highly recommended.
FYI, the official city for postal code 12345 is Schenectady, NY.
I call troll. A comment like this is completely baseless. While the management of EDS may have issues, I know many people who work there. They are some of the best, most intelligent programmers I know, and at least one of them is a huge Debian fan. I would also wager that they could code circles around you without even breaking a sweat.
And really, this goes for Microsoft too. Look, I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, and I constantly find myself frustrated and angry with their products (ie. Visual Studio 2003). However, the people that work there are no slouches. When you consider that the upper management insists that they maintain backward compatibility with code of questionable design and nearly infinite complexity, it is downright astounding that their software products work as well as they do. I have to stop and remind myself of this fact. Their programmers have to be good to make all of the broken pieces work together.
Remember, these programmers are not all that different from us. They have the same interests and hobbies, and at home, they may very well be running their own Linux server farm. But they have to make money somehow, and these big companies give them great perks and the security that comes with a large, established company. Go ahead and hate the management (marketing?) and their hair-brained decisions, but remember that we are all far more alike than we would care to contemplate.
This was mentioned in the article, and it is not exactly great news:
Which features are they not going to support? Given my experience with them, it will probably be the very ones that I would actually like to use. :-) Why is it that they are so loathe to adopt standards? Is their code that flaky, or is it truly their monopolistic tendencies?
All of you who are immediately attacking the idea saying "haven't we done this before" are missing the point. This is not just redirected light. It is transporting the light through fiberoptic cables and transferring that energy through regular light fixtures. This would allow solar power to light internal rooms that don't have windows. It also will generate electricity for other internal applications beyond light.
This technology would allow businesses to retrofit their buildings with solar light without having to do heavy remodelling to add skylights (the old way of doing it). This can be especially difficult for multi-floored buildings with internal rooms. Please read about the technology before immediately dismissing it as "nothing new".