The question is not whether more people would go or not, but whether the increased number of people would compensate for the decreased revenue and increased costs from all the extra people (for shows that are already running at or near capacity)
It's possible that they have got the equilibrium price point wrong, but I doubt that the film studios and theater companies who spend hundreds of millions of dollars per movie haven't given it some very serious consideration.
You may not mind waiting till the movies have gone from the big theaters to the smaller, cheaper ones, but the studios have come to rely on heavy marketing and big opening weeks and a lot of people have short attention spans.
I don't understand how your description of infinite stages is not a single stage? Imagine that you build a solid rocket that was built out of rocket fuel (or a casing of relatively negligible mass) so it spent itself as it burnt... would that count as one stage or infinity? To me that would seem more like a single stage rocket.
I'm not saying that the police WANT to kill innocent people... just that they ought to be a lot more careful about killing innocents. In this case they didn't bother to positively ID the man before shooting him dead. Then they lied about him wearing an unseasonally bulky jacket, they lied about the fact that they shot him while he was running away when in fact they already had him restrained. Then they don't even issue a real apology or promise to reduce the chance of this happening in the future.
Finally, it might make you feel like you're being very proactive and what not with a shoot-to-kill policy but it's completely ineffective. About 10 seconds worth of rewiring will turn a push-to-detonate bomb into a bomb with a dead man trigger. You hold the button down... if you shoot the guy it blows up. The Irish terrorists have a long history of doing that.
It's sad that Tony Blair announces that "they try to change our way of life, but we won't change" and then goes from a land that's proud to have largely unarmed police officers to carrying out summary executions.
And yes, I DID find another country to live in... it's called the United States of America. I'm sure as hell not setting foot in the UK until you guys regain your senses.
if the terrorists are killing innocent civillians and the police are killing innocent civillians, what's the difference between the two?
As for your questions: 1. It wasn't a house, it was an appartment building where lots of innocent people were living 2. The police knew nothing about his immigration status, at the time (given that they didn't even know who he was) so that's just lame after-the-fact justification
I wouldn't stop short of saying there was a coverup given the fact that the recently leaked documents show that the statements they've been making for weeks after the incident were no exaggerations or half-truths but pure fabrication.
In my opinion all officers involved in the shooting and subsequent coverup ought to lose their jobs and stand trial on some pretty serious charges.
You're talking about people who are largely satisfied with a very lame "oh well too bad. We're not going to change anything, though" response when an innocent civillian is murdered by the police.
Oh of course.... I'm sure they never though about that! I'm SO glad they have Slashdotters to tell Park Rangers how to do their jobs, NASA engineers how to undertake better space missions and so on. I mean realizing that a lot of north america has cold winters?! Wow! Such insight!!! I bet they've NEVER thought about that!
They ought to shut down all universities and just let the armchair experts at Slashdot tell everyone how to do everything.
I'm not denying that that is the state of affairs... but the GP is suggesting that they ought to be liable for such damages, and I disagree. I think americans need to learn to assume responsibility for their own actions rather than seeing out a deep pocket to sue everytime they get a paper cut.
Why should they be liable for a risk you knowingly assume? If they fail to provide ergonomic keyboards, suitable working conditions and so on, then sure. But if they follow the best accepted practices of the time, I don't think they should be liable.
Have you been asleep for the last couple of decades? ...
We are doing great things with space exploration: probes going to the outer reaches of the solar system, solar sails, new propulsion methods, hibernation, you name it, it's being worked on.
Wow! Obviously their work on hibernation is been a grand success!
Only the energy that is lost to heat and such from the absorbemit cycle, which I'm guessing is a vanishingly small amount.
It's not like the phosphors are a black hole when the light is on and only emit light when it's off. The lights might be dimmed a little bit while they are charging, but once they're saturated, they're going to be emitting and absorbing the same amount of energy continuously.
People who don't know AMD are also probably the people who listen to whatever the Bestbuy salesmen tell them, and are convinved they need the latest and greatest PC out there to run IE.
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. They are under no obligation to enable you to exercise your freedom of speech on their site. You're more than welcome to publish your own site, tell your friends or hand out flyers on the street corner.
All your talk of "free speech" and "censorship" is rather ridiculous.
While you're in uniform, you're presenting yourself as a representative of that company. The same laws that prevent you from making your own uniform an pretending to be an employee of a company when you're not, also dictate that they get to decide how their uniforms are used.
There is absolutely nothing unreasonable here and it's just typical slashdot sensationalism.
They may have shot him before they pinned him down... but once they had him restrained, there is absolutely no way to justify pumping those bullets into his head
They shot him five times in the head while he was pinned down by two other officers. At that point he couldn't possibly have been a threat... it wasn't police trying to stop a potential suicide bomber... it was a simple execution.
If they thought he had a bomb, why did they let him board the bus when they were following him?
Slashdot Mirror
The question is not whether more people would go or not, but whether the increased number of people would compensate for the decreased revenue and increased costs from all the extra people (for shows that are already running at or near capacity)
It's possible that they have got the equilibrium price point wrong, but I doubt that the film studios and theater companies who spend hundreds of millions of dollars per movie haven't given it some very serious consideration.
You may not mind waiting till the movies have gone from the big theaters to the smaller, cheaper ones, but the studios have come to rely on heavy marketing and big opening weeks and a lot of people have short attention spans.
I don't understand how your description of infinite stages is not a single stage? Imagine that you build a solid rocket that was built out of rocket fuel (or a casing of relatively negligible mass) so it spent itself as it burnt... would that count as one stage or infinity? To me that would seem more like a single stage rocket.
Of course, IANARS.
I'm not saying that the police WANT to kill innocent people... just that they ought to be a lot more careful about killing innocents. In this case they didn't bother to positively ID the man before shooting him dead. Then they lied about him wearing an unseasonally bulky jacket, they lied about the fact that they shot him while he was running away when in fact they already had him restrained. Then they don't even issue a real apology or promise to reduce the chance of this happening in the future.
Finally, it might make you feel like you're being very proactive and what not with a shoot-to-kill policy but it's completely ineffective. About 10 seconds worth of rewiring will turn a push-to-detonate bomb into a bomb with a dead man trigger. You hold the button down... if you shoot the guy it blows up. The Irish terrorists have a long history of doing that.
It's sad that Tony Blair announces that "they try to change our way of life, but we won't change" and then goes from a land that's proud to have largely unarmed police officers to carrying out summary executions.
And yes, I DID find another country to live in... it's called the United States of America. I'm sure as hell not setting foot in the UK until you guys regain your senses.
if the terrorists are killing innocent civillians and the police are killing innocent civillians, what's the difference between the two?
As for your questions:
1. It wasn't a house, it was an appartment building where lots of innocent people were living
2. The police knew nothing about his immigration status, at the time (given that they didn't even know who he was) so that's just lame after-the-fact justification
I wouldn't stop short of saying there was a coverup given the fact that the recently leaked documents show that the statements they've been making for weeks after the incident were no exaggerations or half-truths but pure fabrication.
In my opinion all officers involved in the shooting and subsequent coverup ought to lose their jobs and stand trial on some pretty serious charges.
Ask any Londoner how oppressed they feel.
You're talking about people who are largely satisfied with a very lame "oh well too bad. We're not going to change anything, though" response when an innocent civillian is murdered by the police.
Oh of course.... I'm sure they never though about that! I'm SO glad they have Slashdotters to tell Park Rangers how to do their jobs, NASA engineers how to undertake better space missions and so on. I mean realizing that a lot of north america has cold winters?! Wow! Such insight!!! I bet they've NEVER thought about that!
They ought to shut down all universities and just let the armchair experts at Slashdot tell everyone how to do everything.
I'm not denying that that is the state of affairs... but the GP is suggesting that they ought to be liable for such damages, and I disagree. I think americans need to learn to assume responsibility for their own actions rather than seeing out a deep pocket to sue everytime they get a paper cut.
How is that flamebait?
Why should they be liable for a risk you knowingly assume? If they fail to provide ergonomic keyboards, suitable working conditions and so on, then sure. But if they follow the best accepted practices of the time, I don't think they should be liable.
I think that's a great quote that I'd like to save, but I can't find it anywhere on the web... can you find a citation for me?
...is for you to stop anthropomorphizing it/
Have you been asleep for the last couple of decades?
...
We are doing great things with space exploration: probes going to the outer reaches of the solar system, solar sails, new propulsion methods, hibernation, you name it, it's being worked on.
Wow! Obviously their work on hibernation is been a grand success!
Here's a radical idea.... before asking stupid qustions, click on the damn article, or at least read some of the previous comments.
It's satellite images on Google Maps they're talking about
Only the energy that is lost to heat and such from the absorbemit cycle, which I'm guessing is a vanishingly small amount.
It's not like the phosphors are a black hole when the light is on and only emit light when it's off. The lights might be dimmed a little bit while they are charging, but once they're saturated, they're going to be emitting and absorbing the same amount of energy continuously.
It will take years or decades for it to lose enough energy to fall back into the atmosphere. Considering that a paint fleck caused a 4mm crater in the windshield of a previous shuttle mission, leaving a few tons of trash floating around is a very bad idea.
People who don't know AMD are also probably the people who listen to whatever the Bestbuy salesmen tell them, and are convinved they need the latest and greatest PC out there to run IE.
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. They are under no obligation to enable you to exercise your freedom of speech on their site. You're more than welcome to publish your own site, tell your friends or hand out flyers on the street corner.
All your talk of "free speech" and "censorship" is rather ridiculous.
For one thing, the uniform would likely include a company logo which is protected by trademark law
While you're in uniform, you're presenting yourself as a representative of that company. The same laws that prevent you from making your own uniform an pretending to be an employee of a company when you're not, also dictate that they get to decide how their uniforms are used.
There is absolutely nothing unreasonable here and it's just typical slashdot sensationalism.
Ok, apparently the JPL doesn't do Jet Propulsion research anymore, but I still think the grandparent's post sounds like an urban legend.
You know, Nasa's subsidiary, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory?
They may have shot him before they pinned him down... but once they had him restrained, there is absolutely no way to justify pumping those bullets into his head
They shot him five times in the head while he was pinned down by two other officers. At that point he couldn't possibly have been a threat... it wasn't police trying to stop a potential suicide bomber... it was a simple execution.
If they thought he had a bomb, why did they let him board the bus when they were following him?
On Slashdot? Think again.