Agreed -- all Slashdotters should have their anti-marketing shields up at maximum power. Lucas realises this is his last kick at the can, and his host of Lucas media companies will milk this for all they're worth.
Call in a favour from your friend Spielberg, give Kevin Smith (who has made only one good movie) a free preview, give umpteenth number of 'exclusive' interviews, release $50 press kits to whoever asks...
This movie ~might~ be good, it ~might~ be better than the first two of the prequel trilogy. However, we heard all this twice before and most of us were burned. Don't be a sucker and go for the three-peat...lay low and wait for popular opinion, read legitimate film critics (rotten tomato) and gauge their aggregate response.
of course, if you have a 1978 Battle Star Galatica lunchbox in shrinkwrap, you can ignore my comments.
I find this all very amusing actually, since until recently AMD ruled the desktop/home PC market based on price/performance, whereas Intel maintained its market share because they were so datacentre friendly. When I'm buying racks of enterprise 2, 4, and 8-way x86/x64 processors, a price difference for $100 per CPU is a small component of the overall cost, and frequently is worth the up front capital cost for a 10-20% performance boost.
What I'm seeing is AMD is going to begin kicking ass in the enterprise space for enterprise rack servers and blade configurations, a traditional domain where Intel has ruled. And as for dual-core on the desktop, I don't think the market is really there for that level of performance yet... not many desktop apps can take advantage of those features, just like x64 is just future-proofing your destop for the time being.
So the immediate price difference between AMD and Intel offering doesn't tell the whole story. Intel is going to get hit where it hurts the most -- enterprise markets.
The difference I see between Doubleclick and Google is their attitude towards my personal data. Doubleclick surepticiously tracks my behaviour in the background, their client is the website and their customer is advertisers. I have no oppportunity to 'buy in' or have any ability to affect the transaction, aside from a) avoiding sites that use doubleclick (and how do I figure that out before visiting a link??) and b) turning off coookies, which breaks most of my browsing experience.
Google on the other hand values my personal information. Their customers are still advertisers, but they are partnering with me and offer me value in exchange for my personal information. The offer me free services that are industry best, for the opportunity to present me advertisements. Its a win-win so long as I want to play. And since google's whole strategy is about advertising through services, there's a decent hedge against their abuse of this trust -- people stop trusting google, they lose eyeballs and thus their business strategy fails.
Also, to my knowledge, advertisements are presented at the time of information retreival...there is no master datawarehouse trying to compile the master "Ubergrendle" user profile where they can create a psychological model of my buying patterns. I'm very comfortable with a rules-engine providing me with contextually useful advertisements...its actually user friendly.
This is where Microsoft has their biggest problem -- after years of abusing EULAs, even if MS provided the EXACT SAME SERVICES and comparable technology as Google, most users wouldn't trust them based on their a) other interests, and b) previous behaviour.
You apparently don't remember the restructuring that occured in the late 1980s/early 1990s when IBM had their lunch handed to them by Microsoft (Windows), Compaq (PCs), and Sun (Unix).
IBM cut their global workforce by tens of thousands. Not that I'm speaking from personal experience, but the one thing I've admirred IBM for in the past was the way they treat their employees...even when they have to take drastic measure, they try to be transparent in their decision making process and their severance packages are extremely generous. I've spoken to people that were bridged ~4~ years to retirement.
Just a sign that IBM is in it for the long haul...no point in burning this generation of workers as it will hurt your ability to recruit 5 years down the line. (note: someone should have explained this to Fiorina)
Google O/S (linux/bsd), running Google Office (OpenOffice), with free integration with webservices (Google Maps, Google Groups, Google Mail, Picasa) that have unlimited usage/storage.
Gates has always insisted that his company could cease to be viable in a span of as little as 5 years, given the IBM PC experience (but at least IBM even in the 1980s was much more diversified). With a 3-5 year refresh cycle for desktop PCs this makes Microsoft even more vulnerable than IBM was.
If Google has the 'cool' factor and all of the sudden people start demanding Google desktops like they're demanding iPods, I can see a sudden shift. Unlikely, but possible.
Given that a 9600 (not even a 9600 pro) is at least a generation behind in terms of graphics chipset, at the bottom of the line for that ATI generation, marketing this as a significantly upgraded video card would be a bit disingenious IMHO.
Apple may have upgraded the bundled videocard just on the basis of component availability/price point, but I doubt this is a significant selling feature.
Seriously, if you discover a blog through Google then to me the knowledge contained within is 100% without merit. Blogs work well when an established persona uses it to communicate without a media filter. Using them to advertise is weak since they're not a 'pull' medium but a 'push' medium...and if the owners lose their credibility, the blogs themselves become worthless.
So, I would go and read Bill Gates' or Linus Torvalds' or Darth Vader's (I'm joking!) blog, but I wouldn't read the blog of a 'group of 99' member.
Sorry, I can't disagree more with your comment.
'Athesim' is a categorisation that defines a mode of thought that either actively or passively does not profess a religion or existence of divinity.
If I understand your argument, you're saying that NOT presenting a relgious context for a scientific theory in a textbook actually defaults into being a religious context because atheism is a religion. This circular logic is ludicrous...at best its a double negative but in reality you're just trying to define the argument so that you'll win. Any argument based on logic requires the taking of positive position that must be proven through argument, atheism is the default non-affirmative state. You are trying to turn atheism into a positive position, with the default state being the existence of a divine power.
And this is the value of a classical education. Social sciences, history, english literature, philosphy...these studies help develop an ability to cope with vagarities and non-absolutes, the ability to rationalise and reason qualitative information not just quantitiative. Too often I see a scientist being forced to debate with these religious fundamentalists and LOSE because they cannot handle themselves in a debate.
When your challenged with a logical fallacy you have to aggressively thwart it, and explain why it is irrelevant. When presented with rhetorical questions you have to respond in kind, question the basis of the religion belief and why it can't be interpreted as an absolute.
When given a choice, the vast majority of people will choose the uncertainties of science vs the uncertainties of religion as a basis upon which to lead their lives, since at least science allows for consistency and an ability to gain greater understanding. Hence the desire of the religious groups to avoid a direct confrontation, attack the opponent rather than present the strength of their own position (e.g. it has none).
The Monty Python FAQ categorically states that AIDS was not an issue. Chapman was a die-hard alcoholic, and cancer in this case was at least partially attributed to his addiction.
FPSes have the best visual 'eye candy', but I could have said the same in the 1980s about Flight Sims. Innovative fun games continue to be invented and create their own niches.
In the past few years, there's been some great advancements... Europa Univeralis 2 is probably the most intricate historically based strategy game ever invented (and yet doesn't become a micromanagement nightmare).... how would you qualify "The Sims" as a game based on 1980s or 1990s definitions? Sounds like a dumb premise but its been hugely popular (and inventive). I'm not a big fan of MMORPG but it is definitely an advancement in the realm of CRPGs. And Doom3 is just an eye-candy FPS, as the article poster pointed out he should be trying Half Life 2 or KOTOR.
He's probably indirectly commenting on the slowing pace of 'genre' creation...most of the new games fit into a specific model/theme. This is where consumers have spoken. Tetris is probably one of the most addictive and popular games of all time, but if it was invented today no one would pay $50.00 for it.
In this case Goyer is transcribing alot of "Batman: Year One" by Frank Miller, which is just slightly the lesser of 'The Dark Knight Returns' (but not by much). Even if 50% of the material is transcribed faithfully this movie will have some merit.
"One man's rebellion is another man's war for independence."
No where in my post did I justify the behaviour of the site hackers/defacers...nor did I condemn it. My point was that this type of behaviour is typical throughout human history, and that a cautious person will take account for such a possibility. (e.g. patch, repatch, and patch again your networked servers!)
Anti-war, or anti-imperialist, slogans and graffiti have been found throughout ancient Roman ruins in the Middle East and Europe. Also at industrial age British forticiations in India, or colonial age Spanish garrisons in south america, etc. This isn't new behaviour and comes with the territory of being an empire. Get used to it.
Go to your local bank running a couple of 128 cpu Starcats and whine about how linux rocks, and the professionals will then laugh you out of their shop
Well, we wouldn't quite laugh.:) Technology architecture here has established a nice set of parameters for introducing new technology (specifically operarting systems) to our company:
"We run Windows, Solaris, AIX, OS/390, and NonStop(aka Tandem)... when you can confirm what you can do with Linux that you can't do with any of the above, or if you can confirm what Linux will replace and do better, then you can install it."
Under the circumstances we're much more likely to consolidate AIX onto Solaris than replace AIX with Linux, so even that window of opportunity in minimal.
Linux is good, its just a question of 'is it good enough?'. Much more suited for small to mid-sized companies without a numerous legacy platforms to support.
Looks like Trusted Solaris continues to persist. So much for the presentation my enterprise sales rep... I'll throw this in his face next week and watch him squirm.
It wasn't necessarily proven as legal. First, possessing a personal copy I believe is what was considered acceptable -- but not widespread distribution. Second, CRIA (our RIAA equivalent) hasn't given up the fight...they're collecting evidence and will take another run at this in court. These subpoeanas are merely an element of their next strategy... in the end they only need one ISP (looks like Videotron) to roll over, then they can proceed with their casework. I'm sure they're hoping to set new precedents. Damn this english common law tradition:/
However, we're protected quite a bit through the levy on media that exists here, considered financial compensation for our 'fair use' rights.
To my (limited) knowledge, Linux does not have anything that is comparable to:
1. dtrace
2. zones/containers (e.g. kernel isolation)
3. 128-bit file systems (ZFS)
Also, there is no longer a 'secure' Solaris version, which was typically used by the US government. Solaris 10 is (apparently) secure enough 'out of the box' to be natively deployed in the CIA, NSA, etc...
Certification costs money. To have credibility it must be peer reviewed, or reviewed/audited/approved by an external body. Then there's the QA and testing process. And this activity is not a one time activity, but a long term commitment to regression testing "every patch".
Given that many linux distros are pretending to be enterprise-ready w/o enterprise sales or revenue would indicate that they are unable, uncapable, or unwilling to be certified. Basically they can't afford it.
Of course I am speaking in general terms about linux distributions and the industry in general, there are numerous examples which can be used to refute my generalisations. However I think there's ALOT of consolidation required in the Linux world yet to achieve some of the more lofty goals of open source.
Possibly. Personally I think this can unintentionally be a good thing...with news feeds becoming more expensive, it may tip the scales in favour of more local reporting, or more 'in house' journalists. Alot of newspapers now have a skeleton journalist pool and rely heavily upon newsfeeds for the bulk of their content. Unfortunately those feeds are aggregators...you won't get investigative reporting similar to Watergate, or Iran-Contra, or the Liberal sponsorship scandal.
WWII was fought over a 6 year timespan. That's with technology that consisted of vacuum tube electronics. And it was in a destructive manner...trying to destroy your opponent's means of production. Plastic, RADAR, laser, jet technology, atomic weapons... all developed in 6 years.
Motivate the human race enough and its ridiculous what we can accomplish. We're 3 generations removed from 'total war' economy. An extinction level event would be sufficient motivation for us to see such economic focus once again.
Slashdot Mirror
No you can't its too perilous.
Agreed -- all Slashdotters should have their anti-marketing shields up at maximum power. Lucas realises this is his last kick at the can, and his host of Lucas media companies will milk this for all they're worth.
Call in a favour from your friend Spielberg, give Kevin Smith (who has made only one good movie) a free preview, give umpteenth number of 'exclusive' interviews, release $50 press kits to whoever asks...
This movie ~might~ be good, it ~might~ be better than the first two of the prequel trilogy. However, we heard all this twice before and most of us were burned. Don't be a sucker and go for the three-peat...lay low and wait for popular opinion, read legitimate film critics (rotten tomato) and gauge their aggregate response.
of course, if you have a 1978 Battle Star Galatica lunchbox in shrinkwrap, you can ignore my comments.
I find this all very amusing actually, since until recently AMD ruled the desktop/home PC market based on price/performance, whereas Intel maintained its market share because they were so datacentre friendly. When I'm buying racks of enterprise 2, 4, and 8-way x86/x64 processors, a price difference for $100 per CPU is a small component of the overall cost, and frequently is worth the up front capital cost for a 10-20% performance boost.
What I'm seeing is AMD is going to begin kicking ass in the enterprise space for enterprise rack servers and blade configurations, a traditional domain where Intel has ruled. And as for dual-core on the desktop, I don't think the market is really there for that level of performance yet... not many desktop apps can take advantage of those features, just like x64 is just future-proofing your destop for the time being.
So the immediate price difference between AMD and Intel offering doesn't tell the whole story. Intel is going to get hit where it hurts the most -- enterprise markets.
The difference I see between Doubleclick and Google is their attitude towards my personal data. Doubleclick surepticiously tracks my behaviour in the background, their client is the website and their customer is advertisers. I have no oppportunity to 'buy in' or have any ability to affect the transaction, aside from a) avoiding sites that use doubleclick (and how do I figure that out before visiting a link??) and b) turning off coookies, which breaks most of my browsing experience.
Google on the other hand values my personal information. Their customers are still advertisers, but they are partnering with me and offer me value in exchange for my personal information. The offer me free services that are industry best, for the opportunity to present me advertisements. Its a win-win so long as I want to play. And since google's whole strategy is about advertising through services, there's a decent hedge against their abuse of this trust -- people stop trusting google, they lose eyeballs and thus their business strategy fails.
Also, to my knowledge, advertisements are presented at the time of information retreival...there is no master datawarehouse trying to compile the master "Ubergrendle" user profile where they can create a psychological model of my buying patterns. I'm very comfortable with a rules-engine providing me with contextually useful advertisements...its actually user friendly.
This is where Microsoft has their biggest problem -- after years of abusing EULAs, even if MS provided the EXACT SAME SERVICES and comparable technology as Google, most users wouldn't trust them based on their a) other interests, and b) previous behaviour.
You apparently don't remember the restructuring that occured in the late 1980s/early 1990s when IBM had their lunch handed to them by Microsoft (Windows), Compaq (PCs), and Sun (Unix).
IBM cut their global workforce by tens of thousands. Not that I'm speaking from personal experience, but the one thing I've admirred IBM for in the past was the way they treat their employees...even when they have to take drastic measure, they try to be transparent in their decision making process and their severance packages are extremely generous. I've spoken to people that were bridged ~4~ years to retirement.
Just a sign that IBM is in it for the long haul...no point in burning this generation of workers as it will hurt your ability to recruit 5 years down the line. (note: someone should have explained this to Fiorina)
Google O/S (linux/bsd), running Google Office (OpenOffice), with free integration with webservices (Google Maps, Google Groups, Google Mail, Picasa) that have unlimited usage/storage.
Gates has always insisted that his company could cease to be viable in a span of as little as 5 years, given the IBM PC experience (but at least IBM even in the 1980s was much more diversified). With a 3-5 year refresh cycle for desktop PCs this makes Microsoft even more vulnerable than IBM was.
If Google has the 'cool' factor and all of the sudden people start demanding Google desktops like they're demanding iPods, I can see a sudden shift. Unlikely, but possible.
Wow, even my typos are denoted as informative. ;)
:)
And it ~was~ a typo, 'i' is right beside 'u' on the keyboard.
Given that a 9600 (not even a 9600 pro) is at least a generation behind in terms of graphics chipset, at the bottom of the line for that ATI generation, marketing this as a significantly upgraded video card would be a bit disingenious IMHO.
Apple may have upgraded the bundled videocard just on the basis of component availability/price point, but I doubt this is a significant selling feature.
Blogging is like usenet, without the peer review.
"OMG SHUTUP YOU LOZER U KNOW NTHING!!!!"
Seriously, if you discover a blog through Google then to me the knowledge contained within is 100% without merit. Blogs work well when an established persona uses it to communicate without a media filter. Using them to advertise is weak since they're not a 'pull' medium but a 'push' medium...and if the owners lose their credibility, the blogs themselves become worthless.
So, I would go and read Bill Gates' or Linus Torvalds' or Darth Vader's (I'm joking!) blog, but I wouldn't read the blog of a 'group of 99' member.
Sorry, I can't disagree more with your comment. 'Athesim' is a categorisation that defines a mode of thought that either actively or passively does not profess a religion or existence of divinity.
If I understand your argument, you're saying that NOT presenting a relgious context for a scientific theory in a textbook actually defaults into being a religious context because atheism is a religion. This circular logic is ludicrous...at best its a double negative but in reality you're just trying to define the argument so that you'll win. Any argument based on logic requires the taking of positive position that must be proven through argument, atheism is the default non-affirmative state. You are trying to turn atheism into a positive position, with the default state being the existence of a divine power.
In short, atheism is not a religion.
And this is the value of a classical education. Social sciences, history, english literature, philosphy...these studies help develop an ability to cope with vagarities and non-absolutes, the ability to rationalise and reason qualitative information not just quantitiative. Too often I see a scientist being forced to debate with these religious fundamentalists and LOSE because they cannot handle themselves in a debate.
When your challenged with a logical fallacy you have to aggressively thwart it, and explain why it is irrelevant. When presented with rhetorical questions you have to respond in kind, question the basis of the religion belief and why it can't be interpreted as an absolute.
When given a choice, the vast majority of people will choose the uncertainties of science vs the uncertainties of religion as a basis upon which to lead their lives, since at least science allows for consistency and an ability to gain greater understanding. Hence the desire of the religious groups to avoid a direct confrontation, attack the opponent rather than present the strength of their own position (e.g. it has none).
The Monty Python FAQ categorically states that AIDS was not an issue. Chapman was a die-hard alcoholic, and cancer in this case was at least partially attributed to his addiction.
FPSes have the best visual 'eye candy', but I could have said the same in the 1980s about Flight Sims. Innovative fun games continue to be invented and create their own niches.
In the past few years, there's been some great advancements... Europa Univeralis 2 is probably the most intricate historically based strategy game ever invented (and yet doesn't become a micromanagement nightmare).... how would you qualify "The Sims" as a game based on 1980s or 1990s definitions? Sounds like a dumb premise but its been hugely popular (and inventive). I'm not a big fan of MMORPG but it is definitely an advancement in the realm of CRPGs. And Doom3 is just an eye-candy FPS, as the article poster pointed out he should be trying Half Life 2 or KOTOR.
He's probably indirectly commenting on the slowing pace of 'genre' creation...most of the new games fit into a specific model/theme. This is where consumers have spoken. Tetris is probably one of the most addictive and popular games of all time, but if it was invented today no one would pay $50.00 for it.
In this case Goyer is transcribing alot of "Batman: Year One" by Frank Miller, which is just slightly the lesser of 'The Dark Knight Returns' (but not by much). Even if 50% of the material is transcribed faithfully this movie will have some merit.
"One man's rebellion is another man's war for independence."
No where in my post did I justify the behaviour of the site hackers/defacers...nor did I condemn it. My point was that this type of behaviour is typical throughout human history, and that a cautious person will take account for such a possibility. (e.g. patch, repatch, and patch again your networked servers!)
Anti-war, or anti-imperialist, slogans and graffiti have been found throughout ancient Roman ruins in the Middle East and Europe. Also at industrial age British forticiations in India, or colonial age Spanish garrisons in south america, etc. This isn't new behaviour and comes with the territory of being an empire. Get used to it.
No users either...
Isn't that because they're all dead? Oh wait, thats the OS...
(I kid! I kid!)
Go to your local bank running a couple of 128 cpu Starcats and whine about how linux rocks, and the professionals will then laugh you out of their shop
:) Technology architecture here has established a nice set of parameters for introducing new technology (specifically operarting systems) to our company:
"We run Windows, Solaris, AIX, OS/390, and NonStop(aka Tandem)... when you can confirm what you can do with Linux that you can't do with any of the above, or if you can confirm what Linux will replace and do better, then you can install it."
Well, we wouldn't quite laugh.
Under the circumstances we're much more likely to consolidate AIX onto Solaris than replace AIX with Linux, so even that window of opportunity in minimal.
Linux is good, its just a question of 'is it good enough?'. Much more suited for small to mid-sized companies without a numerous legacy platforms to support.
Looks like Trusted Solaris continues to persist. So much for the presentation my enterprise sales rep... I'll throw this in his face next week and watch him squirm.
;)
Anyone have a webcam I can borrow?
It wasn't necessarily proven as legal. First, possessing a personal copy I believe is what was considered acceptable -- but not widespread distribution. Second, CRIA (our RIAA equivalent) hasn't given up the fight...they're collecting evidence and will take another run at this in court. These subpoeanas are merely an element of their next strategy... in the end they only need one ISP (looks like Videotron) to roll over, then they can proceed with their casework. I'm sure they're hoping to set new precedents. Damn this english common law tradition :/
However, we're protected quite a bit through the levy on media that exists here, considered financial compensation for our 'fair use' rights.
To my (limited) knowledge, Linux does not have anything that is comparable to:
1. dtrace
2. zones/containers (e.g. kernel isolation)
3. 128-bit file systems (ZFS)
Also, there is no longer a 'secure' Solaris version, which was typically used by the US government. Solaris 10 is (apparently) secure enough 'out of the box' to be natively deployed in the CIA, NSA, etc...
Certification costs money. To have credibility it must be peer reviewed, or reviewed/audited/approved by an external body. Then there's the QA and testing process. And this activity is not a one time activity, but a long term commitment to regression testing "every patch".
Given that many linux distros are pretending to be enterprise-ready w/o enterprise sales or revenue would indicate that they are unable, uncapable, or unwilling to be certified. Basically they can't afford it.
Of course I am speaking in general terms about linux distributions and the industry in general, there are numerous examples which can be used to refute my generalisations. However I think there's ALOT of consolidation required in the Linux world yet to achieve some of the more lofty goals of open source.
Possibly. Personally I think this can unintentionally be a good thing...with news feeds becoming more expensive, it may tip the scales in favour of more local reporting, or more 'in house' journalists. Alot of newspapers now have a skeleton journalist pool and rely heavily upon newsfeeds for the bulk of their content. Unfortunately those feeds are aggregators...you won't get investigative reporting similar to Watergate, or Iran-Contra, or the Liberal sponsorship scandal.
WWII was fought over a 6 year timespan. That's with technology that consisted of vacuum tube electronics. And it was in a destructive manner...trying to destroy your opponent's means of production. Plastic, RADAR, laser, jet technology, atomic weapons... all developed in 6 years.
Motivate the human race enough and its ridiculous what we can accomplish. We're 3 generations removed from 'total war' economy. An extinction level event would be sufficient motivation for us to see such economic focus once again.
Of course not! Its infested with all those hairy icky mammals who still think digital watches are 'kinda cool'.