Sorry to nitpick, but the fact that it was coathoured by DA does not mean much in this case. It certainly does not mean it was approved by DA. DA dies before the movie was made. He did not authorize the final script. They kapt his name on there because he contributed to writing the script but we do not know what his contributions were and whether he would have approved the final script.
I keep saying this because it is very unfair to an author to attribute something to him which he has not approved for publication, and this has already happened to DA twice. Once with his last book "Salmon of doubt" and the second time with this movie.
Because Douglas Adams is quite popular outside of Britian as well, and outside of Britian the books are usually the only or the most readibly available source of material.
I was really pissed off about the commercials when I saw HHGTTG too. The problem was not only the length, but the content. First of all Disney decided to advertise only their movies and they obviously were not suited for audience that wanted to see hitchhiker's guide. Second of all the movies were just plain stupid. And third of all and most importantly one of the adds actually included footage from the hitchhikers guide. That is fucking annoying because you think the actual movie is starting, you stop your side conversations, you start paying attention and then you get yet another add.
I completely agree that the romantic story screwed up the whole movie.
I am not against romantic stories per se and I always wanted Arthur to get it on with Trillian ASAP, so generally I would have welcomed it. But it was SOOO badly executed. It was very out of place with the whole rest of the movie and was not at all believable.
Basicaly, you have a couple of pieces of incredibly cheesy dialogue inserted in a sarcastic story. So for the time of this dialogue it feels like you are watching a completely different movie.
Also, there was the whole stupid Hollywood obssession that characters must have "arcs", and male leads have to "change" or be "redeemed" in order to "earn" the woman.
He did not write the script he was working on the script when he died. We don't know how much of his contributions were actually kept, and even how much he contributed to begin with. Only the people that made the movie know that and they won't tell us because they would like us to believe that he wrote it all.
Although they do say that the point of view gun was his idea and i believe them there... it totally sounds like something he would come up with (it is also very similar to that machine that gives you perspective on things from the books).
Of course you are allowed to own your code. Write your own damn code and own it all you want.
Oh, I see what you are saying "you are not allowed to own GPLed code". Well guess what - are you allowed to own the Windows code? I guess not. Why don't you bitch about how that destroys your business.
Imagine two people waist deep in a swamp. One of them tries to lift the other by the hair hoping that the other will eventually be able to lift him off. Meanwhile both of them tragically and comically keep sinking. This is what this review is like.
Both Smith and Lucas once made decent movies and then were completely destroyed by their egos which were much bigger than their talents. The moment of destruction for each of them came when they thought they knew marketing.
Lucas made some decent action flicks but then he reaslized that he made more money on toys than movies, so he decided "gee, why don't I substitute a three hour toy and video game commercial for my next movie". Never did he realize that people don't enjoy paying $10 to see a commercial.
I used to like Smith a lot because he made good movies about teenagers, something that is very rare. But then he too decided he knew about marketing. He decided to make "grown up" movies that are more "serious" and "intelligent" so he can target a bigger demographic and get more respect in hollywood. And then, when everybody told him point blanc that his movies suck, he said : "you are so immature, why don't you like my deep intelligent movies". SOrry Kevin your movies are not intelligent, they are fucking stupid. All he does is bring up controvercial subjects (lesbians!, race !, bitchy women !, that are lesbians!) that are guaranteed to get him press without having anything remotely intelligent to say about them. Don't get me started about the whole Ben-JLo thing. Smith pretended he was an innocent victim of that disaster (counting of course on Americanss' notoriously short memories). Well I am one American that remembers shit and let me tell Smith engineered the whole fucking thing himself and then scheduled 2 movies in a way so he can take advantage of it. (afterwards when the scope of the disaster was obvious to everyone, he rescheduled the movies so they don't open within the same two month period). There he goes again thinking he knows about marketing. Thinking that he can make a huge blockbuster movie by manipulating the public perception.
There is one thing about modern marketing -- if you are into it you must hate people. It is a requirement for the job. The premise of modern marketing is that people are dumb sheep whoose opinions can be molded like slabs of clay. And you can easily see from their movies how both Smith and Lucas hate their fans. Just watching their movies you see them talking down to you. Well George, Kevin people are sometimes not as stupid as you take them to be, and we tend to notice these things.
And now Lucas has very little credibility left (Smith essentially has none)so now Smith tries to make himself look better by attempting to lift Lucas out of the swamp. Ain't gonna happen -- I will never see either of your movies again. There are too many good movies nowadays to waste my time on you two.
They are not making a gamble as they have a quite capable competitor for the 787 already in production. They are taking the very sensible approach that there will be a market for the medium sized planes as well as the large ones so they biuld planes in each market.
Airbus already have competitive offerings in the smaller plane category. The reason why they are getting so much press for this particular plane is that it is more or less the only offering in its category.
As far as what people prefer, I am pretty sure they will be a market for this plane as there obviously has been a market for the Boeing 747. The number of air passengers is steadily increasing so there will be some routes where you can get flexible schedules and a lot of departure times even with these huge planes.
Boeing likes to pretend that large planes are not going to be needed. This is a really bizarre hypothesis considering the ever increasing number of passengers and the difficulty in building new airports. But essentially Boeing wants to cover up their bad manegement. Thay failed to design a successor to their hugely popular 747. Instead they tried to make a quick buck on some dot com ventures in the nineties. So they are handing the large plane business to airbus on a silver platter.
No need to overburdn the moderation system. Things are either funny or not funny. Problem is people give "+1 funny" to some posts that are merely trying to be funny.
I know every body loves to blame the victim, but it is completely immaterial whether at 15 she was smart enough not to hook up with that guy. Fact is that AOL made a representation that their chat rooms were safe for kids, and they should be held to that.
That's like an someone selling you a waterproof watch which breaks the moment you step into water, and then the seller saying "you are stupid to swim with your watch on" as an excuse.
Sorry, but none of the things you listed are trolls. If a statement is factually incorrect it does not mean it is a troll. If a statement has been repeated many times, it still does not mean it is a troll.
Many people that come here do not know much about macs. So any one of the above can be (and usually are) honest gripes or questions about Macs. If you don't feel like responding to the same thing a thousand times, ignore them. If you feel like being helpful, answer it. How hard is that?
Instead, of course, most Mac people take every post as a personal offense and moderate everything down. That attitude is immature, annoying and ruins the slashdot experience for many people. At least during the MS-Linux flamewars you can see high moderated posts from each side of the fence which makes the discussion fun to read and sometimes even informative.
"I (and I think many others) don't want their operating system selling them crap."
Actually most Mac users do want their operating system to sell them crap. Especially if it is overpriced. It gives them a warm and fuzzy feeling. If you don't believe me, read the other replies to your post. I don't really know the exact reason why seemingly intelligent people would love being overcharged so much, but it might have something to do with SM fantasies involving Steve Jobs. That's my best guess.
What Ubuntu got wrong is that they did not tell you about this before hand.
Believe me it is a pain in the ass for a first time Linux user that does not know the meaning of sudo. Of course the installation instructions do tell you to use sudo to do various things... but do not explain what sudo means or does.
When my installation screwed up, I had to start editing various configuration files and had no idea how to save changes. It took me a couple of hours browsing trough their forums and wiki to figure out that they don't give you a root account and how to create one.
That is something Ubuntu could have easily avoided by giving you a short explanation in the set-up screen.
Problem is you NEED a conductor on the subway train, just in case something happens on the train. They are able to call police, or tell the driver to stop, etc.
Removing conductors will definately reduce safety, not because of hackers, but because of conductor's ability to control various situations that may arise on the train.
I am very surprised that Slashdot would actually approve such a misleading story. Misleading stories have appeared on Slashdot before, but at least when it comes to free software, the stories used to be truthful and informative. Well , this is an unfortunate exception.
First of all the story purports to tell what Eben Moglen is doing but mostly includes quotes from that Olson fellow. The obnly Moglen quote basicly says "let me finish the draft first and then we can discuss it". Then the article continues on pure speculation of what Moglen might be thinking.
Second, the slashdot blurb completely misrepresents the actual referenced article. The shashdot blurb makes it look like the main purpose of the FSF is to hit up google, yahoo, etc. for money. In reality the whole damn controversy is whether the code should be released or not.
Of course if there ever emerges a legal requirement to release the code and the code is not released the FSF might be entitled to damages -- thats just the way the US judicial system works. But that does not mean that the FSF are looking to hit up these companies for money. In every dispute so far the FSF has made it quite clear that they will forgo money damages when the code is actually released.
Now whether GPL derived code used for providing internet services should be released is an very interesting (and increasingly important) issue. However, this slashdot article completely misses the whole issue by making it look like the FSF is just trying to get rich on Google's behalf.
Of course Best buy's cables are expensive, it is part of their business model. The business model is this: attract customer with ads of an item that is sold for almost no profit and then when the customer actually comes to buy that item overload the customer with expensive extras which are sold at huge profits. The most popular extra is their extended warranty but cables are also counted as extras.
So that over priced cable is meant to compensate for the profit of the item that it is being sold with.
IMO it is a dumb business model because it is obviously based on creating an incorrect impression of the true prices of things, but that's their business model.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry to nitpick, but the fact that it was coathoured by DA does not mean much in this case. It certainly does not mean it was approved by DA. DA dies before the movie was made. He did not authorize the final script. They kapt his name on there because he contributed to writing the script but we do not know what his contributions were and whether he would have approved the final script.
I keep saying this because it is very unfair to an author to attribute something to him which he has not approved for publication, and this has already happened to DA twice. Once with his last book "Salmon of doubt" and the second time with this movie.
I did not like the movie very much either, but I think the actors were fine. And also there was John Malkovich who was briliant as usual.
Because Douglas Adams is quite popular outside of Britian as well, and outside of Britian the books are usually the only or the most readibly available source of material.
I was really pissed off about the commercials when I saw HHGTTG too. The problem was not only the length, but the content. First of all Disney decided to advertise only their movies and they obviously were not suited for audience that wanted to see hitchhiker's guide. Second of all the movies were just plain stupid. And third of all and most importantly one of the adds actually included footage from the hitchhikers guide. That is fucking annoying because you think the actual movie is starting, you stop your side conversations, you start paying attention and then you get yet another add.
I completely agree that the romantic story screwed up the whole movie.
I am not against romantic stories per se and I always wanted Arthur to get it on with Trillian ASAP, so generally I would have welcomed it. But it was SOOO badly executed. It was very out of place with the whole rest of the movie and was not at all believable.
Basicaly, you have a couple of pieces of incredibly cheesy dialogue inserted in a sarcastic story. So for the time of this dialogue it feels like you are watching a completely different movie.
Also, there was the whole stupid Hollywood obssession that characters must have "arcs", and male leads have to "change" or be "redeemed" in order to "earn" the woman.
He did not write the script he was working on the script when he died. We don't know how much of his contributions were actually kept, and even how much he contributed to begin with. Only the people that made the movie know that and they won't tell us because they would like us to believe that he wrote it all.
... it totally sounds like something he would come up with (it is also very similar to that machine that gives you perspective on things from the books).
Although they do say that the point of view gun was his idea and i believe them there
Of course you are allowed to own your code. Write your own damn code and own it all you want.
Oh, I see what you are saying "you are not allowed to own GPLed code". Well guess what - are you allowed to own the Windows code? I guess not. Why don't you bitch about how that destroys your business.
The place will be full of dozens of idiots dressed in spandex and insisting thet they come from the future.
We are talking about text messaging here. I mean how hard it is to send a line of text securely. There should be no security concerns whatsoever.
I do hope you are right but I have doubts for the political career of anyone that pisses off the banks as much as Spitzer did.
Imagine two people waist deep in a swamp. One of them tries to lift the other by the hair hoping that the other will eventually be able to lift him off. Meanwhile both of them tragically and comically keep sinking. This is what this review is like.
Both Smith and Lucas once made decent movies and then were completely destroyed by their egos which were much bigger than their talents. The moment of destruction for each of them came when they thought they knew marketing.
Lucas made some decent action flicks but then he reaslized that he made more money on toys than movies, so he decided "gee, why don't I substitute a three hour toy and video game commercial for my next movie". Never did he realize that people don't enjoy paying $10 to see a commercial.
I used to like Smith a lot because he made good movies about teenagers, something that is very rare. But then he too decided he knew about marketing. He decided to make "grown up" movies that are more "serious" and "intelligent" so he can target a bigger demographic and get more respect in hollywood. And then, when everybody told him point blanc that his movies suck, he said : "you are so immature, why don't you like my deep intelligent movies". SOrry Kevin your movies are not intelligent, they are fucking stupid. All he does is bring up controvercial subjects (lesbians!, race !, bitchy women !, that are lesbians!) that are guaranteed to get him press without having anything remotely intelligent to say about them. Don't get me started about the whole Ben-JLo thing. Smith pretended he was an innocent victim of that disaster (counting of course on Americanss' notoriously short memories). Well I am one American that remembers shit and let me tell Smith engineered the whole fucking thing himself and then scheduled 2 movies in a way so he can take advantage of it. (afterwards when the scope of the disaster was obvious to everyone, he rescheduled the movies so they don't open within the same two month period). There he goes again thinking he knows about marketing. Thinking that he can make a huge blockbuster movie by manipulating the public perception.
There is one thing about modern marketing -- if you are into it you must hate people. It is a requirement for the job. The premise of modern marketing is that people are dumb sheep whoose opinions can be molded like slabs of clay. And you can easily see from their movies how both Smith and Lucas hate their fans. Just watching their movies you see them talking down to you. Well George, Kevin people are sometimes not as stupid as you take them to be, and we tend to notice these things.
And now Lucas has very little credibility left (Smith essentially has none)so now Smith tries to make himself look better by attempting to lift Lucas out of the swamp. Ain't gonna happen -- I will never see either of your movies again. There are too many good movies nowadays to waste my time on you two.
They are not making a gamble as they have a quite capable competitor for the 787 already in production. They are taking the very sensible approach that there will be a market for the medium sized planes as well as the large ones so they biuld planes in each market.
Airbus already have competitive offerings in the smaller plane category. The reason why they are getting so much press for this particular plane is that it is more or less the only offering in its category.
As far as what people prefer, I am pretty sure they will be a market for this plane as there obviously has been a market for the Boeing 747. The number of air passengers is steadily increasing so there will be some routes where you can get flexible schedules and a lot of departure times even with these huge planes.
Boeing likes to pretend that large planes are not going to be needed. This is a really bizarre hypothesis considering the ever increasing number of passengers and the difficulty in building new airports. But essentially Boeing wants to cover up their bad manegement. Thay failed to design a successor to their hugely popular 747. Instead they tried to make a quick buck on some dot com ventures in the nineties. So they are handing the large plane business to airbus on a silver platter.
Someday I hope to meet an attractive woman in a bar that is a PR shill for torjan condoms.
As anybody who has actually spoken to alice knows, this chatterbot is very stupid and will never pass a real Turing test.
No need to overburdn the moderation system. Things are either funny or not funny. Problem is people give "+1 funny" to some posts that are merely trying to be funny.
I know every body loves to blame the victim, but it is completely immaterial whether at 15 she was smart enough not to hook up with that guy. Fact is that AOL made a representation that their chat rooms were safe for kids, and they should be held to that.
That's like an someone selling you a waterproof watch which breaks the moment you step into water, and then the seller saying "you are stupid to swim with your watch on" as an excuse.
Sorry, but none of the things you listed are trolls. If a statement is factually incorrect it does not mean it is a troll. If a statement has been repeated many times, it still does not mean it is a troll.
Many people that come here do not know much about macs. So any one of the above can be (and usually are) honest gripes or questions about Macs. If you don't feel like responding to the same thing a thousand times, ignore them. If you feel like being helpful, answer it. How hard is that?
Instead, of course, most Mac people take every post as a personal offense and moderate everything down. That attitude is immature, annoying and ruins the slashdot experience for many people. At least during the MS-Linux flamewars you can see high moderated posts from each side of the fence which makes the discussion fun to read and sometimes even informative.
"I (and I think many others) don't want their operating system selling them crap."
Actually most Mac users do want their operating system to sell them crap. Especially if it is overpriced. It gives them a warm and fuzzy feeling. If you don't believe me, read the other replies to your post. I don't really know the exact reason why seemingly intelligent people would love being overcharged so much, but it might have something to do with SM fantasies involving Steve Jobs. That's my best guess.
What Ubuntu got wrong is that they did not tell you about this before hand.
... but do not explain what sudo means or does.
Believe me it is a pain in the ass for a first time Linux user that does not know the meaning of sudo. Of course the installation instructions do tell you to use sudo to do various things
When my installation screwed up, I had to start editing various configuration files and had no idea how to save changes. It took me a couple of hours browsing trough their forums and wiki to figure out that they don't give you a root account and how to create one.
That is something Ubuntu could have easily avoided by giving you a short explanation in the set-up screen.
I did read the article, and no there will not be a conductor.
Problem is you NEED a conductor on the subway train, just in case something happens on the train. They are able to call police, or tell the driver to stop, etc.
Removing conductors will definately reduce safety, not because of hackers, but because of conductor's ability to control various situations that may arise on the train.
hmm you forgot the best one: Uma Thurman
I am very surprised that Slashdot would actually approve such a misleading story. Misleading stories have appeared on Slashdot before, but at least when it comes to free software, the stories used to be truthful and informative. Well , this is an unfortunate exception.
First of all the story purports to tell what Eben Moglen is doing but mostly includes quotes from that Olson fellow. The obnly Moglen quote basicly says "let me finish the draft first and then we can discuss it". Then the article continues on pure speculation of what Moglen might be thinking.
Second, the slashdot blurb completely misrepresents the actual referenced article. The shashdot blurb makes it look like the main purpose of the FSF is to hit up google, yahoo, etc. for money. In reality the whole damn controversy is whether the code should be released or not.
Of course if there ever emerges a legal requirement to release the code and the code is not released the FSF might be entitled to damages -- thats just the way the US judicial system works. But that does not mean that the FSF are looking to hit up these companies for money. In every dispute so far the FSF has made it quite clear that they will forgo money damages when the code is actually released.
Now whether GPL derived code used for providing internet services should be released is an very interesting (and increasingly important) issue. However, this slashdot article completely misses the whole issue by making it look like the FSF is just trying to get rich on Google's behalf.
Of course Best buy's cables are expensive, it is part of their business model. The business model is this: attract customer with ads of an item that is sold for almost no profit and then when the customer actually comes to buy that item overload the customer with expensive extras which are sold at huge profits. The most popular extra is their extended warranty but cables are also counted as extras.
So that over priced cable is meant to compensate for the profit of the item that it is being sold with.
IMO it is a dumb business model because it is obviously based on creating an incorrect impression of the true prices of things, but that's their business model.