It was his editor. Apparently, the first cut of the Star Wars film was beyond awful. They couldn't go back to the desert to shoot scenes and Mark Hamill got into a car accident, so he was unavailable for retakes. So, he hired a new editor (can't remember the name--three editors are given joint credit for the film, but it was the new guy who made it actually work) and he pulled out every trick he could to make the movie watchable. This is all detailed in the Story of Star Wars DVD that came with the Episode IV release, along with a lot of clips of the footage that Lucas originally wanted to put in. It was awful. The editor made Star Wars great, not Lucas. Fortunately, he won an academy award.
Incorrect. The Sandy Hook shooter was in the legal process of commitment. He would not have passed the background check. What would be more helpful is the requirement that firearms be coded to the registered owner and could not be fired by anyone else. The technology exists, but the NRA has bullied gun manufacturers not to implement them.
Football 2.0 will also be very unpopular. It's a very difficult choice for rulemakers--make the game safer and see the popularity of the game drop precipitously, or keep things as they are and suffer lawsuits and reduced participation from youth.
The major differences are the lack of blocking in Rugby, the ball always coming loose after a hit (negating the need for a hard tackle to dislodge the ball), and the lack of forward progress and "spotting" the ball (negating the need for a hard hit to prevent the ball carrier gaining extra yards). The two sports are very different, and comparing the two is loke comparing apples and oranges.
The browser does make a difference in regards to battery life. You can use two browsers one after the other and see a big difference in battery drain between them. As for Flash, it's true that Adobe does not support it, but there are workarounds. Dolphin and Opera refuse to recognize those workarounds. Only Firefox (and a few other no name browsers) let you use unofficial flash in their products.
..except that it's a major battery hog. Most of the third party browsers for Android are, with the notable exception of Chrome (which has gotten worse,lately) and Opera Mini (Opera Mobile still hogs battery big time). Even the "stock" browser that shipped pre-Jelly Bean sucked battery power, too. Battery drain is an important consideration in a mobile browser. Also, on this list, only Firefox mobile supports Flash at the moment. All the others either explicitly don't support external plugins or refuse to allow their use on JellyBean OS's.
The Canadians brought Rugby to the States. Up until that point, the various schools played a bastardized version of Association Rules--typically without the offsides rule (Americans like their scoring). Harvard had their own unique game that was kind of like Gaelic football. No one else would play it, though, so they invited some folks from McGill University in Quebec to show them the game. They said, that's nice, but here's a better one.. and they showed them Rugby. Well, Harvard was wowed with the game and evangelized it to the other schools that would become the Ivy League. A student at Yale named Walter Camp thought that the game could be improved in several ways. He reduced the team size to 11 (after seeing a true Soccer match), allowed blocking, and implemented the system of "downs" and yards to go to prevent loose balls after every play so as to allow the possessing team to develop plays and a strategy. Thus, American Football was born!
Rugby tackling is much more head friendly. The ball carrier drops the ball almost immediately upon being touched by the defender. There is no incentive for the tackler to hit hard. Yes, there is the scrum, yet most of the contact in a scrum is endured by the players' shoulders. Most importantly, there is no blocking. The most frequent incidence of head contact in American football is on the line of scrimmage. Every running play involves the offensive line (and other associated players) running forward headfirst into a group of other players. There has even been talk about eliminating the three point stance to minimize helmet to helmet contact at the point of contact at the line of scrimmage.
The term "football" is in reference to playing the game "on foot" as opposed to mounted on a horse like polo. Many early versions of games called football in the middle ages involved practically no kicking of a ball at all. The direct precursors to Association Football, or Soccer, allowed one to not only touch the ball with your hands, but catch it, too (i.e. the fair catch, which still survives with Soccer's cousins Rugby and American Football).
As for the brain damage with the North American version of the game, I'm not sure if there is much of a solution. There is a common belief that all the hard shell padding and hard helmets are to blame, and going "naked" like rugby would solve the problem. Players wouldn't feel as invincible and their instinct for self-preservation would kick in, reducing the force of their blocks and tackles. The data doesn't support this theory. There have been positive brain trauma studies of this sort going back 80 years ago during the age of leather helmets and soft padding, so reducing protection is probably not the answer. The nature of the game is simply predisposed to hard hits both in blocking and tackling players. The goal is to always get extra yardage or jar the ball loose. That's not an issue in rugby where there is no line to gain, the ball is loose after every play, and there is no blocking allowed. I'm not sure you could make the game safer without so radically changing its nature that it would essentially become something completely different from football as we know it.
...that this platform will be any different from previous Nintendo platforms--a new design full of promise only to become primarily a target for kiddie games and crap shovelware. It's nice that the WiiU has some real games available at launch, but so did the Wii. That phenomenon didn't last very long. Real software shops pulled out of the Nintendo market quicker than [insert humorous NSFW analogy here]. I wouldn't trust them to stick around with the WiiU, either. After all, it's Nintendo--a company that simply refuses to let go of its, "Super Mario plus other cartoony games," forumula. Why would any other software shop take their platform seriously when Nintendo itself does not.
The difference between the American system and the British-style parliamentary systems are the size of the districts represented. When you have 600 members of parliament for a country the size of a large American State (i.e. Great Britain), it's a lot easier for third parties to thrive. The state of Florida is one of the most populous in the nation. It only has 27 representatives and 2 senators. That's a fraction of most parliamentary democracies with similar populations. Add to the fact that the districts are Gerrymandered to favor incumbents, third parties die off very quickly.
There are exceptions. The New Hampshire House of Representatives is massive--over 400 representatives, one per 3,000 residents. Not surprisingly, the New Hampshire house membership swings wildly from one election to another. However, third party representation is still limited--the representatives are picked at large in multi-member districts. Again, the size of the district, even in this situation, prevents third parties from gaining a foothold.
I should add that protection from investors is not absolute. If an investor thinks that you defrauded them, they can still sue you personally.
People think that being a corporation shields you from almost anything, and you can do whatever you want without fear of personal repercussions. That's simply not true!
That is an incorrect assumption. Being a shareholder does indemnify you from most lawsuits, but the board of directors can be personally liable as well as the corporate officers. If you are a small business as an s-corp, you will still be personally on the hook for most things. The only real protection that incorporation offers is liability from your investors. Investors have little to no recourse if you lose all their money. You are not shielded from other forms of liability, such as personal injury or negligence. You can still be sued directly along with the corporation you own, since you would be the presiding officer and CEO. Protection from creditors is mixed. While you may be protected from personal action if you stiff a supplier, the bank may require you to be personally responsible for any loan to your company as a condition of credit.
You should confer with an attorney before incorporating any business. The few hundred dollars in consultation fee is worth doing it right.
Those old floppies were resilient. I have floppies from the late 70's which are still perfectly usable today, while 3.5" floppies from just a decade ago no longer work. You'd think that the harder shell would make them more resilient, but not even close. I guess the low density of the old floppies makes them more reliable.
I always coveted the Radio Shack pocket computer... Imagine having a computer that you would take with you on the go! Yeah, that's a bit of a joke now, but back then it was almost the stuff of science fiction. I finally managed to get ahold of one on clearance well past its end of retail shelf life, and found it to be extremely useful. A few months ago, I was cleaning up and found it again! A new battery and it worked like new! Whoot! It's still a pretty impressive machine, considering how old it is.
I wrote my first program ever on a TRS-80 color computer. It was a community computer programming course that they ran from a local school. We had to write out our programs at home on special graph paper and type it in during class. I was immediately hooked on computers and programming.
I used to book programming time at the local library for their TRS-80 model III. It was a lousy machine compared to its contemporaries, but, it was the only reliable access I had to a microcomputer, so I cherished the few precious minutes I had available to program. I was only able to book one hour at a time, so I had to work fast and leave enough time to save the programs to tape. I remember programming some games from David H. Ahl's "More Basic Computer Games--TRS-80 Edition" which was modified to use the primitive TRS-80 graphics. I tried making a light cycle game, but failed at that attempt pretty badly. I never got it to work right. If only I had more time...
In the early 90's, I stumbled upon an old Model III sitting on the clearance table at the local Radio Shack. They were asking 30 bucks for it. I really wanted to buy it, but my wife would have none of it. To this day, I still regret not acquiring that classic machine. Yeah, it wasn't great, but it still was an important piece of computing history... and my own.
This guy is pissed 'cos he's somehow losing money by charging for a game, and so is essentially forced to use an ad revenue model instead. He shouldn't be mad. That's the way Android is *supposed* to work. Just like Google, the idea is to keep things free and open. So, how does one make money? The revenue model is based on advertising instead of walled off gardens. If that is his primary complaint, then he simply doesn't get how the Android model works. It's designed to punish paid apps and reward free or ad-supported ones. Yes, it is a completely different ecosystem than Apple's "old-school" payware model. If he doesn't want to adapt to a more modern paradigm, then he's free to stick with iOS. There are plenty of other developers who will take their place.
The guy who wrote Angry Birds released it free on Android with ads instead of charging for the game. He stated in an interview that the Android model is much better suited for ad-supported apps than paid ones. He's not whining about it. He's making a ton of money for his 'free" game 'cos he understands how the system works.
Exactly! I simply don't understand why Larry Page is obsessed with trying to make Google into Apple. The reason why Google is successful is that they are NOT like Apple. The world already has an Apple. It doesn't need another. Stick with what got you here in the first place instead of trying to be something you aren't.
Slashdot Mirror
It was his editor. Apparently, the first cut of the Star Wars film was beyond awful. They couldn't go back to the desert to shoot scenes and Mark Hamill got into a car accident, so he was unavailable for retakes. So, he hired a new editor (can't remember the name--three editors are given joint credit for the film, but it was the new guy who made it actually work) and he pulled out every trick he could to make the movie watchable. This is all detailed in the Story of Star Wars DVD that came with the Episode IV release, along with a lot of clips of the footage that Lucas originally wanted to put in. It was awful. The editor made Star Wars great, not Lucas. Fortunately, he won an academy award.
At 300 baud, that movie download is going to take one heck of a long time!
Incorrect. The Sandy Hook shooter was in the legal process of commitment. He would not have passed the background check. What would be more helpful is the requirement that firearms be coded to the registered owner and could not be fired by anyone else. The technology exists, but the NRA has bullied gun manufacturers not to implement them.
Incorrect. Unless it reforms as a partnership, there will be shareholders. The shares simply won't be traded publicly.
Football 2.0 will also be very unpopular. It's a very difficult choice for rulemakers--make the game safer and see the popularity of the game drop precipitously, or keep things as they are and suffer lawsuits and reduced participation from youth.
The flying wedge was originally a rugby play. It was used on kickoffs, just like the American version. Here's what it looks like:
http://youtu.be/enTb9wlLB1I?t=22s
It wasn't banned from Rugby until the 1980's.
The major differences are the lack of blocking in Rugby, the ball always coming loose after a hit (negating the need for a hard tackle to dislodge the ball), and the lack of forward progress and "spotting" the ball (negating the need for a hard hit to prevent the ball carrier gaining extra yards). The two sports are very different, and comparing the two is loke comparing apples and oranges.
Actually, I think he was alluding to Julius Caesar convincing the Roman Senate to declare him emperor of Rome.
The browser does make a difference in regards to battery life. You can use two browsers one after the other and see a big difference in battery drain between them. As for Flash, it's true that Adobe does not support it, but there are workarounds. Dolphin and Opera refuse to recognize those workarounds. Only Firefox (and a few other no name browsers) let you use unofficial flash in their products.
..except that it's a major battery hog. Most of the third party browsers for Android are, with the notable exception of Chrome (which has gotten worse,lately) and Opera Mini (Opera Mobile still hogs battery big time). Even the "stock" browser that shipped pre-Jelly Bean sucked battery power, too. Battery drain is an important consideration in a mobile browser. Also, on this list, only Firefox mobile supports Flash at the moment. All the others either explicitly don't support external plugins or refuse to allow their use on JellyBean OS's.
Check again... If you run it, you'll see that it's basically using the Safari engine underneath it all. Not much of a difference.
It still uses the painfully slow and limited Safari engine underneath it. It's not much more than a skin for Safari.
The Canadians brought Rugby to the States. Up until that point, the various schools played a bastardized version of Association Rules--typically without the offsides rule (Americans like their scoring). Harvard had their own unique game that was kind of like Gaelic football. No one else would play it, though, so they invited some folks from McGill University in Quebec to show them the game. They said, that's nice, but here's a better one.. and they showed them Rugby. Well, Harvard was wowed with the game and evangelized it to the other schools that would become the Ivy League. A student at Yale named Walter Camp thought that the game could be improved in several ways. He reduced the team size to 11 (after seeing a true Soccer match), allowed blocking, and implemented the system of "downs" and yards to go to prevent loose balls after every play so as to allow the possessing team to develop plays and a strategy. Thus, American Football was born!
Rugby tackling is much more head friendly. The ball carrier drops the ball almost immediately upon being touched by the defender. There is no incentive for the tackler to hit hard. Yes, there is the scrum, yet most of the contact in a scrum is endured by the players' shoulders. Most importantly, there is no blocking. The most frequent incidence of head contact in American football is on the line of scrimmage. Every running play involves the offensive line (and other associated players) running forward headfirst into a group of other players. There has even been talk about eliminating the three point stance to minimize helmet to helmet contact at the point of contact at the line of scrimmage.
The term "football" is in reference to playing the game "on foot" as opposed to mounted on a horse like polo. Many early versions of games called football in the middle ages involved practically no kicking of a ball at all. The direct precursors to Association Football, or Soccer, allowed one to not only touch the ball with your hands, but catch it, too (i.e. the fair catch, which still survives with Soccer's cousins Rugby and American Football).
As for the brain damage with the North American version of the game, I'm not sure if there is much of a solution. There is a common belief that all the hard shell padding and hard helmets are to blame, and going "naked" like rugby would solve the problem. Players wouldn't feel as invincible and their instinct for self-preservation would kick in, reducing the force of their blocks and tackles. The data doesn't support this theory. There have been positive brain trauma studies of this sort going back 80 years ago during the age of leather helmets and soft padding, so reducing protection is probably not the answer. The nature of the game is simply predisposed to hard hits both in blocking and tackling players. The goal is to always get extra yardage or jar the ball loose. That's not an issue in rugby where there is no line to gain, the ball is loose after every play, and there is no blocking allowed. I'm not sure you could make the game safer without so radically changing its nature that it would essentially become something completely different from football as we know it.
...that this platform will be any different from previous Nintendo platforms--a new design full of promise only to become primarily a target for kiddie games and crap shovelware. It's nice that the WiiU has some real games available at launch, but so did the Wii. That phenomenon didn't last very long. Real software shops pulled out of the Nintendo market quicker than [insert humorous NSFW analogy here]. I wouldn't trust them to stick around with the WiiU, either. After all, it's Nintendo--a company that simply refuses to let go of its, "Super Mario plus other cartoony games," forumula. Why would any other software shop take their platform seriously when Nintendo itself does not.
The difference between the American system and the British-style parliamentary systems are the size of the districts represented. When you have 600 members of parliament for a country the size of a large American State (i.e. Great Britain), it's a lot easier for third parties to thrive. The state of Florida is one of the most populous in the nation. It only has 27 representatives and 2 senators. That's a fraction of most parliamentary democracies with similar populations. Add to the fact that the districts are Gerrymandered to favor incumbents, third parties die off very quickly.
There are exceptions. The New Hampshire House of Representatives is massive--over 400 representatives, one per 3,000 residents. Not surprisingly, the New Hampshire house membership swings wildly from one election to another. However, third party representation is still limited--the representatives are picked at large in multi-member districts. Again, the size of the district, even in this situation, prevents third parties from gaining a foothold.
I should add that protection from investors is not absolute. If an investor thinks that you defrauded them, they can still sue you personally.
People think that being a corporation shields you from almost anything, and you can do whatever you want without fear of personal repercussions. That's simply not true!
That is an incorrect assumption. Being a shareholder does indemnify you from most lawsuits, but the board of directors can be personally liable as well as the corporate officers. If you are a small business as an s-corp, you will still be personally on the hook for most things. The only real protection that incorporation offers is liability from your investors. Investors have little to no recourse if you lose all their money. You are not shielded from other forms of liability, such as personal injury or negligence. You can still be sued directly along with the corporation you own, since you would be the presiding officer and CEO. Protection from creditors is mixed. While you may be protected from personal action if you stiff a supplier, the bank may require you to be personally responsible for any loan to your company as a condition of credit.
You should confer with an attorney before incorporating any business. The few hundred dollars in consultation fee is worth doing it right.
Well, there were also these warnings from Beagle Bros.:
http://stevenf.com/beagle/diskcare.html
I always would forget to not feed the disk to the alligator, and an more than one occasion forgot the warning and cooked the disk in a toaster. ;-)
Those old floppies were resilient. I have floppies from the late 70's which are still perfectly usable today, while 3.5" floppies from just a decade ago no longer work. You'd think that the harder shell would make them more resilient, but not even close. I guess the low density of the old floppies makes them more reliable.
I always coveted the Radio Shack pocket computer... Imagine having a computer that you would take with you on the go! Yeah, that's a bit of a joke now, but back then it was almost the stuff of science fiction. I finally managed to get ahold of one on clearance well past its end of retail shelf life, and found it to be extremely useful. A few months ago, I was cleaning up and found it again! A new battery and it worked like new! Whoot! It's still a pretty impressive machine, considering how old it is.
I wrote my first program ever on a TRS-80 color computer. It was a community computer programming course that they ran from a local school. We had to write out our programs at home on special graph paper and type it in during class. I was immediately hooked on computers and programming.
I used to book programming time at the local library for their TRS-80 model III. It was a lousy machine compared to its contemporaries, but, it was the only reliable access I had to a microcomputer, so I cherished the few precious minutes I had available to program. I was only able to book one hour at a time, so I had to work fast and leave enough time to save the programs to tape. I remember programming some games from David H. Ahl's "More Basic Computer Games--TRS-80 Edition" which was modified to use the primitive TRS-80 graphics. I tried making a light cycle game, but failed at that attempt pretty badly. I never got it to work right. If only I had more time...
In the early 90's, I stumbled upon an old Model III sitting on the clearance table at the local Radio Shack. They were asking 30 bucks for it. I really wanted to buy it, but my wife would have none of it. To this day, I still regret not acquiring that classic machine. Yeah, it wasn't great, but it still was an important piece of computing history... and my own.
This guy is pissed 'cos he's somehow losing money by charging for a game, and so is essentially forced to use an ad revenue model instead. He shouldn't be mad. That's the way Android is *supposed* to work. Just like Google, the idea is to keep things free and open. So, how does one make money? The revenue model is based on advertising instead of walled off gardens. If that is his primary complaint, then he simply doesn't get how the Android model works. It's designed to punish paid apps and reward free or ad-supported ones. Yes, it is a completely different ecosystem than Apple's "old-school" payware model. If he doesn't want to adapt to a more modern paradigm, then he's free to stick with iOS. There are plenty of other developers who will take their place.
The guy who wrote Angry Birds released it free on Android with ads instead of charging for the game. He stated in an interview that the Android model is much better suited for ad-supported apps than paid ones. He's not whining about it. He's making a ton of money for his 'free" game 'cos he understands how the system works.
Exactly! I simply don't understand why Larry Page is obsessed with trying to make Google into Apple. The reason why Google is successful is that they are NOT like Apple. The world already has an Apple. It doesn't need another. Stick with what got you here in the first place instead of trying to be something you aren't.