if she just did the trailer that would change things...idk it seemed she narrated the whole thing b/c she mentioned going down the studio multiple times IIRC
just like in my new hire embarrasing the boss/founder example...even though its true it's still bad judgement which is enough to get you fired in the "vagaries of contemporary employment"
think twitter...twitter is speech...if a person sends a dick pic via twitter they might be fired depending on their job
that's ***legal***
those are two examples but the point is he had *bad judgement*
is it fair? i'm not addressing that question b/c I don't know the details of his hiring in the first place...maybe he had been warned internally, maybe all Mozilla are like him...no way for us in this discussion to know
So, either Colbert is a sell-out, or the MSM is nothing like as hostile to libtards as is claimed.
Viacom and CBS are owned (majority shareholder) by National Amusements, conservative financier/Billionaire Sumner Redstone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
They are oligarchs, but they ***still have to make a profit*** the game is rigged but not that rigged
NBC is #1 and Fallon gets the ratings/advertising
Colbert is, from a **COMPLETELY FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE** a great choice.
He's a proven commodity across media and with young and old. Comedy Central is youth demographic 'central' and Colbert is at the top of the product chain there. He's sold books, audio, and gets things like a *treadmill on the ISS named after him.*
Dont tell me Craig Ferguson or Chelsea Handler can come anywhere near that marketshare/reach. Colbert pwns.
So "which is it?"
Neither...Oligarchs still have to play the money game just like everyone else. Colbert pulled it off.
Mr. Pettis thanks for taking the time. Your 3D printers are nice.
My question:
What is needed to take consumer home-based 3D printing beyond novelty items? Specifically everyday home consumers not pure hobbyists.
Of course 3D fabricators are used for more than "novelty items" in several commercial and industrial applications, but for several reasons, not the least of which is cost of the 3D fabricator, most of what people make is just knick knacks, novelty items, and bric-a-brac.
What will we need to see technologically to take consumer home fabrication beyond things like action figures? Ex: making something like a flashlight or toothbrush
doing it as a gig is fine from a "food on the table" perspective...no judgement its work we'd all do
i'm criticizing her acting, especially in the captain role
i'm saying that as a professional in something like Star Trek that has built-in millions of fans as an actor you can **remain an airhead** and phone in your work or you can use it to launch a much more successful career
Shatner and Patrick Stewart are, give or take, about as famous as people their age can be...Voyager was on for 6 or 7 seasons IIRC
people *love* those guys...even non-Trek fans
they obviously chose, as professionals, to take the sillyness seriously and grow professionally...fans know how silly it all looks too...people running around in pajamas and whatnot...but the cultural effect is undeniable ($$$)
Mulgrew should have known better...that's what I'm really saying
she did get a pretty sweet gig as the cook on Orange is the New Black, but IMHO her acting is just as empty and wooden and predictable in that as well
Am I the only one that wished 7of9 wore **more** clothes?
Seriously it was embarassing to watch the show with a female in the room....and this is the show with the woman captain that was supposed to be all female inclusive. TOS had boobs everywhere but it's old enough to get away with it.
If I want porn i just look at...you know....pr0n
And the answer to my question is in the subject for this one too...
interesting link...ok...this is going to have to be my last post on "technobabble"...let's untangle this mess
first, is it being used as a pejorative?
that's going to clear up alot of the mess right there...in the context does the speaker mean it as a negative, annoying thing
Mulgrew in her "The Captains" interview was *definitely* using the term as a pejorative...
others, including some from your Memory Alpha link, use it as a general term for any *TV dialogue* that involves scientific or technical language...just a neutral term
2nd, why are they using the term 'technobabble' as pejorative?
here on/. for us techies, we sometimes use 'technobabble' to indicate **obviously fake** technical language that was thrown in as an afterthought to either pander to the audience's need for "authenticity" or to move the plot along...Red Matterfrom JJ Abrams reboot is a good example
To make things confusing, non-techs use the term 'technobabble' as a pejorative regardless of its accuracy or usage in the plot...they do not know the difference at all...they just don't like having to learn strange words or think it's irrelevant to the story or are just kind of dumb and don't get it
my criticism of Mulgrew is that she is the latter...a person who is intellectually incurious & generally ignorant of science who calls any scientific language used in drama "technobabble"
yeah I know what you mean...but we're techies so our definition of "technobabble" is more narrow than a non-tech, even one with a good education.
to Mulgrew, anything "science-y" was "technobabble"
this is the problem, Star Trek had mixed results with scientific accuracy...in that sense it is "technobabble" because it is fictional science in a future setting they are using...however, depending on which series at which time, the quality of the science dialogue was educational
I **liked** the fictional future science of the later series...it wasn't completely believable, but they definitely had a science advisor and you could see the consistency
It was educational...in the sense that it exposed me to new ideas & motivated me to ***actually look up the real science***
one thing Trekkies overlook is that today its mostly **teens** who watch Trek...average, everyday teenagers...I know this from my teaching experience, I'd have cheerleader type chicks mention Trek in papers
It doesn't really affect the "Best Star Trek Captain" discussions (I always answer with the *vision* the creators had for the character not how it was acted)...but Kate Mulgrew is kind of a ditz
In interviews (like in The Captains film: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T... ) she was clearly just doing Trek purely as a 'gig' for a paycheck...she had no personal connection to science or space whatsoever and did not see her role as a way to educate herself or broaden her horizons to improve her acting
to her it was all just "technobabble" which angers me to no end as a person who advocates for women in science...but it's her life and career so I'm not judging her choices necessarily...i just think it's unprofessional and lazy...her performance in Orange is the New Black is equally as bad, IMHO...very perfunctory
Mulgrew read the ***narration*** of the whole film...how could she do that and not know the film as about the earth being the *actual* center of the universe?
Y = any entity or group that uses technology to communicate
I'm not trying to start discussions on all aspects of Snowden...but I do definitely see a streeeetching of this story for maximum clicks by the likes of The Guardian.
Maybe that's the reason for "outrage fatigue" mentioned by another poster above....the media has commercialized the information now
I'm sure we can scientifically link **ALL** bad technology design to negative behaviors.
And those negative behaviors, like feeling frustration repeatedly for a routine task, correlate in a proven way to high blood pressure & all kinds of other health problems.
Bad design is ruining our health now too...we have the data to prove it.
I doubt he would drop a live grenade and then proceed to stand there and talk.
don't give anyone any ideas...
heh...it sounds like some kind of pitch meeting story a VC douchebag would tell at a launch party to impress part-time strippers hired to attend the party
i was taking a survey...surveys need consistent definitions. idiots attach their personal pride to answering the question "Do you run Linux" which biases answers. I just wanted to know who used it for a certain task *only*....so...i needed to be proactive to avoid idiots like you...you know you're essentially trolling when you make dumb distinctions like that, right?
everyone can see that you nitpick and make your own "personal definitions" just to have an excuse to look intelligent
**stop it**
it is obstructive, needlessly confusing & completely rooted in your personal narcissism
employees get fired for virtually everything...the annecdotes are ridiculous
if an entry level new-hire at a software company dropped a grenade in the first meeting they were allowed to attend and said, "Our app doesn't make money because everyone knows it is spam"
**right in front of the boss/guy who invented the app**
and that guy got fired...or reassigned to something so bullshit that he quit...
would we even care or suspect something wrong happend?
in my mind Mozilla's CEO is the same
just b/c he's a CEO doesn't mean he is immune to the vagaries of contemporary employment
Slashdot Mirror
as I said, i'm going of how she described herself in The Captians film, which came out about 3 years ago
if she just did the trailer that would change things...idk it seemed she narrated the whole thing b/c she mentioned going down the studio multiple times IIRC
he was fired for bad judgement
just like in my new hire embarrasing the boss/founder example...even though its true it's still bad judgement which is enough to get you fired in the "vagaries of contemporary employment"
think twitter...twitter is speech...if a person sends a dick pic via twitter they might be fired depending on their job
that's ***legal***
those are two examples but the point is he had *bad judgement*
is it fair? i'm not addressing that question b/c I don't know the details of his hiring in the first place...maybe he had been warned internally, maybe all Mozilla are like him...no way for us in this discussion to know
he apologized...that should be noted
"news for nerds, stuff that matters" used to be at the top of the home page
this is both
Viacom and CBS are owned (majority shareholder) by National Amusements, conservative financier/Billionaire Sumner Redstone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
They are oligarchs, but they ***still have to make a profit*** the game is rigged but not that rigged
NBC is #1 and Fallon gets the ratings/advertising
Colbert is, from a **COMPLETELY FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE** a great choice.
He's a proven commodity across media and with young and old. Comedy Central is youth demographic 'central' and Colbert is at the top of the product chain there. He's sold books, audio, and gets things like a *treadmill on the ISS named after him.*
Dont tell me Craig Ferguson or Chelsea Handler can come anywhere near that marketshare/reach. Colbert pwns.
So "which is it?"
Neither...Oligarchs still have to play the money game just like everyone else. Colbert pulled it off.
my comment above is **not trolling or flamebait**
i think the decision was bad...I gave pithy analogies to other known controversial hirings
my points are falsifiable & on topic
seriously...i was downmodded for reasons other than trolling or flame!
How do companies talk themselves into ridiculous moves like this?
This is an order of magnitude worse than Yahoo hiring Katie Couric.
I get apoplectic when I see news like this...reminds me of Steve Schmidt on Colbert saying only criminals want privacy
Mr. Pettis thanks for taking the time. Your 3D printers are nice.
My question:
What is needed to take consumer home-based 3D printing beyond novelty items? Specifically everyday home consumers not pure hobbyists.
Of course 3D fabricators are used for more than "novelty items" in several commercial and industrial applications, but for several reasons, not the least of which is cost of the 3D fabricator, most of what people make is just knick knacks, novelty items, and bric-a-brac.
What will we need to see technologically to take consumer home fabrication beyond things like action figures? Ex: making something like a flashlight or toothbrush
doing it as a gig is fine from a "food on the table" perspective...no judgement its work we'd all do
i'm criticizing her acting, especially in the captain role
i'm saying that as a professional in something like Star Trek that has built-in millions of fans as an actor you can **remain an airhead** and phone in your work or you can use it to launch a much more successful career
Shatner and Patrick Stewart are, give or take, about as famous as people their age can be...Voyager was on for 6 or 7 seasons IIRC
people *love* those guys...even non-Trek fans
they obviously chose, as professionals, to take the sillyness seriously and grow professionally...fans know how silly it all looks too...people running around in pajamas and whatnot...but the cultural effect is undeniable ($$$)
Mulgrew should have known better...that's what I'm really saying
she did get a pretty sweet gig as the cook on Orange is the New Black, but IMHO her acting is just as empty and wooden and predictable in that as well
Am I the only one that wished 7of9 wore **more** clothes?
Seriously it was embarassing to watch the show with a female in the room....and this is the show with the woman captain that was supposed to be all female inclusive. TOS had boobs everywhere but it's old enough to get away with it.
If I want porn i just look at...you know....pr0n
And the answer to my question is in the subject for this one too...
sorry messed up the link in my post
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wik...
if you don't know what it is in reference to Trek count yourself lucky
interesting link...ok...this is going to have to be my last post on "technobabble"...let's untangle this mess
first, is it being used as a pejorative?
that's going to clear up alot of the mess right there...in the context does the speaker mean it as a negative, annoying thing
Mulgrew in her "The Captains" interview was *definitely* using the term as a pejorative...
others, including some from your Memory Alpha link, use it as a general term for any *TV dialogue* that involves scientific or technical language...just a neutral term
2nd, why are they using the term 'technobabble' as pejorative?
here on /. for us techies, we sometimes use 'technobabble' to indicate **obviously fake** technical language that was thrown in as an afterthought to either pander to the audience's need for "authenticity" or to move the plot along...Red Matterfrom JJ Abrams reboot is a good example
To make things confusing, non-techs use the term 'technobabble' as a pejorative regardless of its accuracy or usage in the plot...they do not know the difference at all...they just don't like having to learn strange words or think it's irrelevant to the story or are just kind of dumb and don't get it
my criticism of Mulgrew is that she is the latter...a person who is intellectually incurious & generally ignorant of science who calls any scientific language used in drama "technobabble"
yeah I know what you mean...but we're techies so our definition of "technobabble" is more narrow than a non-tech, even one with a good education.
to Mulgrew, anything "science-y" was "technobabble"
this is the problem, Star Trek had mixed results with scientific accuracy...in that sense it is "technobabble" because it is fictional science in a future setting they are using...however, depending on which series at which time, the quality of the science dialogue was educational
I **liked** the fictional future science of the later series...it wasn't completely believable, but they definitely had a science advisor and you could see the consistency
It was educational...in the sense that it exposed me to new ideas & motivated me to ***actually look up the real science***
one thing Trekkies overlook is that today its mostly **teens** who watch Trek...average, everyday teenagers...I know this from my teaching experience, I'd have cheerleader type chicks mention Trek in papers
It doesn't really affect the "Best Star Trek Captain" discussions (I always answer with the *vision* the creators had for the character not how it was acted)...but Kate Mulgrew is kind of a ditz
In interviews (like in The Captains film: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T... ) she was clearly just doing Trek purely as a 'gig' for a paycheck...she had no personal connection to science or space whatsoever and did not see her role as a way to educate herself or broaden her horizons to improve her acting
to her it was all just "technobabble" which angers me to no end as a person who advocates for women in science...but it's her life and career so I'm not judging her choices necessarily...i just think it's unprofessional and lazy...her performance in Orange is the New Black is equally as bad, IMHO...very perfunctory
Mulgrew read the ***narration*** of the whole film...how could she do that and not know the film as about the earth being the *actual* center of the universe?
answer is in the subject line
I have no problem admiting that the video is cool...but this is more about design trends and the implications
first...what was depicted in the video is not "off roading"
2nd...the most "off roading" these Range Rovers will ever see is if the Soccer Mom ever accidentally backs into a flower garden
again I think the video is cool, and the general concept has many awesome applications
this *particular* application is not one of them
hell yes.
this is how you get government accountability! YOU FUCK THEM UP
This is not a good application of technology...
ALL OF THIS IS TO INCREASE SHOWROOM SALES
this is about hooking in soccer moms, with an eye to short term sales figures only, by dazzling them with technology they will never use
no ammount of technology can account for an **inattentive driver**
this is bunk application of tech....and to pretend otherwise is bad for our industry
and we, us who vote, can change it
we can vote for politicians who favor accountability and if none are running we can organize and lobby to make it an issue
you use the same faulty logic as the "privacy is dead" people use and it kills our industry.
you're abdicating your power, agency, and responsibilty then claiming that **your** choices represent "how things are"
i'm not a serf...and neither is anyone reading this...at least we can **choose** to work to change
X = any government agency with spy operations
Y = any entity or group that uses technology to communicate
I'm not trying to start discussions on all aspects of Snowden...but I do definitely see a streeeetching of this story for maximum clicks by the likes of The Guardian.
Maybe that's the reason for "outrage fatigue" mentioned by another poster above....the media has commercialized the information now
I'm not taking a side on the greater question, but it is **typical** for successful criminal operations to use non-profits as front organizations
Investigating a non-profit **could** be justified, given a proper warrant with evidence of course.
I'm sure we can scientifically link **ALL** bad technology design to negative behaviors.
And those negative behaviors, like feeling frustration repeatedly for a routine task, correlate in a proven way to high blood pressure & all kinds of other health problems.
Bad design is ruining our health now too...we have the data to prove it.
they took the 'video game' factor out of the experiment, in a sense, by testing with different control factors
they tested whether it was **the game** or **frustration with technology** and **frustration with losing**
they tested across all kinds of games, Candy Crush to Call of Duty....same result...aggression comes from frustration
however, "poorly designed gameplay" does indeed equate to aggression...which mirrors non-gaming behavior as well..ex: BSOD
so no, they don't "make" you turn violent...they cause you to express aggression for the same reason **other things** do
don't give anyone any ideas...
heh...it sounds like some kind of pitch meeting story a VC douchebag would tell at a launch party to impress part-time strippers hired to attend the party
yes...**exactly** why I phrased it as I did
i was taking a survey...surveys need consistent definitions. idiots attach their personal pride to answering the question "Do you run Linux" which biases answers. I just wanted to know who used it for a certain task *only*....so...i needed to be proactive to avoid idiots like you...you know you're essentially trolling when you make dumb distinctions like that, right?
everyone can see that you nitpick and make your own "personal definitions" just to have an excuse to look intelligent
**stop it**
it is obstructive, needlessly confusing & completely rooted in your personal narcissism
employees get fired for virtually everything...the annecdotes are ridiculous
if an entry level new-hire at a software company dropped a grenade in the first meeting they were allowed to attend and said, "Our app doesn't make money because everyone knows it is spam"
**right in front of the boss/guy who invented the app**
and that guy got fired...or reassigned to something so bullshit that he quit...
would we even care or suspect something wrong happend?
in my mind Mozilla's CEO is the same
just b/c he's a CEO doesn't mean he is immune to the vagaries of contemporary employment