Even legitimate charities are sometimes a bit sloppy with how they spend the contributions they get. Many non-profits spend a considerable portion of their donations on fund-raising (read: telemarketers) and compensation of management. One of my favorite non-profits is the American Institute of Philanthropy which is a watch-dog organization that releases reports that "rate" the charities on various criteria. Given the fact that there are so very many organizations that are set up to aid the tsunami victims, I encourage my fellow slashdotians to give their money to an organization that gets an A rating in the guide.
...and who's going to watch the non-boosted events? Will companies choose to sponsor the athletes setting records, or those who "just" take first place? Who will the networks cover?
In recent years women's tennis has become as popular as men's tennis. Now part of that has been due to the "glamourization" of the female athletes, I admit. But part of the increased attention is due to people losing interest in the men's game. The men have gotten to the point where the serve is a very major component of the game. An increasing number of fans are getting sick of watching some guy bang a 130 mph ball past someone over and over. The number of hanging-on-the-edge-of-your-seat rallies in the men's game has dropped considerably over the years. Fans are turning to the women's game because there are more interesting rallies going on over there. I submit to you that this is evidence that people won't necessarily flock to enhanced sports. Those enhancements may make the game very boring to watch and the non-enhanced games may be more enjoyable.
And let's not forgot the possibility that public opinion of enhancement might sour considerably in the future. The death of one or more beloved athletes who died prematurely because of enhancement might turn the tide of public opinion from tolerance to anger. And in the father future, people who resent their enhanced co-workers who snap up all the promotions at work due to their superior abilities certainly aren't going to want to spend their meager paychecks watching more "enhanced freaks" on the weekend. We may yet see a serious backlash against enhanced people -- athletes and other.
As an interesting aside, I have said this before on Slashdot, but human eyes are pretty pathetic in terms of their sophistication. Birds, fish and many reptiles have much more sophisticated retinas that perceive what we would term a multi-spectral visual world. A visual scene much richer that the simple three-space world we currently see.
Evolution gives organisms the tools they need to survive, not necessarily what those organsims might put down on their wish lists. The ability to sense the world in such detail is much more important to the survival of those creatures than it is for human beings. This is a feature, not a bug. Since this is slashdot, I'm going to assume that you are very familiar with the epsiode in Star Trek where Kirk outmaneuvers aliens with vastly superior intellect and technology. How does he do it? In order to operate the Enterprise, these creatures had to fit themselves into human bodies which have senses that are much more hightened than those of their normal form. Kirk simply overloads their senses to the point that they can't think straight. Just yesterday we had an article here on slashdot about how people are having trouble dealing with the flood of new information available to them. Be thankful that our eyes are more limited than those of birds, fish, and their ilk. Our brains are already having trouble keeping up with the world around us. The day we start seeing in the IR and UV parts of the spectrum, that'll be all the more for us to process on a second-by-second basis.
Good luck with the research. I'm gratified to know that at least someone thinks that this technology should be used first to assist those who are disabled and then used to give super-powers to the rich. All too often medical research caters to stupid things like baldness cures instead of focusing on cures of cancer and Alzheimer's.
GMD
Re:Majored in math, away from it for a year
on
Prime Obsession
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
This wouldn't be a book to get someone that works in a heavily mathematical field...
Why not? I have a Ph.D. in math from one of the top scientific institutions in the world and I think the book sounds interesting. Quoting from the above review:
By a larger margin, however, Prime Obsession's intrigue lies in Derbyshire's expositions on Riemann, Hilbert, Turing, Gauss, et al, as well as those modern mathematicians he's interviewed personally. The line between the mathematical half of the book and the historical is clearly defined; the odd-numbered chapters are devoted to the former, the even to the latter.
This book is not a "dip in the math kiddie pool" like you suggest; it's an examination of the personalities behind the equations. I know quite a bit of math but very little about the people who developed the theories and the trials they had to go through. I suspect that most people who work in "heavily mathematical field" are in the same boat. And these stories can be very interesting. Ever read the account (or see the PBS special) about Andrew Wiles's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem? Fascinating stuff!
I think this idea that popular math books appeal only to those who know something about math is unfortunate. It prevent the public at large from understanding and appreciating mathematics. Carl Sagan did wonders for astronomy with his Cosmos series (although the isn't too tough to do because, as my astronomer friend Nicole says, "astronomy is a 'sexy' science") but we don't have any real champion for other fields of science. I think books like this should appeal to a large audience: mathematicians and the math-phobic alike.
People get those gifts because they try. They don't understand math at all, but they know that you do "something mathy".
Exactly right. They are trying to get you something that they think you might like even though they don't know very much about math. Instead of the grandparent getting all hot under the collar that his family and friends dare insult his grant intellect by purchasing him a "Math for Dummies" book (as he seems to think this historical work is), he should feel gratified to know that he family cares enough about him to actually put forth some effort to getting something that attempts to match his interests. There are lots of people who simply buy generic gifts for family like socks or shit like that. Isn't this book a lot better than a gift like that?
Reading the grandparents rant, I was reminded of an article in The Onion awhile back about some film snob getting all upset because his family -- damn their incompetance! -- dared buy him the widescreen edition of one of the Matrix sequels when he actually wanted the letterboxed edition (opportunity for karma whoring here if someone can link to it). For chrissake, your family and friends are trying their goddamned best and you get your panties in a bunch over details? That's so incredibly childlike, I can hardly believe this above "rant". Christmas isn't really about getting exactly what you want -- at least once you're an adult it's not. Christmas is just an opportunity to get together with loved ones and exchange gifts as a token of affection. It doesn't have to be the "perfect gift"; as long as it's somewhere in the ballpark you should feel happy that your family is at least aware of your interests.
Yes, Roger Moore slipped into 007's shoes very nicely. I really liked Moore as bond. Almost as good as Connery and Brosnan in the ruthless bastard department.
Look, I'm not mocking you but I'm honestly stunned that you think of Roger Moore as "ruthless". For my money, he was way too gentlemenly to be an effective Bond. Who comes to my mind when I think of the word "ruthless"? Timothy Dalton. He played Bond as though he was on the verge of losing control of himself at any time. He could barely contain his contempt for those around him. When he killed someone in a gruesome manner, he didn't crack a joke like Moore (or even Connery); he had a sadistic, content snear on his face. My opinion is that this is why he is one of the least-liked Bonds. You knew he could get the job done but it seemed like he had a bit of a wild, almost evil streak in him that made it hard for the general audience to really like him. Dalton's Bond seemed to vascilate between amusement and violence.
I like Brosnan. He does that kind of flip-flopping well, too. One minute he's a smug, confident guy, the next he's flipping out and you could very clearly see the anger in his face.
"Ruthless" and "bastard" are too words that I most certainly do not associate with Roger Moore. I'm surprised that you feel otherwise.
Yeah, well so are most geeks. I wish I had a dollar everytime I heard some chick say "Well, you're smart and all and kinda cute but I just can't see dating someone who's shorter than me. I hope you don't think I'm being shallow. But don't worry, I'm sure you'll find someone wonderful out there! Someone who can appreciate all the wonderful qualities you have! No, not me. But someone! Sure! It will happen to you! You're such a great guy! A little short, sure, but you're a great guy! Just don't get discouraged. No, I won't reconsider. Look, there's no need to cry. There are tons of girls out there who would love to date a short, smart guy. What? Well, no, you can't expect me to name them off the top of my head like that. Huh? Well, I don't know! Look, don't get angry. I'm trying to boast your morale and this is how you act? Christ, no wonder you can't get a girlfriend. Your height is only the start of your problems. What are you blubbering about? Well, you shouldn't have freaked out like that. Okay, fine, apology accepted. I'm sure it must be tough for someone as short as you to find a girlfriend. No, I don't want to know how long it's been since you've head sex. There are lots of cute, short girls out there who would love to date someone their size! What? Are you sure? Why would some 5'2" girl want to date someone 6'? No, I haven't looked through the personal ads. Well, I'm sure those aren't typical of most women. Look, I've got to go. I just remembered I have to wash my hair. Maybe you should invest in some platform shoes..."
This is the beginning of a recent fad that I have noticed the past couple years. Lately it seems that the mascot video game character has declined in popularity.
Uh, so isn't this really the end of a fad? Games are being judged on gameplay and word-of-mouth instead of how many photo-ops some guy in a oversized fur suit attends?
Think about this the next time you are coding a servo controller on your Redhat compiler. Could your code be misused in a way you would not approve?
Y'know, I hear this kind of question a lot. I work for a defense contractor. When I'm explaining my work to people, invariably the question of "don't you worry that your work will be used in some future war that you don't approve of?" No, actually, I don't and the reason isn't that I approve of all (or even most) of the military actions that my country is involved in. Part of it is a bit of short-sightedness on my part. I work on very "research-y" topics: data fusion, sensor resource management, and other stuff that isn't gonna get implemented until 2015 at the very earliest. Part of it is that I think war is a necessary part of humanity. I wish it weren't but a simple examination of the human brain reveals that the "R-complex" (aka reptilian brain) is present in every person. I have learned to use my other brain portions to control my aggresive tendancies but there are lots of people who will never master that trick.
But I think the main reason why I don't lie awake at night worrying that the results of my efforts might make the world a worse place is the same reason why parents don't usually lie awake worrying that their kids are going to turn out to cause more harm to society than benefit. I don't have kids but I'm thinking that if I did, I probably wouldn't spend too much time worrying that my kid is gonna become the next Kenneth Lay and be the cause of a great deal of suffering. I would probably think that my kid is more likely to be a benefit to society or I'd just be enjoying the process of raising my kid and not get all worried about how he's going to turn out.
I don't see any reason why one should assume that the products of their efforts will only be used for applications that they 100% agree with. Really, I think that's terribly naive. Do sheetmetal workers lie awake at night worrying that the steel they cast that day might be used in the casing for a bomb?
GMD
Citing prior research in this area
on
Humans Born to Run
·
· Score: 4, Funny
This provides an interesting corallary to work done by Dr. Freddie Mercury and his colleagues many years ago on the relation between women with big buttocks and the rotation of the Earth.
Aside from that: Items like Aeron chairs and foosball tables and game systems in the break room and people keeping excessively odd hours can stay gone. I never liked those...
I was going to post more or less the same thing but you beat me to the punch. I wanted to smack the submitter when I read him whinning about not seeing foosball tables making a return. All that shit was complete waste. Those days are gone, my friends. Here at slashdot we like to laugh at how stupid management is. But they are smart enough not to get burned twice on buying a lot of pointless shit like that.
I think it's time for programmers to stop waxing nostalgic about crap and start worrying more about how to make programming in the US (as opposed to outsourcing it) a valuable commodity. Time to start worrying about saving up enough money that you might actually get a chance to retire when Social Security collapses. Time to start paying more attention to whether a prospective employer has a solid medical plan rather than counting the number of foosball tables or arcade games they have in the break room. In short, it's time to grow up.
It's great to see the Gorn get some mention, even if it's just a silly song. I always thought that epsiode (Arena) was fascinating. When I was a kid, I loved this episode because it features Kirk fighting against a dinosaur-looking alien. As an adult, I can appreciate it even more. Unlike so many Star Trek epsiodes where Kirk is lecturing some other species about justice or equality, here Kirk is taught an important lesson about his own prejudice.
The episode begins with the Enterprise finding a Federation colony under savage attack by an unknown species. Countless men, women, and children -- all civilians -- have been slaughtered. Kirk is enraged and chases the attacking vessel across space. Spock tries to talk some sense into Kirk but he will have none of it. He pushes his vessel past safe limits in an attempt to catch the aliens. When when the two ships travel into space claimed by the Metrons -- an advanced, pacifistic species -- the situation changes considerably.
Realizing that both the Enterprise and the aliens are running on pure adreneline and not thinking things out, the Metrons decide to let the two sides satisfy their thirst for violence through a one-on-one battle between the captain of each starship. Kirk and the captain of the alien ship are transported to the surface of a barren world where they are to engage in hand-to-hand combat to the death. To Kirk's horror, he finds that his opponent is from a species of incredibly strong reptiles named the Gorn. Kirk quickly discovers that he is physically outmatched.
What makes this episode so fascinating is how Kirk changes during the course of the conflict. At the start, he is openly hateful of the Gorn, even going so far to as to admit that he has a natural revulsion towards reptiles. He considers them lower lifeforms. However, he is aware of his prejudice against them and forces himself to remember that his opponent is every much his equal intellectually. Late in the battle, he communicates with the Gorn captain through the universal translator device and discovers that the Gorn attacked the Federation colony because they believed it was an invasion. For the first time, Kirk is able to see the situation from the other side. The Gorn were acting in (perceived) self-defense.
By the time that the battle has finally reached the final confrontation between the two, Kirk has come to the conclusion that he is not qualified to judge the action of this species nor dispense justice. His surprising resolution of the conflict impresses the Metrons, who have been overseeing the battle.
The ambition of this episode -- airing in the 60s and with a limited budget -- is staggering in retrospect. Shooting a battle between Kirk and a reptile running around in the desert is impressive enough. But the fact that Kirk, the quintessential hero, is able to admit that he may have been wrong is something that is rare even in today's popular TV shows and movies. This episode was well before its time. Everyone remembers that episode where Spock has to wed that cold-hearted, logical Vulcan babe -- why doesn't Arena get mentioned more often as a fan favorite?
I think this is one of the big drivers beind the "retro-gaming" movement. It's not so much that 30-somethings are trying to recapture some lost element of their youth, it's just that many people are so drained by their jobs that they just want something simple to unwind with. But gamers who like old fashioned games are probably happy with the various emulators out there and wouldn't have much reason to purchase some newly-created simple game. So there's no market for these types of quickie games.
Anyhow, that's my theory. I'm not a gamer either way but I admit a fondness for retro games. There's no friggin' way I could be bothered with any of the games that come out these days (even though the chicks in them look way sexier than that broad you had to save in Donkey Kong).
Sheesh, it was an SNL sketch, not Shatners personal opinion or hatred.
Maybe Shatner has no outright hatred but I think it's also pretty sad that he doesn't seem to appreciate the fans. Neither Shatner nor Patrick Stewart agreed to be interviewed for Trekkies. I'm assuming the reason was money -- not enough of it. I, however, believe that since Star Trek made these guys so popular that they could afford to command high salaries, they should have agreed to be interviewed for Trekkies for a smaller-than-usual amount.
My first question of the director is if he could verify my assumption: that Shatner and Stewart weren't interviewed for Trekkies because of money (as opposed to a conscious decision by the director to focus on the other actors). Second, if you did, indeed, want them in the film and they refused, did you work hard to get them? Did you try to negotiate their payment? Did they even consider your offer? Or did you simply get a letter from their agent saying, essentially, "Mr. Statner is too important to be interviewed in your two-bit documentary."
I'm really dying to know. Shatner, I can believe being a dick. I was a little surprised not to see Stewart in Trekkies, however.
The RIAA has been doing this for so long, why is the MPAA only doing this now, I wonder?
Hey, who cares? No self-respecting geek clutters up their hard drives with the drivel that the MPAA members produce. Now if the Porn Industry Movie Producers (PIMP) start cracking down on sharing Miko Lee and Jenna Jameson flicks, then us geeks are really going to be in trouble.
The last time there was an all-star monster cast like this in a film was the 1969 Destroy All Monsters. But don't expect a repeat of that finale with all the monsters ganging up on Ghidora. Based on what I've read, the director is in favor of a very powerful Godzilla. One so powerful that a single blast from his breath weapon will be enough to dispatch a foe (similiar to his fight with Baragon in the 2001 film "Godzilla, Mothra, King Ghidora: Giant Monsters All Out Attack"). Also, the plot seems to indicate that most of the monsters are going to be wiped out by aliens who arrive on Earth just in the nick of time (hmmmm) to save us.
I, for one, have never understood why Toho doesn't film more multi-monster battles? All Godzilla's fights seem to be one-on-one. There are times where multiple monsters are present (e.g., Godzilla and MOGERA team against SpaceGodzilla, Mothra and Battra against Godzilla) but even in those cases the action is really limited to one monster attacking another and the others just standing around watching. Surely they should be able to choreograph these fights to make them a little more exciting. I mean, Kamacuras is nothing more than a giant Praying Mantis. So it's not going to fare to well against, say, Gigan. But you get Kamacuras, Manda, and Kumonga to simultaneously attack Gigan and now you've got a real fight!
leave it to Kansas to hold an academic conference, 'In the Footsteps of Godzilla'.
I don't get it. Why is it especially appropriate for Kansas to do this?
Maybe because Kansas is so damn flat it looks like Godzilla stomped everything that was once there into the ground. Get it? "Footsteps of Godzilla?" You see, his footsteps from his stomping...ah, forget it.
That entire submission was a little hard to understand. I'm not sure it was meant to claim there was any particular reason why it should be held in Kansas. Maybe we're both too dense to figure it out...
Yes, that's the list. Funny thing about it, though...
There are advertisements available on the Internet which show clips of each of the monsters. Minilla, the much-hated "Son of Godzilla" in the awful G-films of the 60s, is not shown. A monster that is shown, however, is GINO -- the nickname given to the Hollywood Godzilla (Godzilla In Name Only). So this leads to an interesting idea: is Toho going to refer to the Hollywood Godzilla as Minilla in "Godzilla Final Wars?" That would be an incredible "fuck you" to the bastards at Tri-Star who took Japan's most pervasive contribution to world culture and turned it into a brainless, typical Hollywood summer blockbuster.
Perhaps it is too much to hope for. But consider these facts. First, Toho has already said this is going to be the last film for a long time. No need to worry about retribution from offended TriStar studio executives. Second, Toho seems to be making this film as a legitimate thank you to all their fans. The budget for this film is several times larger than in a typical film. What better way to tickle their fans then to mock GINO?
Actually, the whole title of beer or wine being "healthy" is rediculous. Alcohol is the most damaging food product you can put in your body. It's far worse than trans-fatty acids, artificial ingredients (e.g., pesticides, food coloring), or sugar. I defy you to find any reputable medical researcher who would encourage people to take up drinking for health benefits. You want the health benefits of wine or beer? Eat some grapes instead. You'll get the benefits of the flavonoids without the damaging effects of the alcohol.
Look, I have nothing against alcohol. I love wine and I'm fortunate to live in an area known for exceptional wine growing. But let's not kid ourselves about alcohol being some kind of health food. So put away your low-carb beer and your red wine and drink what you want -- in moderation.
Hasn't War of the Worlds already been remade about 50,000 times? Independence Day? Signs? Heck, even the old 'V' mini-series was basically the same story.
I'm not sure what you mean by "basically the same story". You mean they all featured mankind trying to repel an alien invasion? Because that's where the similiarites stop. Indepedence Day follows the trials and tribulations of the heros who are going to stop the bad guys. Signs is a focused study on how one family reacts to the threat. "V" examined whether a group of rag-tag freedom fighters could actually win against a technologically-superior advesary. War of the Worlds, on the other hand, largely deals with how society as a whole deals with the invasion. Remember the encounter between the newspaper reporter and the artillary man? Or with the parson and his wife? I think any similiarities between War of the Worlds and the movies you list above is pretty superficial.
I don't understand why we even bother making movies from books if we are going to change the stories completely.
Oh, come on! That's an easy one! Two words: name recognition. Making a movie is an expensive proposition and is always risky. By co-opting a well-known name and slapping it on their product, the studios already have a built-in market. They can save money on promotion and marketing as well. We saw this a few years ago when Tri-Star took the internationally-known brand-name of Godzilla and slapped it on the front of a movie in which the monster bore little to no resemblance to the real deal.
Never underestimate the power of a brand-name. Remember when we were kids and you just *had* to have Pac-Man on your home console? The fact that the home versions really, really sucked didn't matter all that much? Remember how you were more happy to have a 3rd-rate version of Pac-Man rather than a 1st-rate version of, say, Mousetrap or some other Pac-Man-like maze game? That's what I'm talking about here. So it is with movies as well.
Actually, the commonly-believed story that there was mass panic was really a newspaper-fueled fantasy. The number of people who actually were scared enough to go ape-shit was quite small. You can read more about the overhyped-hysteria here -- go down halfway on the page until you get to "Book Excerpts, by Prof. David L. Miller".
By the way, the rest of that page has a lot of interesting material on the War of the Worlds broadcast, if you are interested.
Couldn't you have put in a paragraph or two drawing parallels between this movie and Columbine? Or how it relates to globalism? Your plain vanilla movie review kinda feels naked without you attempting to link it in with current events or society.
Slashdot Mirror
First we got robot soldiers and now we got robot soccer players. What we really need are robotic Mexican soccer announcers:
GMD
Even legitimate charities are sometimes a bit sloppy with how they spend the contributions they get. Many non-profits spend a considerable portion of their donations on fund-raising (read: telemarketers) and compensation of management. One of my favorite non-profits is the American Institute of Philanthropy which is a watch-dog organization that releases reports that "rate" the charities on various criteria. Given the fact that there are so very many organizations that are set up to aid the tsunami victims, I encourage my fellow slashdotians to give their money to an organization that gets an A rating in the guide.
GMD
In recent years women's tennis has become as popular as men's tennis. Now part of that has been due to the "glamourization" of the female athletes, I admit. But part of the increased attention is due to people losing interest in the men's game. The men have gotten to the point where the serve is a very major component of the game. An increasing number of fans are getting sick of watching some guy bang a 130 mph ball past someone over and over. The number of hanging-on-the-edge-of-your-seat rallies in the men's game has dropped considerably over the years. Fans are turning to the women's game because there are more interesting rallies going on over there. I submit to you that this is evidence that people won't necessarily flock to enhanced sports. Those enhancements may make the game very boring to watch and the non-enhanced games may be more enjoyable.
And let's not forgot the possibility that public opinion of enhancement might sour considerably in the future. The death of one or more beloved athletes who died prematurely because of enhancement might turn the tide of public opinion from tolerance to anger. And in the father future, people who resent their enhanced co-workers who snap up all the promotions at work due to their superior abilities certainly aren't going to want to spend their meager paychecks watching more "enhanced freaks" on the weekend. We may yet see a serious backlash against enhanced people -- athletes and other.
GMD
As an interesting aside, I have said this before on Slashdot, but human eyes are pretty pathetic in terms of their sophistication. Birds, fish and many reptiles have much more sophisticated retinas that perceive what we would term a multi-spectral visual world. A visual scene much richer that the simple three-space world we currently see.
Evolution gives organisms the tools they need to survive, not necessarily what those organsims might put down on their wish lists. The ability to sense the world in such detail is much more important to the survival of those creatures than it is for human beings. This is a feature, not a bug. Since this is slashdot, I'm going to assume that you are very familiar with the epsiode in Star Trek where Kirk outmaneuvers aliens with vastly superior intellect and technology. How does he do it? In order to operate the Enterprise, these creatures had to fit themselves into human bodies which have senses that are much more hightened than those of their normal form. Kirk simply overloads their senses to the point that they can't think straight. Just yesterday we had an article here on slashdot about how people are having trouble dealing with the flood of new information available to them. Be thankful that our eyes are more limited than those of birds, fish, and their ilk. Our brains are already having trouble keeping up with the world around us. The day we start seeing in the IR and UV parts of the spectrum, that'll be all the more for us to process on a second-by-second basis.
Good luck with the research. I'm gratified to know that at least someone thinks that this technology should be used first to assist those who are disabled and then used to give super-powers to the rich. All too often medical research caters to stupid things like baldness cures instead of focusing on cures of cancer and Alzheimer's.
GMD
This wouldn't be a book to get someone that works in a heavily mathematical field...
Why not? I have a Ph.D. in math from one of the top scientific institutions in the world and I think the book sounds interesting. Quoting from the above review:
This book is not a "dip in the math kiddie pool" like you suggest; it's an examination of the personalities behind the equations. I know quite a bit of math but very little about the people who developed the theories and the trials they had to go through. I suspect that most people who work in "heavily mathematical field" are in the same boat. And these stories can be very interesting. Ever read the account (or see the PBS special) about Andrew Wiles's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem? Fascinating stuff!
I think this idea that popular math books appeal only to those who know something about math is unfortunate. It prevent the public at large from understanding and appreciating mathematics. Carl Sagan did wonders for astronomy with his Cosmos series (although the isn't too tough to do because, as my astronomer friend Nicole says, "astronomy is a 'sexy' science") but we don't have any real champion for other fields of science. I think books like this should appeal to a large audience: mathematicians and the math-phobic alike.
GMD
People get those gifts because they try. They don't understand math at all, but they know that you do "something mathy".
Exactly right. They are trying to get you something that they think you might like even though they don't know very much about math. Instead of the grandparent getting all hot under the collar that his family and friends dare insult his grant intellect by purchasing him a "Math for Dummies" book (as he seems to think this historical work is), he should feel gratified to know that he family cares enough about him to actually put forth some effort to getting something that attempts to match his interests. There are lots of people who simply buy generic gifts for family like socks or shit like that. Isn't this book a lot better than a gift like that?
Reading the grandparents rant, I was reminded of an article in The Onion awhile back about some film snob getting all upset because his family -- damn their incompetance! -- dared buy him the widescreen edition of one of the Matrix sequels when he actually wanted the letterboxed edition (opportunity for karma whoring here if someone can link to it). For chrissake, your family and friends are trying their goddamned best and you get your panties in a bunch over details? That's so incredibly childlike, I can hardly believe this above "rant". Christmas isn't really about getting exactly what you want -- at least once you're an adult it's not. Christmas is just an opportunity to get together with loved ones and exchange gifts as a token of affection. It doesn't have to be the "perfect gift"; as long as it's somewhere in the ballpark you should feel happy that your family is at least aware of your interests.
GMD
Yes, Roger Moore slipped into 007's shoes very nicely. I really liked Moore as bond. Almost as good as Connery and Brosnan in the ruthless bastard department.
Look, I'm not mocking you but I'm honestly stunned that you think of Roger Moore as "ruthless". For my money, he was way too gentlemenly to be an effective Bond. Who comes to my mind when I think of the word "ruthless"? Timothy Dalton. He played Bond as though he was on the verge of losing control of himself at any time. He could barely contain his contempt for those around him. When he killed someone in a gruesome manner, he didn't crack a joke like Moore (or even Connery); he had a sadistic, content snear on his face. My opinion is that this is why he is one of the least-liked Bonds. You knew he could get the job done but it seemed like he had a bit of a wild, almost evil streak in him that made it hard for the general audience to really like him. Dalton's Bond seemed to vascilate between amusement and violence.
I like Brosnan. He does that kind of flip-flopping well, too. One minute he's a smug, confident guy, the next he's flipping out and you could very clearly see the anger in his face.
"Ruthless" and "bastard" are too words that I most certainly do not associate with Roger Moore. I'm surprised that you feel otherwise.
GMD
One year-olds are vertically-challenged.
Yeah, well so are most geeks. I wish I had a dollar everytime I heard some chick say "Well, you're smart and all and kinda cute but I just can't see dating someone who's shorter than me. I hope you don't think I'm being shallow. But don't worry, I'm sure you'll find someone wonderful out there! Someone who can appreciate all the wonderful qualities you have! No, not me. But someone! Sure! It will happen to you! You're such a great guy! A little short, sure, but you're a great guy! Just don't get discouraged. No, I won't reconsider. Look, there's no need to cry. There are tons of girls out there who would love to date a short, smart guy. What? Well, no, you can't expect me to name them off the top of my head like that. Huh? Well, I don't know! Look, don't get angry. I'm trying to boast your morale and this is how you act? Christ, no wonder you can't get a girlfriend. Your height is only the start of your problems. What are you blubbering about? Well, you shouldn't have freaked out like that. Okay, fine, apology accepted. I'm sure it must be tough for someone as short as you to find a girlfriend. No, I don't want to know how long it's been since you've head sex. There are lots of cute, short girls out there who would love to date someone their size! What? Are you sure? Why would some 5'2" girl want to date someone 6'? No, I haven't looked through the personal ads. Well, I'm sure those aren't typical of most women. Look, I've got to go. I just remembered I have to wash my hair. Maybe you should invest in some platform shoes..."
GMD
John Romero - Daikatana
This is the beginning of a recent fad that I have noticed the past couple years. Lately it seems that the mascot video game character has declined in popularity.
Uh, so isn't this really the end of a fad? Games are being judged on gameplay and word-of-mouth instead of how many photo-ops some guy in a oversized fur suit attends?
GMD
Think about this the next time you are coding a servo controller on your Redhat compiler. Could your code be misused in a way you would not approve?
Y'know, I hear this kind of question a lot. I work for a defense contractor. When I'm explaining my work to people, invariably the question of "don't you worry that your work will be used in some future war that you don't approve of?" No, actually, I don't and the reason isn't that I approve of all (or even most) of the military actions that my country is involved in. Part of it is a bit of short-sightedness on my part. I work on very "research-y" topics: data fusion, sensor resource management, and other stuff that isn't gonna get implemented until 2015 at the very earliest. Part of it is that I think war is a necessary part of humanity. I wish it weren't but a simple examination of the human brain reveals that the "R-complex" (aka reptilian brain) is present in every person. I have learned to use my other brain portions to control my aggresive tendancies but there are lots of people who will never master that trick.
But I think the main reason why I don't lie awake at night worrying that the results of my efforts might make the world a worse place is the same reason why parents don't usually lie awake worrying that their kids are going to turn out to cause more harm to society than benefit. I don't have kids but I'm thinking that if I did, I probably wouldn't spend too much time worrying that my kid is gonna become the next Kenneth Lay and be the cause of a great deal of suffering. I would probably think that my kid is more likely to be a benefit to society or I'd just be enjoying the process of raising my kid and not get all worried about how he's going to turn out.
I don't see any reason why one should assume that the products of their efforts will only be used for applications that they 100% agree with. Really, I think that's terribly naive. Do sheetmetal workers lie awake at night worrying that the steel they cast that day might be used in the casing for a bomb?
GMD
This provides an interesting corallary to work done by Dr. Freddie Mercury and his colleagues many years ago on the relation between women with big buttocks and the rotation of the Earth.
GMD
Aside from that: Items like Aeron chairs and foosball tables and game systems in the break room and people keeping excessively odd hours can stay gone. I never liked those...
I was going to post more or less the same thing but you beat me to the punch. I wanted to smack the submitter when I read him whinning about not seeing foosball tables making a return. All that shit was complete waste. Those days are gone, my friends. Here at slashdot we like to laugh at how stupid management is. But they are smart enough not to get burned twice on buying a lot of pointless shit like that.
I think it's time for programmers to stop waxing nostalgic about crap and start worrying more about how to make programming in the US (as opposed to outsourcing it) a valuable commodity. Time to start worrying about saving up enough money that you might actually get a chance to retire when Social Security collapses. Time to start paying more attention to whether a prospective employer has a solid medical plan rather than counting the number of foosball tables or arcade games they have in the break room. In short, it's time to grow up.
GMD
It's great to see the Gorn get some mention, even if it's just a silly song. I always thought that epsiode (Arena) was fascinating. When I was a kid, I loved this episode because it features Kirk fighting against a dinosaur-looking alien. As an adult, I can appreciate it even more. Unlike so many Star Trek epsiodes where Kirk is lecturing some other species about justice or equality, here Kirk is taught an important lesson about his own prejudice.
The episode begins with the Enterprise finding a Federation colony under savage attack by an unknown species. Countless men, women, and children -- all civilians -- have been slaughtered. Kirk is enraged and chases the attacking vessel across space. Spock tries to talk some sense into Kirk but he will have none of it. He pushes his vessel past safe limits in an attempt to catch the aliens. When when the two ships travel into space claimed by the Metrons -- an advanced, pacifistic species -- the situation changes considerably.
Realizing that both the Enterprise and the aliens are running on pure adreneline and not thinking things out, the Metrons decide to let the two sides satisfy their thirst for violence through a one-on-one battle between the captain of each starship. Kirk and the captain of the alien ship are transported to the surface of a barren world where they are to engage in hand-to-hand combat to the death. To Kirk's horror, he finds that his opponent is from a species of incredibly strong reptiles named the Gorn. Kirk quickly discovers that he is physically outmatched.
What makes this episode so fascinating is how Kirk changes during the course of the conflict. At the start, he is openly hateful of the Gorn, even going so far to as to admit that he has a natural revulsion towards reptiles. He considers them lower lifeforms. However, he is aware of his prejudice against them and forces himself to remember that his opponent is every much his equal intellectually. Late in the battle, he communicates with the Gorn captain through the universal translator device and discovers that the Gorn attacked the Federation colony because they believed it was an invasion. For the first time, Kirk is able to see the situation from the other side. The Gorn were acting in (perceived) self-defense.
By the time that the battle has finally reached the final confrontation between the two, Kirk has come to the conclusion that he is not qualified to judge the action of this species nor dispense justice. His surprising resolution of the conflict impresses the Metrons, who have been overseeing the battle.
The ambition of this episode -- airing in the 60s and with a limited budget -- is staggering in retrospect. Shooting a battle between Kirk and a reptile running around in the desert is impressive enough. But the fact that Kirk, the quintessential hero, is able to admit that he may have been wrong is something that is rare even in today's popular TV shows and movies. This episode was well before its time. Everyone remembers that episode where Spock has to wed that cold-hearted, logical Vulcan babe -- why doesn't Arena get mentioned more often as a fan favorite?
GMD
I think this is one of the big drivers beind the "retro-gaming" movement. It's not so much that 30-somethings are trying to recapture some lost element of their youth, it's just that many people are so drained by their jobs that they just want something simple to unwind with. But gamers who like old fashioned games are probably happy with the various emulators out there and wouldn't have much reason to purchase some newly-created simple game. So there's no market for these types of quickie games.
Anyhow, that's my theory. I'm not a gamer either way but I admit a fondness for retro games. There's no friggin' way I could be bothered with any of the games that come out these days (even though the chicks in them look way sexier than that broad you had to save in Donkey Kong).
GMD
Sheesh, it was an SNL sketch, not Shatners personal opinion or hatred.
Maybe Shatner has no outright hatred but I think it's also pretty sad that he doesn't seem to appreciate the fans. Neither Shatner nor Patrick Stewart agreed to be interviewed for Trekkies. I'm assuming the reason was money -- not enough of it. I, however, believe that since Star Trek made these guys so popular that they could afford to command high salaries, they should have agreed to be interviewed for Trekkies for a smaller-than-usual amount.
My first question of the director is if he could verify my assumption: that Shatner and Stewart weren't interviewed for Trekkies because of money (as opposed to a conscious decision by the director to focus on the other actors). Second, if you did, indeed, want them in the film and they refused, did you work hard to get them? Did you try to negotiate their payment? Did they even consider your offer? Or did you simply get a letter from their agent saying, essentially, "Mr. Statner is too important to be interviewed in your two-bit documentary."
I'm really dying to know. Shatner, I can believe being a dick. I was a little surprised not to see Stewart in Trekkies, however.
Thanks,
GMD
The RIAA has been doing this for so long, why is the MPAA only doing this now, I wonder?
Hey, who cares? No self-respecting geek clutters up their hard drives with the drivel that the MPAA members produce. Now if the Porn Industry Movie Producers (PIMP) start cracking down on sharing Miko Lee and Jenna Jameson flicks, then us geeks are really going to be in trouble.
The last time there was an all-star monster cast like this in a film was the 1969 Destroy All Monsters. But don't expect a repeat of that finale with all the monsters ganging up on Ghidora. Based on what I've read, the director is in favor of a very powerful Godzilla. One so powerful that a single blast from his breath weapon will be enough to dispatch a foe (similiar to his fight with Baragon in the 2001 film "Godzilla, Mothra, King Ghidora: Giant Monsters All Out Attack"). Also, the plot seems to indicate that most of the monsters are going to be wiped out by aliens who arrive on Earth just in the nick of time (hmmmm) to save us.
I, for one, have never understood why Toho doesn't film more multi-monster battles? All Godzilla's fights seem to be one-on-one. There are times where multiple monsters are present (e.g., Godzilla and MOGERA team against SpaceGodzilla, Mothra and Battra against Godzilla) but even in those cases the action is really limited to one monster attacking another and the others just standing around watching. Surely they should be able to choreograph these fights to make them a little more exciting. I mean, Kamacuras is nothing more than a giant Praying Mantis. So it's not going to fare to well against, say, Gigan. But you get Kamacuras, Manda, and Kumonga to simultaneously attack Gigan and now you've got a real fight!
GMD
leave it to Kansas to hold an academic conference, 'In the Footsteps of Godzilla'.
I don't get it. Why is it especially appropriate for Kansas to do this?
Maybe because Kansas is so damn flat it looks like Godzilla stomped everything that was once there into the ground. Get it? "Footsteps of Godzilla?" You see, his footsteps from his stomping...ah, forget it.
That entire submission was a little hard to understand. I'm not sure it was meant to claim there was any particular reason why it should be held in Kansas. Maybe we're both too dense to figure it out...
GMD
Yes, that's the list. Funny thing about it, though...
There are advertisements available on the Internet which show clips of each of the monsters. Minilla, the much-hated "Son of Godzilla" in the awful G-films of the 60s, is not shown. A monster that is shown, however, is GINO -- the nickname given to the Hollywood Godzilla (Godzilla In Name Only). So this leads to an interesting idea: is Toho going to refer to the Hollywood Godzilla as Minilla in "Godzilla Final Wars?" That would be an incredible "fuck you" to the bastards at Tri-Star who took Japan's most pervasive contribution to world culture and turned it into a brainless, typical Hollywood summer blockbuster.
Perhaps it is too much to hope for. But consider these facts. First, Toho has already said this is going to be the last film for a long time. No need to worry about retribution from offended TriStar studio executives. Second, Toho seems to be making this film as a legitimate thank you to all their fans. The budget for this film is several times larger than in a typical film. What better way to tickle their fans then to mock GINO?
GMD
Actually, the whole title of beer or wine being "healthy" is rediculous. Alcohol is the most damaging food product you can put in your body. It's far worse than trans-fatty acids, artificial ingredients (e.g., pesticides, food coloring), or sugar. I defy you to find any reputable medical researcher who would encourage people to take up drinking for health benefits. You want the health benefits of wine or beer? Eat some grapes instead. You'll get the benefits of the flavonoids without the damaging effects of the alcohol.
Look, I have nothing against alcohol. I love wine and I'm fortunate to live in an area known for exceptional wine growing. But let's not kid ourselves about alcohol being some kind of health food. So put away your low-carb beer and your red wine and drink what you want -- in moderation.
GMD
Hasn't War of the Worlds already been remade about 50,000 times? Independence Day? Signs? Heck, even the old 'V' mini-series was basically the same story.
I'm not sure what you mean by "basically the same story". You mean they all featured mankind trying to repel an alien invasion? Because that's where the similiarites stop. Indepedence Day follows the trials and tribulations of the heros who are going to stop the bad guys. Signs is a focused study on how one family reacts to the threat. "V" examined whether a group of rag-tag freedom fighters could actually win against a technologically-superior advesary. War of the Worlds, on the other hand, largely deals with how society as a whole deals with the invasion. Remember the encounter between the newspaper reporter and the artillary man? Or with the parson and his wife? I think any similiarities between War of the Worlds and the movies you list above is pretty superficial.
GMD
I don't understand why we even bother making movies from books if we are going to change the stories completely.
Oh, come on! That's an easy one! Two words: name recognition. Making a movie is an expensive proposition and is always risky. By co-opting a well-known name and slapping it on their product, the studios already have a built-in market. They can save money on promotion and marketing as well. We saw this a few years ago when Tri-Star took the internationally-known brand-name of Godzilla and slapped it on the front of a movie in which the monster bore little to no resemblance to the real deal.
Never underestimate the power of a brand-name. Remember when we were kids and you just *had* to have Pac-Man on your home console? The fact that the home versions really, really sucked didn't matter all that much? Remember how you were more happy to have a 3rd-rate version of Pac-Man rather than a 1st-rate version of, say, Mousetrap or some other Pac-Man-like maze game? That's what I'm talking about here. So it is with movies as well.
GMD
Actually, the commonly-believed story that there was mass panic was really a newspaper-fueled fantasy. The number of people who actually were scared enough to go ape-shit was quite small. You can read more about the overhyped-hysteria here -- go down halfway on the page until you get to "Book Excerpts, by Prof. David L. Miller".
By the way, the rest of that page has a lot of interesting material on the War of the Worlds broadcast, if you are interested.
GMD
Couldn't you have put in a paragraph or two drawing parallels between this movie and Columbine? Or how it relates to globalism? Your plain vanilla movie review kinda feels naked without you attempting to link it in with current events or society.
GMD