I don't think the majority of those involved in these bannings are out to create a generation of drones. Some, I would not argue, are. Many of the banners or ban supporters are out only to eliminate ideas that scare them, with no designs more complex than that. Some (perhaps most) are likely operating on the delusion that they need to decide what's best for everyone else's children.
Science Fiction novels, like those of other genres, tend to have a hard time cracking into education(as they do in many other places). There tends to be a general discrimination of sorts against genre fiction(check out non-genre-specific literary magazines, and see how many of them print genre fiction).
I remember reading some genre pieces in high school and before, but they were few and far between. One Western piece that I can remember. Unfortunately no Noir. One or two Sci-fi pieces... one about life on a terraformed Venus, and another being Tom Godwin and the darned "The Cold Equations". Oh, and a short story by Asimov that I remember finding boring as hell.:)
Meh... I guess, personally, I don't have many complaints about my education. Then again, I don't know how much of that actually took place in school.
You make some very good points, and I agree with most of the points you make. I think I either disagree with you about the movie, or misunderstand you, however.
A story on paper, and a story performed are more different than most people know. They are not just slightly removed from one another, but are completely different animals -- that's why some devices that are helpful and natural in books make movies drag, and the reason that some devices employed in movies make books seem amateurish.
My experience with the LotR books was different from my experience with the movies. I liked both, but they are not the same. I suppose the best analogy would be that they are like two different retellings of the same events.
Furthermore, and most importantly, when you read a story, you are engaged and involved in it. It is a necessity of the medium -- if you do not invest yourself into the story, not only are you unlikely to retain anything from it, but you're probably not going to get through the story in the first place. A movie, on the other hand, requires only that you sit nearby -- it will feed your eyes and ears(and if William Castle was involved, possibly a few more sensory organs) without any effort on your part. That doesn't make either a lesser medium, merely different. Both have something to offer their consumers.
RadarVision isn't the company developing this particular device, and neither is Time Domain. This company's name is Camero, and their website is http://www.camero-tech.com/. Not much there though. Basically, they have a statement of what the device is supposed to do, what some applications could be, and a link to a press release about five million dollars in funding they've secured(and who pledged it to them).
The Camero device is different from the RadarVision/Time Domain one, in that the latter must be used against the wall, and delivers only information as to location, whereas the former can be used up to around twenty meters away from the wall, and is supposed to deliver a picture somewhat on the level of an ultrasound.
For something to be libel in the U.S., it must be: a lie made with malicious intent, viewed by at least three people. That much I am sure of... if there was anything else about it stated in my journalism class, I've forgotten it.
Anyway, "malicious intent" is quite the rub. It is essential that this be proven, but, as one might imagine, is rather hard to do. One has to prove that the alleged libeller knew his statement was false, and made it to do harm.
Besides, if, as is likely in most cases under the law, you don't succeed in the suit, all you've succeeded in doing is giving the alleged libeller quite a bit of publicity, and probably grounds for countersuit.
> This might turn out to be a very interesting chapter in future > history books. I still have hope it's all going to work out for > the better though...
I have few arguments for anything you said in that post, and in this last statement we are most heartily agreed.
(Honestly, I think most people in the debate seem to lose sight of the fact that most people in the debate want for everything to work out for the best, and so lock in their positions and fight the evilerals and vilervatives. End off topic minirant.)
Look at the word "own" as it pertains to investors in the stock market. Some yokel buys one share of Finkel Widget. He now owns Finkel Widget -- one share of it. What does this give him the rights to do? Cast one vote in shareholder meetings, and complain in them, and that's about it. He has a different type of ownership than the bruiser that has forty percent of the stock.
It's like the word "love." People love each other. People also love cars, foods, computers and dancing. Different, but related, concepts under the umbrella of one word.
So when you experience something, you do take a certain kind of ownership in it. You did not put in money, like our yokel investor, but invested your time instead. Your time, and perhaps your emotions. On something like a movie, or a building you walk by every day on the way to work, this gives you one very small share in the object. You bought your rights to complain, but nobody has to listen.
(many thanks to Gabe at Penny Arcade for having that wonderful thought on the word "love")
> So if those 19 Saudis and Egyptians attacked us, why did we
> not start a war with Egypt or Saudi Arabia?
>
> Unfortunately most Americans HAVE forgotten that Iraq had
> nothing to do with 9/11...
We did not go to war with Egypt or Saudi Arabia, because those who perpetrated 9/11 were not there to represent their nationalities. They were there to represent a certain brand of Islam. Subscribers to that brand are not isolated to one or two countries.
The possibility/wisdom of using Iraq strategically against the perpetraitors of 9/11 is debatable. You might have very well been right when you said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Now, I think, might be a different story.
I used to say stuff like that... then I realized I was deluding myself.
All the other, more important characteristics of the current conflict are in keeping with the definition of what a war is. Before there was a Constitution or a Congress, there was a war.
I know we're not supposed to make "hear hear" posts, but that was spot on. Thank you, thank you for not letting a humourless dink stand without appropriate challenge.
*honk*
Well, the signing maybe... lot's of people named x, though. Then there are those that just sign gobbledegook. Some of those don't even use a real alphabet.
I could see the hardback edition though. Really long mantle starting with "A-Aardvark".
You say that the problems on Earth can be solved with present technology, and that the obstacles to the solution of those problems are social and political. Fine.
So how would pulling the people working on the space program off of it untie the social and political knots?
You don't want an automechanic building your house, and you don't want an architect fixing your car--why, then, do you want to force rocket scientists to muck about in politics?
I claim not that only politicians should work in politics, but that people forced into fields that they have no passion for don't do much, if anything, for causing progress in those fields. Architects can enjoy messing about with cars, and being very able mechanics, and mechanics can love the design and construction of buildings along with cars, but most do not.
For example, the theory of continental drift was proposed by a meteorologist. As evidence has panned out, he was right, but do you really want Al Roker studying the fault lines near you?
I had a sleep study done once. Figured out from that, I think, that I had sleep apnea. Of course, that was was about a decade ago, and my problems got so severe that I was "sleeping" most of the hours out of the day, so I don't remember a whole heck of a lot about it.
Anyway, I'd stay away from sleeping pills until you actually know what's wrong with your sleeping. See your doctor, and consider a sleep study if you think its warranted. Best to find a cure after you better know what ails you.
If there's an impending rock-slide, then the rover gets crushed. Remember that whatever the scientists in control see is around five minutes old, and that any directions of avoidance take an addition five minutes or so to reach the rover.
Besides, I don't believe they're letting the rover choose its own targets, nor did they give it power to override an imperative command.
The "Kate and Leopold" DVD has something similar. There are one or two story points that the studio wanted dropped for the theatrical release, and the DVD has both versions of the film.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, it also has places like Iran and Syria...
I don't think the majority of those involved in these bannings are out to create a generation of drones. Some, I would not argue, are. Many of the banners or ban supporters are out only to eliminate ideas that scare them, with no designs more complex than that. Some (perhaps most) are likely operating on the delusion that they need to decide what's best for everyone else's children.
*honk*
There are four lights!
Science Fiction novels, like those of other genres, tend to have a hard time cracking into education(as they do in many other places). There tends to be a general discrimination of sorts against genre fiction(check out non-genre-specific literary magazines, and see how many of them print genre fiction).
:)
I remember reading some genre pieces in high school and before, but they were few and far between. One Western piece that I can remember. Unfortunately no Noir. One or two Sci-fi pieces... one about life on a terraformed Venus, and another being Tom Godwin and the darned "The Cold Equations". Oh, and a short story by Asimov that I remember finding boring as hell.
Meh... I guess, personally, I don't have many complaints about my education. Then again, I don't know how much of that actually took place in school.
*honk*
You make some very good points, and I agree with most of the points you make. I think I either disagree with you about the movie, or misunderstand you, however.
A story on paper, and a story performed are more different than most people know. They are not just slightly removed from one another, but are completely different animals -- that's why some devices that are helpful and natural in books make movies drag, and the reason that some devices employed in movies make books seem amateurish.
My experience with the LotR books was different from my experience with the movies. I liked both, but they are not the same. I suppose the best analogy would be that they are like two different retellings of the same events.
Furthermore, and most importantly, when you read a story, you are engaged and involved in it. It is a necessity of the medium -- if you do not invest yourself into the story, not only are you unlikely to retain anything from it, but you're probably not going to get through the story in the first place. A movie, on the other hand, requires only that you sit nearby -- it will feed your eyes and ears(and if William Castle was involved, possibly a few more sensory organs) without any effort on your part. That doesn't make either a lesser medium, merely different. Both have something to offer their consumers.
And... I think I got carried away.
*honk*
RadarVision isn't the company developing this particular device, and neither is Time Domain. This company's name is Camero, and their website is http://www.camero-tech.com/. Not much there though. Basically, they have a statement of what the device is supposed to do, what some applications could be, and a link to a press release about five million dollars in funding they've secured(and who pledged it to them).
The Camero device is different from the RadarVision/Time Domain one, in that the latter must be used against the wall, and delivers only information as to location, whereas the former can be used up to around twenty meters away from the wall, and is supposed to deliver a picture somewhat on the level of an ultrasound.
*honk*
For something to be libel in the U.S., it must be: a lie made with malicious intent, viewed by at least three people. That much I am sure of... if there was anything else about it stated in my journalism class, I've forgotten it.
Anyway, "malicious intent" is quite the rub. It is essential that this be proven, but, as one might imagine, is rather hard to do. One has to prove that the alleged libeller knew his statement was false, and made it to do harm.
Besides, if, as is likely in most cases under the law, you don't succeed in the suit, all you've succeeded in doing is giving the alleged libeller quite a bit of publicity, and probably grounds for countersuit.
*honk*
Or, you know, you could always just pay attention to yourself.
*honk*
> This might turn out to be a very interesting chapter in future
> history books. I still have hope it's all going to work out for
> the better though...
I have few arguments for anything you said in that post, and in this last statement we are most heartily agreed.
(Honestly, I think most people in the debate seem to lose sight of the fact that most people in the debate want for everything to work out for the best, and so lock in their positions and fight the evilerals and vilervatives. End off topic minirant.)
*honk*
One of my up mod points, that is. Brilliant post. Everything I was going to say, plus a bit more, all eloquently put.
:)
Thank you for writing that.
*honk*
Look at the word "own" as it pertains to investors in the stock market. Some yokel buys one share of Finkel Widget. He now owns Finkel Widget -- one share of it. What does this give him the rights to do? Cast one vote in shareholder meetings, and complain in them, and that's about it. He has a different type of ownership than the bruiser that has forty percent of the stock.
It's like the word "love." People love each other. People also love cars, foods, computers and dancing. Different, but related, concepts under the umbrella of one word.
So when you experience something, you do take a certain kind of ownership in it. You did not put in money, like our yokel investor, but invested your time instead. Your time, and perhaps your emotions. On something like a movie, or a building you walk by every day on the way to work, this gives you one very small share in the object. You bought your rights to complain, but nobody has to listen.
(many thanks to Gabe at Penny Arcade for having that wonderful thought on the word "love")
*honk*
Adult Swim runs the entire block twice(once from eleven to two, repeated from two till five).
And it does indeed help not missing shows... though they aren't on fridays.
*honk*
> So if those 19 Saudis and Egyptians attacked us, why did we
> not start a war with Egypt or Saudi Arabia?
>
> Unfortunately most Americans HAVE forgotten that Iraq had
> nothing to do with 9/11...
We did not go to war with Egypt or Saudi Arabia, because those who perpetrated 9/11 were not there to represent their nationalities. They were there to represent a certain brand of Islam. Subscribers to that brand are not isolated to one or two countries.
The possibility/wisdom of using Iraq strategically against the perpetraitors of 9/11 is debatable. You might have very well been right when you said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Now, I think, might be a different story.
*honk*
I used to say stuff like that... then I realized I was deluding myself.
All the other, more important characteristics of the current conflict are in keeping with the definition of what a war is. Before there was a Constitution or a Congress, there was a war.
*honk*
If you're looking to play Windows Media files, you could try VLC.
I'm using version 0.6.2, and have few complaints. Not sure how it falls in the bloat scale... but it isn't WMP.
*honk*
I know we're not supposed to make "hear hear" posts, but that was spot on. Thank you, thank you for not letting a humourless dink stand without appropriate challenge. *honk*
I think the tin foil hat and AC status might have been a tip off...
*honken*
Good point, because French is the lingua franca. Wait, that's not right...
*honken*
Well, the signing maybe... lot's of people named x, though. Then there are those that just sign gobbledegook. Some of those don't even use a real alphabet.
I could see the hardback edition though. Really long mantle starting with "A-Aardvark".
*honken*
You say that the problems on Earth can be solved with present technology, and that the obstacles to the solution of those problems are social and political. Fine.
So how would pulling the people working on the space program off of it untie the social and political knots?
You don't want an automechanic building your house, and you don't want an architect fixing your car--why, then, do you want to force rocket scientists to muck about in politics?
I claim not that only politicians should work in politics, but that people forced into fields that they have no passion for don't do much, if anything, for causing progress in those fields. Architects can enjoy messing about with cars, and being very able mechanics, and mechanics can love the design and construction of buildings along with cars, but most do not.
For example, the theory of continental drift was proposed by a meteorologist. As evidence has panned out, he was right, but do you really want Al Roker studying the fault lines near you?
*honk*
Dammit! When will people learn to appreciate the danger of Gordon Lightfoot?
Why! Why! Khan!!!
*honk*
I had a sleep study done once. Figured out from that, I think, that I had sleep apnea. Of course, that was was about a decade ago, and my problems got so severe that I was "sleeping" most of the hours out of the day, so I don't remember a whole heck of a lot about it.
Anyway, I'd stay away from sleeping pills until you actually know what's wrong with your sleeping. See your doctor, and consider a sleep study if you think its warranted. Best to find a cure after you better know what ails you.
*honks*
If there's an impending rock-slide, then the rover gets crushed. Remember that whatever the scientists in control see is around five minutes old, and that any directions of avoidance take an addition five minutes or so to reach the rover.
Besides, I don't believe they're letting the rover choose its own targets, nor did they give it power to override an imperative command.
*honk*
Was the cook named "Elzar?"
Just wondering...
*honk*
The "Kate and Leopold" DVD has something similar. There are one or two story points that the studio wanted dropped for the theatrical release, and the DVD has both versions of the film.
*honk*