it is fun to make a couple of sandwiches and a flask of coffee, get out of the house, get into the car, drive somewhere you've never been, play with the GPS for awhile, sit down, eat sandwiches, drink coffee, head back home.
It's no more stupid than watching football (or soccer as Americans call it) or basketball or any other sporting event.
You go out, walk a little bit, do some exercise. Foreign concepts to/. crowd.:)
The grandparent justification is so lame. The main purpose is to have fun. Everyone has fun in their own way, these guys like to go around and hunt for some mathematical concepts.
I can't understand how someone can draw such a conclusion. That would be akin to finding alien life . Since glaciers are only a couple (or in the order ) of thousands years old, surely no one can claim something like that.
If you are drilling with an unsterile drill, you can easily contaminate the sample, resulting with a positive lab analysis. That's the same problem with lake Vostok where the trouble is keeping the lake uncontaminated during and after the drilling.
Come on? Which bit was particularly bad? The whole thing stank of post-9/11 America but still they managed to paint a more realistic storyline compared to the original one. I didn't like the bit about the succession of power (lowly minister becomes the goddamn president of the USA, ops, pardon, something). It was much more gritty, the destruction of the planets was much more graphic and realistic compared to straffing streets with Cylon ships and plants exploding into water droplets. The bit where only a couple of people would be saved off a planet was realistic but overacted. The bit where they had to leave a large number of ships behind, just to be destroyed almost immediately was incredibly realistic (in WWII atlantic, when a ship was torpedoed, no one was allowed to stop to rescue the stricken crew, they were usually left to die).
It had its faults, I loved BG as a child and it was plain wrong in many was but it was fun and it was fresh.
I didn't like the humanoids though but the Cyclon babe was gorgeous.:)
Well, there was this civil war in the middle of 19th century where the lost part wore gray and then mostly became outlaws (i.e., Jesse James). Does it ring any bells? Does it sound familiar?
At the same time there was this great, vast continent, untamed(!) and at the fringes there were people taming(!) the fringes of the civilization by invading Indians' land.
It's a huge ripoff from a dreamy American history, a history that never happened. It's just not a good story.
The movie can be fun but it won't be good. It won't be a movie to watch again and again in the coming years. It won't be a movie to remember because the series doesn't have these qualities either.
If they invented the whole thing from scratch but still managed to give this backward-feeling, that'd be great. Take Farscape. There are high-tech planets and low-tech planets. There are high-tech ships and low-tech ships but since it is completely new, completely genuine, you actually believe it very easily. You don't have to go over a huge speed-bump of rip-off/unbelievability problem. They didn't have to rip the whole concept from mid-19th century american-dream.
I painstakingly downloaded them, one by one and watched all episodes. I still hate it. I haven't watched just one episode and decided, I forced myself through all episodes and still hated it.
There were some nice touches like the captain not being a perfect (aka Captain "Bloody" Picard) being. I quite like a character who will kill a nasty piece of "bandit" by throwing him into the engines but still the characters just didn't seem real. They were caricatures of the "American Cowboy" dream (which is a complete fabrication itself).
I love Space Opera where the hard SF takes a back seat. If you've read Iain M. Banks you can understand what I mean. That's how a space opera should be laid out, not this cowboy-fantasy crap.
You have the technology to go faster than light. You have the energy to take a ship out of a damn deep gravity well w/o sweating and you don't have the technology to breed cattle from embryos and you have to ship it around in a spaceship which is full of forementioned technology.
Similarly, you have a ship which can go in space but your "cowboy mates" still sit in 1850s kitchen to have their lunch.
No, it isn't strong. This isn't what SF is supposed to be. SF is supposed to be intriquing, interesting, intellectually challenging. Cowboys and especially cows in space isn't (the episode about them buying the ship and getting the crew together).
To be fair, the remake of Battlestar Galactica was pretty good. There were a couple of good story points compared to the original one like the lost colony not existing, betrayals. On the other hand Starbuck shouldn't be a woman. He's a womanizer, not a woman!
I'm pretty happy it's canned. It sucked. As an avid SF fan I hated it. Cowboys-in-space, what a stupid concept. Lifted straight from a fake American dream. Had nothing interesting, no proper stoyline, no intriquing science-fiction element. Nothing. An absolute bore. No wonder it got canned and it should stay that way.
Re:v6 could help solve some net problems
on
IPv6 is Here
·
· Score: 1
In order of magnitutes, ipv6 will address approx 10^15 moles assuming perfect usage of the address space and routing, if I haven't calculated it incorrectly. (10^(38-23)=10^15), which is not that bad.
it's a sad day when no one can understand a simple joke. Well, this is slashdot.:)
Re:v6 could help solve some net problems
on
IPv6 is Here
·
· Score: 1
selective quoting. You should read that as "every [pornographic] image of a child"... On the other hand quite recently pretty mad things happened in UK. Some stupid headmaster/mistress banned the videotaping of christmas nativity play because "peadophiles could have used it". Now that's stupid.
Re:v6 could help solve some net problems
on
IPv6 is Here
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Wait until "smart dust" concept really kicks in. A mole of (6.22x10^23) nanorobots will eat into your IPv6 numberspace pretty easily.
Well, what do you expect? That is its purpose, managing your development. I personally abstracted ant scripts where you can define where the files in properties. Then it is a matter of policy and taste where to put the files.
If you download the maven source, with a minimal set of configuration, you have something going because Maven is used to build Maven.
If you are building a new project, it takes a couple of hours on a sizeable project, if it is quite complex, it will take some time to incorporate everything. You can't build a complicated compile/tool chain without spending some time.
It is more visual compared to ant, more interactive. Ant is just a workhorse, this has some estethics. On the other hand, if you are happy with ant, maven doesn't add anything new.
If you are going to start a new project, give Maven a try. If you already have something mature based on complicated Ant scripts, moving to Maven won't add any value to your development system.
tools.jar is in $JAVA_HOME/lib/tools.jar, if you have the JDK. On the other hand, in many cases you only jave to define JAVA_HOME correctly. If you have JRE, you don't have tools.jar.
What installer? Just download the tarball version of the JDK if you don't want to bother with the rpm package, export JAVA_HOME, then add $JAVA_HOME/bin to your path and Bob's your uncle.
Same thing also works with the Windows version. Most packaged applications behave well with JAVA_HOME env. defined properly. You are ready to roll. Maven and Ant are no different.
you must be kidding. My 1986 Nissan Bluebird easily could do 100 with 1.6L. My 1987 Mazda 626, 2L, could more than that without sweat. our old 1984 Skoda (1.2L) would do 70 mhp after a while.
On the other hand, you are probably an american and you think a 2L car is something pretty small. They aren't.
Now I own a 1991 Volvo 940 (2.3L). Nice car but you still would find it pretty small.
Slashdot Mirror
It's no more stupid than watching football (or soccer as Americans call it) or basketball or any other sporting event.
You go out, walk a little bit, do some exercise. Foreign concepts to /. crowd. :)
The grandparent justification is so lame. The main purpose is to have fun. Everyone has fun in their own way, these guys like to go around and hunt for some mathematical concepts.
I can't understand how someone can draw such a conclusion. That would be akin to finding alien life . Since glaciers are only a couple (or in the order ) of thousands years old, surely no one can claim something like that.
Crap? This is just logic.
sorry, you were asking about unauthorized access, Echo (to my knowledge) was used by its owners only.
http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/Echo.html
Where did I say I hate America? Please stop trolling.
It had its faults, I loved BG as a child and it was plain wrong in many was but it was fun and it was fresh.
I didn't like the humanoids though but the Cyclon babe was gorgeous. :)
At the same time there was this great, vast continent, untamed(!) and at the fringes there were people taming(!) the fringes of the civilization by invading Indians' land.
It's a huge ripoff from a dreamy American history, a history that never happened. It's just not a good story.
The movie can be fun but it won't be good. It won't be a movie to watch again and again in the coming years. It won't be a movie to remember because the series doesn't have these qualities either.
If they invented the whole thing from scratch but still managed to give this backward-feeling, that'd be great. Take Farscape. There are high-tech planets and low-tech planets. There are high-tech ships and low-tech ships but since it is completely new, completely genuine, you actually believe it very easily. You don't have to go over a huge speed-bump of rip-off/unbelievability problem. They didn't have to rip the whole concept from mid-19th century american-dream.
would you be interested in him if he was still a man and preferred men?
Thought not.
There were some nice touches like the captain not being a perfect (aka Captain "Bloody" Picard) being. I quite like a character who will kill a nasty piece of "bandit" by throwing him into the engines but still the characters just didn't seem real. They were caricatures of the "American Cowboy" dream (which is a complete fabrication itself).
I love Space Opera where the hard SF takes a back seat. If you've read Iain M. Banks you can understand what I mean. That's how a space opera should be laid out, not this cowboy-fantasy crap.
Similarly, you have a ship which can go in space but your "cowboy mates" still sit in 1850s kitchen to have their lunch.
It just doesn't work.
No, it isn't strong. This isn't what SF is supposed to be. SF is supposed to be intriquing, interesting, intellectually challenging. Cowboys and especially cows in space isn't (the episode about them buying the ship and getting the crew together).
To be fair, the remake of Battlestar Galactica was pretty good. There were a couple of good story points compared to the original one like the lost colony not existing, betrayals. On the other hand Starbuck shouldn't be a woman. He's a womanizer, not a woman!
I'm pretty happy it's canned. It sucked. As an avid SF fan I hated it. Cowboys-in-space, what a stupid concept. Lifted straight from a fake American dream. Had nothing interesting, no proper stoyline, no intriquing science-fiction element. Nothing. An absolute bore. No wonder it got canned and it should stay that way.
it's a sad day when no one can understand a simple joke. Well, this is slashdot. :)
Damn, has it been so long since I graduated?
You must be out of your mind. Get gvim 6 installed onto your XP box and be happy. If you insist on spending money, use XMLSpy.
selective quoting. You should read that as "every [pornographic] image of a child"... On the other hand quite recently pretty mad things happened in UK. Some stupid headmaster/mistress banned the videotaping of christmas nativity play because "peadophiles could have used it". Now that's stupid.
Wait until "smart dust" concept really kicks in. A mole of (6.22x10^23) nanorobots will eat into your IPv6 numberspace pretty easily.
Well, what do you expect? That is its purpose, managing your development. I personally abstracted ant scripts where you can define where the files in properties. Then it is a matter of policy and taste where to put the files.
If you are building a new project, it takes a couple of hours on a sizeable project, if it is quite complex, it will take some time to incorporate everything. You can't build a complicated compile/tool chain without spending some time.
It is more visual compared to ant, more interactive. Ant is just a workhorse, this has some estethics. On the other hand, if you are happy with ant, maven doesn't add anything new.
If you are going to start a new project, give Maven a try. If you already have something mature based on complicated Ant scripts, moving to Maven won't add any value to your development system.
tools.jar is in $JAVA_HOME/lib/tools.jar, if you have the JDK. On the other hand, in many cases you only jave to define JAVA_HOME correctly. If you have JRE, you don't have tools.jar.
Same thing also works with the Windows version. Most packaged applications behave well with JAVA_HOME env. defined properly. You are ready to roll. Maven and Ant are no different.
That's why I'm driving a 1991 model Volvo...
On the other hand, you are probably an american and you think a 2L car is something pretty small. They aren't.
Now I own a 1991 Volvo 940 (2.3L). Nice car but you still would find it pretty small.