One of the keys to Bladerunner's look was visual density. I recall a quote from one of the set decorators that they had emptied prop houses and junkyards for miles around to get the street scenes ready. When Ridley looked at it he said "That's a good start."
Movies that try to imitate the Bladerunner look fail because they lack the commitment and/or resources to achieve that same visual density. They end up looking like sets.
Alien was like a test run for Bladerunner's set design. The command area is very dense, control panels are studded with screens and controls, as well as personal items, signs that the area is in use and has been for some time.
After seeing Bladerunner in the theater when it first came out all other movies I see will be compared to it, and very few have come close to the strange combination of realism and science fiction, two words that should in a sense be mutually exclusive, but Ridley Scott brought them together better than anyone before or since.
I'm sorry, I don't believe in an espionage system without limits, laws or oversight. I understand that for you the world is a very frightening place where any form of espionage can be explained away, but I don't see things that way.
Yes, some spying is necessary. Part of the game that governments have always played with each other. But espionage at all levels, for any purpose is not alright with me. Those are limits we impose on ourselves internally, based on our own ideas, not those of other countries. It will never be ok with me for my government to lower itself to the petty level of other countries just because they too are doing it.
I don't think it's unreasonable for a foreign government to suspect that our government is not currently obeying any laws, morals, or ethics where snooping on electronic information is concerned.
Even when laws are obeyed they differ from country to country, and one country might not appreciate the latitude (or lack of it) in the way another country handles information and espionage.
I know some might herald this as proof of progress, but I believe this is proof of CCP's utter failure to manage this problem. This should be completely unnecessary, but they've dug themselves such a hole by continually lying about their internal responses.
Their inability to control their own employees is pathetic. I've played alot of online games, (AO, EQ, SWG, CoH, LotrO, DDO) and have never seen a need for something like this.
I spend a fair amount of time at the HardOCP forums when I'm looking for PC info. It is one of the most virulently anti mac websites I've encountered in the last ten years. It is rare for any post concerning the mac to receive anything other than a tidal wave of antimac troll posts.
There are plenty of intelligent people over there, but when it comes to the Mac they behave like a bunch of fucking baboons, and this "review" should be taken with a very large grain of salt.
"I think Ubuntu Linux is definitely ready for almost anyone with a Windows system who is tired of havig their computer infested with spyware and viruses. It is also a way to avoid Microsoft's "activation" demands. It's free! It's good! It works!"
Played my first arcade game in 1972
on
Videogames Turn 40
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I was just a little boy but there was a "Computer Space" arcade game at the Target my family went to in Oklahoma City. Most people just walked right past it but I was fascinated by it, even though I was barely tall enough to press the buttons.
And here we are in 2007 and video games still catch my interest....:)
I first saw an emoticon when I started using Quantum Link (AOL before it became AOL.) I was in a chat room and was confused because now and then someone would end their sentence with ":D"
Eventually I had to ask and someone wrote "look at it sideways."
Using a few basic emoticons has become as natural to me as regular punctuation marks, and just like regular punctuation when it is used responsibly it clarifies and enhances communication.//misses his C64///with the BIG ol' 300 baud Vicmodem///:D
Of course they are not that bad. They are human beings, and like all human beings some will be good at their job and some won't. Some will be nice, some won't.
It's idiotic to classify them as some kind of vermin. We all have a job to do and how we do it is based on our individual traits, not the position.
I was doing I.T. support for a 400 person call center. In the server room there was a Big Red Button that was very clearly labeled "EMERGENCY POWER SHUT-OFF" near one of the sets of double-doors.
A technician from U.S. Worst had finished his work in the server room and on his way out he hit the Big Red Button thinking that would open the doors, like at a hospital.
Hilarity ensued.
Later that day I printed out several mock "Big Red Buttons" on sheets of paper to use as decoys next time the tech had to visit.
There's a big difference between a hoax and a publicity stunt that is mistaken as possible terrorism. If someone attempts to fool people into believing a terrorist activity is in progress, that's a terrorist hoax.
If someone does something completely unrelated that is somehow interpreted as terrorist activity, that is not a terrorist hoax. It's a mess, yes, but not a terrorist hoax.
The intention and execution is what makes the difference.
I found that to be an odd little opinion piece. It has something of the "chicken/egg" to it what with blaming users for not speaking up stridently enough... about the problems they have with the OS that... they didn't speak up stridently enough about?
I think that most OSes receive PLENTY of feedback, strident and otherwise about perceived flaws and issues.
This kind of "crime" should be covered under the TOS of the service. The only time this should get escalated is if it meets the criteria of real world criminal code covering harassment via electronic means, such as phone calls, email, etc.
This should not ever be considered an analogue to real world rape. That would be a mockery of the real world crime.
I would not install unlicensed software at work. If my boss insisted on it I would ask him to put it on paper with the specifics of the software name, the date, and that he knew we did not have a license. If he signs it taking full responsibility I'd go right ahead.
Part of my job as I.T. Manager has been to make my boss aware of the liability of using pirated software, and of allowing employees to use pirating software like Limewire, etc. If they insist on doing things that expose them to liability it won't be because they didn't know it was a bad idea.:)
It does not free him from the responsibility of writing an accurate headline instead of one he has written to deliberately misrepresent the content, his frequent approach. For a recent example check out this whopper: "HP Stops Selling Printers, Starts Selling Prints." (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/19/16920 8)
Of course HP is not going to stop selling printers. But why let that stop him from writing a headline to make the story seem far more significant than it really is? Instead of letting the story stand on its own merit he needs to cook it.
And no, I'm not going to filter out his stories because I reserve the right to challenge him every time he does it, watering down one of my favorite websites with his bungled content.
Zonk, your persistent use of misleading headlines to stir up the posters is unprofessional. This is only the latest in a long string.
Your headline says "2012 Olympics Security to be Chosen by Sponsorship" and with security such an issue of course the reader will at first believe that it is PHYSICAL security in question.
You know damn well this is not the case. I am just one of the many who want you to start showing a little class and write headlines that accurately reflect the story, not the inflammatory fiction that you would prefer.
This is a technology site and this is a technology story. To fancy that it is anything else is an extravagance on your part, unprofessional and in the end, juvenile.
Business goes to those who spend the most money. It is not based on ability. Why? Because there is no accountability on either end of the process. Unless a company is threatened with the possibility of personal punishment for corporate stupidity then there are only rewards for this kind of system. If a business suffers or fails due to this kind of dumbness those responsible will just get a job somewhere else and leave the mess to someone else.
I stand by my post. I believe the vast majority of P2P is for stealing music/movies. Not all of it, of course, but most of it.
Downloading a movie to avoid paying for it is stealing.
This does NOT mean that I think the RIAA should be allowed to do their hideous witch-hunt. There's a big difference between someone stealing a song and someone stealing a car. They should not be treated the same way.
As an I.T. Manager it's my job to protect my employer's interests, and one of those interests is not getting attacked legally over file sharing violations. It's the same for the university.
This claim that universities should allow all activities of any kind, at any time in the name of 'freedom' is idiotic. One thing you can learn at university: you cannot do anything you feel like without consequences. Obliging the university to use their own resources to support your need to steal music is not expanding anyone's rights, it's just selfish.
Universities are not obliged to support theft. When you download copyrighted materials at home it's completely your responsibility. When you do it on someone else's infrastructure they share the liability.
A university blocking file sharing/file theft is not curtailing freedom, they are protecting their resources. It's no different than a business preventing their employees from using the network to steal multimedia: they have an obligation to protect their resources, and stealing is not a protected freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
I've played all three of those games and never heard of this guild.
One of the keys to Bladerunner's look was visual density. I recall a quote from one of the set decorators that they had emptied prop houses and junkyards for miles around to get the street scenes ready. When Ridley looked at it he said "That's a good start."
Movies that try to imitate the Bladerunner look fail because they lack the commitment and/or resources to achieve that same visual density. They end up looking like sets.
Alien was like a test run for Bladerunner's set design. The command area is very dense, control panels are studded with screens and controls, as well as personal items, signs that the area is in use and has been for some time.
After seeing Bladerunner in the theater when it first came out all other movies I see will be compared to it, and very few have come close to the strange combination of realism and science fiction, two words that should in a sense be mutually exclusive, but Ridley Scott brought them together better than anyone before or since.
I'm sorry, I don't believe in an espionage system without limits, laws or oversight. I understand that for you the world is a very frightening place where any form of espionage can be explained away, but I don't see things that way.
Yes, some spying is necessary. Part of the game that governments have always played with each other. But espionage at all levels, for any purpose is not alright with me. Those are limits we impose on ourselves internally, based on our own ideas, not those of other countries. It will never be ok with me for my government to lower itself to the petty level of other countries just because they too are doing it.
I don't think it's unreasonable for a foreign government to suspect that our government is not currently obeying any laws, morals, or ethics where snooping on electronic information is concerned.
Even when laws are obeyed they differ from country to country, and one country might not appreciate the latitude (or lack of it) in the way another country handles information and espionage.
My apologies, I played EvE for months, just left it off my list. :) //Gallente all the way mo-fos!
I know some might herald this as proof of progress, but I believe this is proof of CCP's utter failure to manage this problem. This should be completely unnecessary, but they've dug themselves such a hole by continually lying about their internal responses.
Their inability to control their own employees is pathetic. I've played alot of online games, (AO, EQ, SWG, CoH, LotrO, DDO) and have never seen a need for something like this.
I spend a fair amount of time at the HardOCP forums when I'm looking for PC info. It is one of the most virulently anti mac websites I've encountered in the last ten years. It is rare for any post concerning the mac to receive anything other than a tidal wave of antimac troll posts.
There are plenty of intelligent people over there, but when it comes to the Mac they behave like a bunch of fucking baboons, and this "review" should be taken with a very large grain of salt.
Have they outlined how much the developers plan to interfere with the players? It would be nice to see a timeline!
From the final page:
"I think Ubuntu Linux is definitely ready for almost anyone with a Windows system who is tired of havig their computer infested with spyware and viruses. It is also a way to avoid Microsoft's "activation" demands. It's free! It's good! It works!"
I was just a little boy but there was a "Computer Space" arcade game at the Target my family went to in Oklahoma City. Most people just walked right past it but I was fascinated by it, even though I was barely tall enough to press the buttons.
:)
And here we are in 2007 and video games still catch my interest....
... I think that word does not mean what you think it means....
... can't stop now!
//misses his C64 ///with the BIG ol' 300 baud Vicmodem ///:D
I first saw an emoticon when I started using Quantum Link (AOL before it became AOL.) I was in a chat room and was confused because now and then someone would end their sentence with ":D"
Eventually I had to ask and someone wrote "look at it sideways."
Using a few basic emoticons has become as natural to me as regular punctuation marks, and just like regular punctuation when it is used responsibly it clarifies and enhances communication.
Sorry. It's a derisive nickname for the telephone company "U.S. West."
Of course they are not that bad. They are human beings, and like all human beings some will be good at their job and some won't. Some will be nice, some won't.
It's idiotic to classify them as some kind of vermin. We all have a job to do and how we do it is based on our individual traits, not the position.
I was doing I.T. support for a 400 person call center. In the server room there was a Big Red Button that was very clearly labeled "EMERGENCY POWER SHUT-OFF" near one of the sets of double-doors.
A technician from U.S. Worst had finished his work in the server room and on his way out he hit the Big Red Button thinking that would open the doors, like at a hospital.
Hilarity ensued.
Later that day I printed out several mock "Big Red Buttons" on sheets of paper to use as decoys next time the tech had to visit.
There's a big difference between a hoax and a publicity stunt that is mistaken as possible terrorism. If someone attempts to fool people into believing a terrorist activity is in progress, that's a terrorist hoax.
If someone does something completely unrelated that is somehow interpreted as terrorist activity, that is not a terrorist hoax. It's a mess, yes, but not a terrorist hoax.
The intention and execution is what makes the difference.
I found that to be an odd little opinion piece. It has something of the "chicken/egg" to it what with blaming users for not speaking up stridently enough... about the problems they have with the OS that... they didn't speak up stridently enough about?
I think that most OSes receive PLENTY of feedback, strident and otherwise about perceived flaws and issues.
This article is basically content free.
This kind of "crime" should be covered under the TOS of the service. The only time this should get escalated is if it meets the criteria of real world criminal code covering harassment via electronic means, such as phone calls, email, etc.
This should not ever be considered an analogue to real world rape. That would be a mockery of the real world crime.
I would not install unlicensed software at work. If my boss insisted on it I would ask him to put it on paper with the specifics of the software name, the date, and that he knew we did not have a license. If he signs it taking full responsibility I'd go right ahead.
:)
Part of my job as I.T. Manager has been to make my boss aware of the liability of using pirated software, and of allowing employees to use pirating software like Limewire, etc. If they insist on doing things that expose them to liability it won't be because they didn't know it was a bad idea.
I support Macs for a living and haven't encountered this one. My own iBook G4 is about three years old now without any failures, but that's just one.
Is there a place where we can see some numbers on how widespread these failures are?
It does not free him from the responsibility of writing an accurate headline instead of one he has written to deliberately misrepresent the content, his frequent approach. For a recent example check out this whopper: "HP Stops Selling Printers, Starts Selling Prints." (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/19/16920 8)
Of course HP is not going to stop selling printers. But why let that stop him from writing a headline to make the story seem far more significant than it really is? Instead of letting the story stand on its own merit he needs to cook it.
And no, I'm not going to filter out his stories because I reserve the right to challenge him every time he does it, watering down one of my favorite websites with his bungled content.
Zonk, your persistent use of misleading headlines to stir up the posters is unprofessional. This is only the latest in a long string.
Your headline says "2012 Olympics Security to be Chosen by Sponsorship" and with security such an issue of course the reader will at first believe that it is PHYSICAL security in question.
You know damn well this is not the case. I am just one of the many who want you to start showing a little class and write headlines that accurately reflect the story, not the inflammatory fiction that you would prefer.
This is a technology site and this is a technology story. To fancy that it is anything else is an extravagance on your part, unprofessional and in the end, juvenile.
Business goes to those who spend the most money. It is not based on ability. Why? Because there is no accountability on either end of the process. Unless a company is threatened with the possibility of personal punishment for corporate stupidity then there are only rewards for this kind of system. If a business suffers or fails due to this kind of dumbness those responsible will just get a job somewhere else and leave the mess to someone else.
I stand by my post. I believe the vast majority of P2P is for stealing music/movies. Not all of it, of course, but most of it.
Downloading a movie to avoid paying for it is stealing.
This does NOT mean that I think the RIAA should be allowed to do their hideous witch-hunt. There's a big difference between someone stealing a song and someone stealing a car. They should not be treated the same way.
As an I.T. Manager it's my job to protect my employer's interests, and one of those interests is not getting attacked legally over file sharing violations. It's the same for the university.
This claim that universities should allow all activities of any kind, at any time in the name of 'freedom' is idiotic. One thing you can learn at university: you cannot do anything you feel like without consequences. Obliging the university to use their own resources to support your need to steal music is not expanding anyone's rights, it's just selfish.
Universities are not obliged to support theft. When you download copyrighted materials at home it's completely your responsibility. When you do it on someone else's infrastructure they share the liability.
A university blocking file sharing/file theft is not curtailing freedom, they are protecting their resources. It's no different than a business preventing their employees from using the network to steal multimedia: they have an obligation to protect their resources, and stealing is not a protected freedom.