Because I don't feel like dropping $700 on the glorified space heater that is the PS3? Or because I was busy playing XBox and Gamecube and PC games instead of PS2 until recently? That's funny. You're funny.
They had blinking lights, but they were barely bigger than a piece of paper. And if they put them on the support column for a bridge, that means UNDER the bridge, which means nobody's really gonna see them but some homeless people. (Unless I misunderstood where they had been placed, which is certainly possible).
I just think they got a lot of free press through this "bomb squad" mistake, and TFA reads like half a press release for ATHF.
Sorry... meant Chris Nolan, not Chris Carter. And say what you will, at least Guy Ritchie had a style, and it was pretty fun. So what if people immediately started copying him? The OP was saying that mainstream movies don't push individuality and a "personal brand", and he's a good example of them doing so.
This is true of many main-stream films, but not of the majority of movies that come out. Charlie Kaufman writes amazingly unique movies, as do Aaron Sorkin and Daron Aronofsky; Terry Gilliam and Paul Thomas Anderson direct artistic masterpieces, and Chris Carter is fast gaining a reputation for interesting touches, as did Guy Ritchie in the late 90s. Also, certain actors tend to work in very interesting films; Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Al Pacino, Tom Cruise before he went nutso, all had a tendency to pick very interesting films. Even moreso in independent film, creativity and personal touches are a staple, not an afterthought.
It's certainly possible to see nothing but mindless entertainment when you go to the movies, but it takes very little effort to find something a lot more satisfying if you live near any decent-sized city.
Who's going to see a tiny little add posted on a bridge's support column? I think they did this so the bomb squad would come, and they'd get all this free press.
I agree with you completely. Letting the individual citizens vote directly for federal senate was the worst mistake in the history of this country. It essentially invalidates local politics in the minds of a lot of people, because they figure they already voted for someone who "outranks" state representatives, therefor they don't need to care. We've gone from a system of independent states which were more like individual nations in a loose alliance, to one large state with funny names for the different sections.
I have no doubt that the consoles will continue to sell like crazy. Right now, you've got sites that track possible locations that might have the Wii near you, and people camping out before stores open. How many consumers are willing to do that? I would guess less than 20%. Which means that there's an even bigger untapped market of people who are waiting until they can stroll into a local store of their choice at 5 PM and still find one on the shelves (I'm one of them). I doubt their sales will be slowing anytime soon.
This is just ridiculous. The popular pages are popular BECAUSE they tend to be the most likely to contain the answer to your search. Presumably when you do a search, you want results that have the most information about the search term, and the popular sites likely do. If they're topping the list but they're really not relevant, you're not providing enough specifics in your search term.
Even better, if you just get two copies of the same file from the service and run a diff on them, you should be able to recover all or most of the stripped data, giving you an untraceable version. This is yet another bad idea that won't stop actual pirates. The most it might catch is some non-technical individual who is dumb enough to share a watermarked copy on Kazaa.
so it could be considered that this feature wasn't delivered until six months later, so they shouldn't be able to count the income from that feature until it is delivered.
Why not? The customer paid for the product in the state it was in when they bought it. If the company chooses to turn on a new feature later, why shouldn't they be able to? I understand that there may be legal reasons behind this, but it strikes me as particularly stupid.
certainly a fair question. I could see it being handy to have it work out automagically as in the Tubes thing... not saying it's something I'm actually planning to use, though...
This could actually be useful... it's sort of combining BitTorrent and RSS. You subscribe to a content channel, and as people with publishing permissions add content, it updates on your local system. Also tracks changes to existing documents, so it could be good for collaboration, although any serious use would likely want a version control system that supports conflict merges. For the average non-techie, though, this could be pretty handy.
It's a shame they're aiming for such a tech-illiterate user base, though... their site doesn't seem to mention whether they do BitTorrent-style bandwidth sharing to distribute content.
Oddly enough, it's usually the people that love driving big heavy cars that also bitch like hell when anyone suggests making them actually pay for ALL the resources they're using up in the process... wonder if the GP is one of them...
The counterpoint to your argument is: Apple. Apple is very different from Windows. It won't run any of the same applications (you can buy some of the same apps altered to work on a Mac, but your old CDs won't work). People still buy them. Ubuntu is about as easy to use as a Mac. So give people some legitimate reasons to try it (it's free, it's more secure, it'll work better on an old computer than Vista, it supports community involvement, open standards, and Freedom (tm)), and there's no reason it can't remain a successful niche market, and even grow.
He also neglects to mention that the "complaints per customer" number at that particular restaurant involved in the scalding lawsuit was much, much higher than that national average. If I remember correctly, that one franchise had been keeping their coffee hotter than most other McDonalds did, which led to this problem in the first place, and had received complaints not only from customers, but from employees injured as a result. Still chose not to change their practices, which led to them losing this suit.
This assumes that communism is the same as a flat-out wealth redistribution scheme, which is ridiculous. There's nothing in communism that says that one person can't get paid more than another because he works harder. All it says is that the ownership of some very key things (natural resources, public lands, etc) should be taken back by the community as a whole, because it should never have been "sold" to a private individual in the first place.
No, not majority shareholder. Any shareholder. Although probably the court will take you a lot more seriously if you own "significant" numbers of shares, with significant depending on the company in question. I would guess that by the 5% range they will be taking you very, very seriously.
Ah, but that assumes that the government actually cares about the deficit, and would rather pay down the national debt than blow untold billions of dollars on pork barrel spending for their own states.
They don't "have" to make a "lesser of two evils" choice. They COULD push for voting reform at a state level, allowing 3rd parties to have a reasonable chance without tipping the balance between the two major parties in the process. They COULD stand up against gerrymandering and attack ads and general stupidity in government. Don't confuse apathy with lack of options. Their representatives pull crap like this in their name, and they're responsible, whether they got off the couch to vote or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Call me crazy, but I swear I read over a year ago that Evolution Office supported Exchange integration...
They had blinking lights, but they were barely bigger than a piece of paper. And if they put them on the support column for a bridge, that means UNDER the bridge, which means nobody's really gonna see them but some homeless people. (Unless I misunderstood where they had been placed, which is certainly possible).
I just think they got a lot of free press through this "bomb squad" mistake, and TFA reads like half a press release for ATHF.
Sorry... meant Chris Nolan, not Chris Carter. And say what you will, at least Guy Ritchie had a style, and it was pretty fun. So what if people immediately started copying him? The OP was saying that mainstream movies don't push individuality and a "personal brand", and he's a good example of them doing so.
This is true of many main-stream films, but not of the majority of movies that come out. Charlie Kaufman writes amazingly unique movies, as do Aaron Sorkin and Daron Aronofsky; Terry Gilliam and Paul Thomas Anderson direct artistic masterpieces, and Chris Carter is fast gaining a reputation for interesting touches, as did Guy Ritchie in the late 90s. Also, certain actors tend to work in very interesting films; Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Al Pacino, Tom Cruise before he went nutso, all had a tendency to pick very interesting films. Even moreso in independent film, creativity and personal touches are a staple, not an afterthought.
It's certainly possible to see nothing but mindless entertainment when you go to the movies, but it takes very little effort to find something a lot more satisfying if you live near any decent-sized city.
Who's going to see a tiny little add posted on a bridge's support column? I think they did this so the bomb squad would come, and they'd get all this free press.
Nice to see that this is out for the PS2. Yet another awesome new game to validate my $120 PS2 purchase this Christmas :-)
I agree with you completely. Letting the individual citizens vote directly for federal senate was the worst mistake in the history of this country. It essentially invalidates local politics in the minds of a lot of people, because they figure they already voted for someone who "outranks" state representatives, therefor they don't need to care. We've gone from a system of independent states which were more like individual nations in a loose alliance, to one large state with funny names for the different sections.
I have no doubt that the consoles will continue to sell like crazy. Right now, you've got sites that track possible locations that might have the Wii near you, and people camping out before stores open. How many consumers are willing to do that? I would guess less than 20%. Which means that there's an even bigger untapped market of people who are waiting until they can stroll into a local store of their choice at 5 PM and still find one on the shelves (I'm one of them). I doubt their sales will be slowing anytime soon.
This is just ridiculous. The popular pages are popular BECAUSE they tend to be the most likely to contain the answer to your search. Presumably when you do a search, you want results that have the most information about the search term, and the popular sites likely do. If they're topping the list but they're really not relevant, you're not providing enough specifics in your search term.
Even better, if you just get two copies of the same file from the service and run a diff on them, you should be able to recover all or most of the stripped data, giving you an untraceable version. This is yet another bad idea that won't stop actual pirates. The most it might catch is some non-technical individual who is dumb enough to share a watermarked copy on Kazaa.
certainly a fair question. I could see it being handy to have it work out automagically as in the Tubes thing... not saying it's something I'm actually planning to use, though...
This could actually be useful... it's sort of combining BitTorrent and RSS. You subscribe to a content channel, and as people with publishing permissions add content, it updates on your local system. Also tracks changes to existing documents, so it could be good for collaboration, although any serious use would likely want a version control system that supports conflict merges. For the average non-techie, though, this could be pretty handy.
It's a shame they're aiming for such a tech-illiterate user base, though... their site doesn't seem to mention whether they do BitTorrent-style bandwidth sharing to distribute content.
Don't you mean "iAnal"?
Oddly enough, it's usually the people that love driving big heavy cars that also bitch like hell when anyone suggests making them actually pay for ALL the resources they're using up in the process... wonder if the GP is one of them...
The counterpoint to your argument is: Apple. Apple is very different from Windows. It won't run any of the same applications (you can buy some of the same apps altered to work on a Mac, but your old CDs won't work). People still buy them. Ubuntu is about as easy to use as a Mac. So give people some legitimate reasons to try it (it's free, it's more secure, it'll work better on an old computer than Vista, it supports community involvement, open standards, and Freedom (tm)), and there's no reason it can't remain a successful niche market, and even grow.
He also neglects to mention that the "complaints per customer" number at that particular restaurant involved in the scalding lawsuit was much, much higher than that national average. If I remember correctly, that one franchise had been keeping their coffee hotter than most other McDonalds did, which led to this problem in the first place, and had received complaints not only from customers, but from employees injured as a result. Still chose not to change their practices, which led to them losing this suit.
You're talking about Stalinism, or at least the Russian version of communism. The actual theory is broader than that.
This assumes that communism is the same as a flat-out wealth redistribution scheme, which is ridiculous. There's nothing in communism that says that one person can't get paid more than another because he works harder. All it says is that the ownership of some very key things (natural resources, public lands, etc) should be taken back by the community as a whole, because it should never have been "sold" to a private individual in the first place.
No, not majority shareholder. Any shareholder. Although probably the court will take you a lot more seriously if you own "significant" numbers of shares, with significant depending on the company in question. I would guess that by the 5% range they will be taking you very, very seriously.
now you are...
If a shareholder believes that a company is not acting in their best interests, they can sue. So yes, it is a law.
Ah, but that assumes that the government actually cares about the deficit, and would rather pay down the national debt than blow untold billions of dollars on pork barrel spending for their own states.
They don't "have" to make a "lesser of two evils" choice. They COULD push for voting reform at a state level, allowing 3rd parties to have a reasonable chance without tipping the balance between the two major parties in the process. They COULD stand up against gerrymandering and attack ads and general stupidity in government. Don't confuse apathy with lack of options. Their representatives pull crap like this in their name, and they're responsible, whether they got off the couch to vote or not.