Just sounds like sour grapes to me. This isn't the 1970s anymore - TV series (well, the upmarket ones) need people who can actually act well, not just stand on their mark looking good. ANd I don't think anyone could accuse Benedict of being the worlds best actor - calling him wooden would be unfair to the pine desk I'm typing this at.
Are we not allowed to have adult sci-fi now? If you want to let your kids watch sci-fi theres plenty of sacharrine shit from Pixar and the like available.
"The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)"
You're coming across as just a teensy bit wet my friend.
As a series BG is perfect , one of the best Sci Fi series in a generation. But no, they've got to milk the franchise until it goes moo and dies. Isn't the new Caprica series enough? Why can't hollywood producers know when something is complete and just leave it as is to be savoured , not slowly milked to death because i'll bet you this film won't be the last.
Actually it is noteworthy and is mentioned in plenty of articles, but the information in the particular update I made to the article wasn't available elsewhere other than simply running the software to see it.
Pay a journalist or magazine to review it? FFS get real. Anyway , all the guy had to do was download the software and run it to check the veracity of my claims but I guess its easier to google for 10 seconds then just press "revert".
I've had stuff reverted which I've known to be 100% true (because it was about some software I personally wrote) and yet some muppet halfway across the world who probably knows next to nothing about the software thinks its wrong because theres no other source to verify against. In the end I just kept re-adding it until he gave up but it really pissed me off and I suspect I'm not alone.
An entire article about a british financial journalist and author was deleted recently by some french guy because he'd never heard of her. Well duh, he's from France, she's an english language journalist, why would he have heard of her? Until these sorts of idiots are weeded out I'll keep wikipedia at arms length and double check everything.
Which is more than you can say about most "liberals" who pretend to be for freedom but are actually nothing more than intellectual facist wolves dressed up as fluffy hippy sheep. Its the deception and lies that sticks in the throat more with the intentions of supposed "liberals".
This is something that people who bang on about formal proofs conveniently forget - all it does is move the bugs from the source code to the formal specification. And if the spec is detailed enough to be useful it effectively becomes code anyway so you might just as well write the actual code and debug *that* instead.
Hashing a file doesn't tell you anything other than its hash value. Statistical analysis of repeating patterns would probably reveal discrepancies within an individual file but given that apparently non windows filesystems cause the computer "forensics" people problems I don't think I'd worry too much about them sussing anything that subtle frankly unless they bring in some crypto specialists.
Tag it into the end of some other sort of binary file (executable, image file etc) that will work fine with extra data on the end but is not human readable therefore cannot be easily checked. Eg adding binary data onto the end of a.txt file would be spotted by all but the most stupid technician.
Since DOS died the BIOS has been little more than a glorified POST. So why can't the OS just enable any features that the BIOS doesn't? Its not like any modern OS uses the BIOS once its up and running anyway - just some information the BIOS may have provided which the OS can double check for itself anyway.
They talk about drawrf stars being better because of the lower amount of high energy EM coming off them (as well as they're longer life). But I wonder if they've stopped to consider that perhaps high energies were required to kick start life as we know it. If the early earth had just been an ocean of soup sitting under a benign, dull, low power star radiating mostly in the IR part of the spectrum its possible that chemically nothing very exciting would have ever happened.
Yeah , I remember that. Also the voice from The Black Knight pinball game from the early 80s has always stuck in my head too. It was like an evil sounding version of Speak-n-Spell. Which was probably the idea!
In fact for me its my favourite video game of all time and I still have happy memories of heading off down to a greasy spoon cafe on the saturdays to play it. Never was very good, I think 40,000 was about the best I managed. But the buzz I got from the speed of the game , all the explosions, not to mention the great sound effects (which I think were one of the first examples sampled sounds used in any game) was immense. All subconcious split second reactions - no thinking - the way a truly good shoot-em-up should be.
Slashdot Mirror
Just sounds like sour grapes to me. This isn't the 1970s anymore - TV series (well, the upmarket ones) need people who can actually act well, not just stand on their mark looking good. ANd I don't think anyone could accuse Benedict of being the worlds best actor - calling him wooden would be unfair to the pine desk I'm typing this at.
Are we not allowed to have adult sci-fi now? If you want to let your kids watch sci-fi theres plenty of sacharrine shit from Pixar and the like available.
"The SciFi remake even bothered me as an adult (the part where at the beginning of the series, the Cylon chick snaps a human baby's neck.)"
You're coming across as just a teensy bit wet my friend.
As a series BG is perfect , one of the best Sci Fi series in a generation. But no, they've got to milk the franchise until it goes moo and dies. Isn't the new Caprica series enough? Why can't hollywood producers know when something is complete and just leave it as is to be savoured , not slowly milked to death because i'll bet you this film won't be the last.
See above
Barbara Stcherbatcheff.
Actually it is noteworthy and is mentioned in plenty of articles, but the information in the particular update I made to the article wasn't available elsewhere other than simply running the software to see it.
"It definitely shouldn't be something the author personally "saw for himself" using a pulley and lever or something."
Err , if what the author saw can be independently verified by anyone who wants to try it then yes it damn well should be.
"Saying "run the software yourself" is not a source"
No , its a lot better than a source - its seeing it for yourself.
"Wikipedia doesn't publish "things that are true", it publishes "things that can be verified by asking other reliable sources"."
What a load of BS.
Pay a journalist or magazine to review it? FFS get real. Anyway , all the guy had to do was download the software and run it to check the veracity of my claims but I guess its easier to google for 10 seconds then just press "revert".
"Information that is not independently verifiable does not belong in an encyclopedia"
Well he could always have downloaded the software, compiled it up and run it but I guess he couldn't be bothered.
I've had stuff reverted which I've known to be 100% true (because it was about some software I personally wrote) and yet some muppet halfway across the world who probably knows next to nothing about the software thinks its wrong because theres no other source to verify against. In the end I just kept re-adding it until he gave up but it really pissed me off and I suspect I'm not alone.
An entire article about a british financial journalist and author was deleted recently by some french guy because he'd never heard of her. Well duh, he's from France, she's an english language journalist, why would he have heard of her? Until these sorts of idiots are weeded out I'll keep wikipedia at arms length and double check everything.
A spec that high level is useless for properly proving a program.
Which is more than you can say about most "liberals" who pretend to be for freedom but are actually nothing more than intellectual facist wolves dressed up as fluffy hippy sheep. Its the deception and lies that sticks in the throat more with the intentions of supposed "liberals".
So who gets to prove the spec then?
This is something that people who bang on about formal proofs conveniently forget - all it does is move the bugs from the source code to the formal specification. And if the spec is detailed enough to be useful it effectively becomes code anyway so you might just as well write the actual code and debug *that* instead.
Easily bypassed - just create your own exes or images. They won't be on the database.
Hashing a file doesn't tell you anything other than its hash value. Statistical analysis of repeating patterns would probably reveal discrepancies within an individual file but given that apparently non windows filesystems cause the computer "forensics" people problems I don't think I'd worry too much about them sussing anything that subtle frankly unless they bring in some crypto specialists.
Tag it into the end of some other sort of binary file (executable, image file etc) that will work fine with extra data on the end but is not human readable therefore cannot be easily checked. Eg adding binary data onto the end of a .txt file would be spotted by all but the most stupid technician.
To represent patent lawyers everywhere.
Since DOS died the BIOS has been little more than a glorified POST. So why can't the OS just enable any features that the BIOS doesn't? Its not like any modern OS uses the BIOS once its up and running anyway - just some information the BIOS may have provided which the OS can double check for itself anyway.
They talk about drawrf stars being better because of the lower amount of high energy EM coming off them (as well as they're longer life). But I wonder if they've stopped to consider that perhaps high energies were required to kick start life as we know it. If the early earth had just been an ocean of soup sitting under a benign, dull, low power star radiating mostly in the IR part of the spectrum its possible that chemically nothing very exciting would have ever happened.
Yeah , I remember that. Also the voice from The Black Knight pinball game from the early 80s has always stuck in my head too. It was like an evil sounding version of Speak-n-Spell. Which was probably the idea!
In fact for me its my favourite video game of all time and I still have happy memories of heading off down to a greasy spoon cafe on the saturdays to play it. Never was very good, I think 40,000 was about the best I managed. But the buzz I got from the speed of the game , all the explosions, not to mention the great sound effects (which I think were one of the first examples sampled sounds used in any game) was immense. All subconcious split second reactions - no thinking - the way a truly good shoot-em-up should be.
Tough. Deal.