Re:(OT)No plot holes in the Three Amigos
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 1
Well, I could point out that they were using those rebuilt houses and buildings to ambush El Guapo's men.
If they really had been destroyed, how would they have used them for the ambush? There would have been no ambush, or a weakened ambush, and the tactical position of El Guapo's men would have been much improved.
In fact, El Guapo's men could have used a variation of the famous "Crossing the T" naval strategy, except we'd be using horses instead of battleships. And tequila instead of oil. But you get the idea.
Re:Really? Infamous?
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Sure it was a great movie, but there were some awful plot holes there. I really thought I was the only geek out there who loved this movie.
Well, England did have a large airforce, but how much of it could have been considered to be "front line" fighters? From what I recall (history major speaking now) Spitfires and Hurricanes were in short supply during the battle of britain... more Spitfires than hurricanes, but the 'canes were nearing the end of their careers as fighters at that point anyhow (figher/bomber was another story however).
A lot of the RAF consisted of nearly useless medium range bombers. It wasn't until spitfire production ramped up and the Lancasters were available in large numbers (and bombing tactics improved) that the odds shifted overwhelmingly towards the RAF.
But, you're right, the navy was the sticking point. There's no way Germany could have put any signifigant number of troops ashore without being mauled by the Royal Navy.
The first and biggest mistake was putting British troops under French command on the continent. Second was waiting for the Germans to attack (the phoney war) instaed of attacking first. Of course, it's easy to say all of this in hindsight...
And what constitues properly supporting a u-boat? A protective screen of destroyers? Kinda takes the element of suprise away, doesn't it?
Put it this way, the French lines collapse and the Belgians surrender. You've got nobody defending your flanks, and Germans are pouring thru and attacking from behind. Getting any troops out is great, getting the bulk of your army away to fight another day is amazing.
Is it just me, or does anyone else see a problem with putting potentially hard objects over the airbags (check the passenger side out, maybe the driver side too, forget) which will be flung towards your face at high speed in the event of a crash.
Kinda reminds me of my old car which had a big sticker on the visor which warned that you "should not place any objects between yourself and the airbag". Duh. I wonder how many people had their plans for putting a big sharp spike on their steering wheel airbag covered foiled due to that sticker.
Okay, I'll call you crazy cos you've totally missed the point of this.
It's not to "Unify" the desktops per se, it's to make GTK and QT apps look like each other. There's nothing wrong with having your widget, styles, and colors shared across apps, and it's even better if it happens transparently.
Westerners who are good at what the West does - innovate - will be as in demand as ever. Those who can't or won't work to remain on the cutting edge, well, there's no helping them.
And you really think once tech jobs start disappearing, and more and more people are out of work over here, we'll really be so innovative?
Open a history book that goes back more than three years?
How about I go back to the 80s? When we funded Saddam in his fight against Iran? When those pictures were taken of Rumsfeld giving ol Saddam a big hug?
Face facts. We f'ed up by not finishing the job with Osama. Period.
Most of the population over here is smart enough to realize they're two different people.
Most of the population over here was dumb enough to forget all about that whole "weapons of mass destruction" lie, and dumb enough to think that Saddam planned 9/11.
Hey, Saddam was a bad guy, no doubt about it. But we should have never stopped looking for Osama. By pulling our best troops off that hunt, we let him get away. Brilliant move, guys.
Other great examples but done better. "The Magnificent 7" (Seven Samari).
You missed the best example of the "done better" genre. The Three Amgios was really the ultimate retelling/working of the Seven Samari. But with 3, intead of 7. And Steve Martin.
Yes, it is a problem for Free Software fans because they would give up the opportunity to make a profit. Some of this money they might choose to put into developing more Free Software. It would, therefore, injure the community to restrict people to non-commercial distribution.
I call bullshit. Look, SUSE pours lots of resources into the linux community. They support KDE, XFree, Alsa, ReiserFS, and so on. They provide money and code. The only thing they don't GPL is Yast. Boo friggin hoo. They want to make some money on their installer. Fine. They're good citizens and give plenty back as well. What's the big deal?
You must not have read it that well. We read it here, and basically you're free to make as many copies and use them as you wish as long as you don't sell them.
Take the 5 minutes to go out and install apt/synaptic. Point it at a repository (I use SUSE, your milage may vary). Install xine. It plays anything MPlayer plays.
You really think SUSE signed into an exclusive sweetheart deal with gateway? Software companies enter into bundling agreements with hardware companies all the time.
MSFT and gateway work together, and last I checked, Windows was available from a few other manufacturers as well.
Let me get this straight. Suse provides you with the code to their installer. Suse allows you to modify their installer as long as you don't resell it. And this is a problem.
Holy crap, we would be lucky if everyone else did that. So they won't let you *resell their installer*. Big friggin deal. It's a great piece of work, works really well, and I've never had a major problem with SUSE. Since I can not say the same for Redhat, guess which one I use.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I could point out that they were using those rebuilt houses and buildings to ambush El Guapo's men. If they really had been destroyed, how would they have used them for the ambush? There would have been no ambush, or a weakened ambush, and the tactical position of El Guapo's men would have been much improved. In fact, El Guapo's men could have used a variation of the famous "Crossing the T" naval strategy, except we'd be using horses instead of battleships. And tequila instead of oil. But you get the idea.
Sure it was a great movie, but there were some awful plot holes there. I really thought I was the only geek out there who loved this movie.
Three Amigos Plot Holes
Well, England did have a large airforce, but how much of it could have been considered to be "front line" fighters? From what I recall (history major speaking now) Spitfires and Hurricanes were in short supply during the battle of britain... more Spitfires than hurricanes, but the 'canes were nearing the end of their careers as fighters at that point anyhow (figher/bomber was another story however).
A lot of the RAF consisted of nearly useless medium range bombers. It wasn't until spitfire production ramped up and the Lancasters were available in large numbers (and bombing tactics improved) that the odds shifted overwhelmingly towards the RAF.
But, you're right, the navy was the sticking point. There's no way Germany could have put any signifigant number of troops ashore without being mauled by the Royal Navy.
The first and biggest mistake was putting British troops under French command on the continent. Second was waiting for the Germans to attack (the phoney war) instaed of attacking first. Of course, it's easy to say all of this in hindsight...
And what constitues properly supporting a u-boat? A protective screen of destroyers? Kinda takes the element of suprise away, doesn't it?
And here's hoping they have tons of pictures of all the people who were killed by the indiscriminate policy of "unrestricted u-boat warfare".
People die on both sides... Dresdin was no worse than putting a torpedo into a passenger liner.
Dunkirk was a victory...
Put it this way, the French lines collapse and the Belgians surrender. You've got nobody defending your flanks, and Germans are pouring thru and attacking from behind. Getting any troops out is great, getting the bulk of your army away to fight another day is amazing.
Dunno if you're aware of it, but the Italians helped out with the whole "rounding up" bit as well. Not with the same enthusiasm, but they did help.
Aren't most airbags dual stage these days? I don't think this has been an issue since the mid 90s...
Is it just me, or does anyone else see a problem with putting potentially hard objects over the airbags (check the passenger side out, maybe the driver side too, forget) which will be flung towards your face at high speed in the event of a crash.
Kinda reminds me of my old car which had a big sticker on the visor which warned that you "should not place any objects between yourself and the airbag". Duh. I wonder how many people had their plans for putting a big sharp spike on their steering wheel airbag covered foiled due to that sticker.
Not quite, but as someone with some experience in the matter, I can guarantee you that somehow, someway, GM (General Motors) had a hand in this.
Don't believe me? Drive an older GM car thru a carwash, and watch that window sealant leak.
Okay, I'll call you crazy cos you've totally missed the point of this.
It's not to "Unify" the desktops per se, it's to make GTK and QT apps look like each other. There's nothing wrong with having your widget, styles, and colors shared across apps, and it's even better if it happens transparently.
Westerners who are good at what the West does - innovate - will be as in demand as ever. Those who can't or won't work to remain on the cutting edge, well, there's no helping them.
And you really think once tech jobs start disappearing, and more and more people are out of work over here, we'll really be so innovative?
Open a history book that goes back more than three years?
How about I go back to the 80s? When we funded Saddam in his fight against Iran? When those pictures were taken of Rumsfeld giving ol Saddam a big hug?
Face facts. We f'ed up by not finishing the job with Osama. Period.
That's slightly wrong.
Most of the population over here is smart enough to realize they're two different people.
Most of the population over here was dumb enough to forget all about that whole "weapons of mass destruction" lie, and dumb enough to think that Saddam planned 9/11.
Hey, Saddam was a bad guy, no doubt about it. But we should have never stopped looking for Osama. By pulling our best troops off that hunt, we let him get away. Brilliant move, guys.
What could be missing? Hrm...
Maybe it's the little Lego Mayor Bloomberg making raids into the Lego Vanity Fair offices to fine them for their Lego Ashtray.
Disclaimer: I think you have to follow the NY news media to understand that one.
Actually, it was El Guapo who asked Jefe if he knew what a Plethora meant. :)
Other great examples but done better. "The Magnificent 7" (Seven Samari).
You missed the best example of the "done better" genre. The Three Amgios was really the ultimate retelling/working of the Seven Samari. But with 3, intead of 7. And Steve Martin.
No, they might not do that.
But then again, they'd never release updated ADO objects for NT that would break access to Oracle via ADO/ODBC, would they? Guess who would!
Hint: If you said Microsoft, you're correct!
Honestly, dunno. I didn't look at the Yast license. I looked at the license that came on the root of my CD. I'm assuming you don't have a CD...
I hope you don't use XFree, ya know that isn't GPL'ed either.
I call bullshit. Look, SUSE pours lots of resources into the linux community. They support KDE, XFree, Alsa, ReiserFS, and so on. They provide money and code. The only thing they don't GPL is Yast. Boo friggin hoo. They want to make some money on their installer. Fine. They're good citizens and give plenty back as well. What's the big deal?
You must not have read it that well. We read it here, and basically you're free to make as many copies and use them as you wish as long as you don't sell them.
Easy answer... don't install MPLayer.
Take the 5 minutes to go out and install apt/synaptic. Point it at a repository (I use SUSE, your milage may vary). Install xine. It plays anything MPlayer plays.
You really think SUSE signed into an exclusive sweetheart deal with gateway? Software companies enter into bundling agreements with hardware companies all the time.
MSFT and gateway work together, and last I checked, Windows was available from a few other manufacturers as well.
So...
Let me get this straight. Suse provides you with the code to their installer. Suse allows you to modify their installer as long as you don't resell it. And this is a problem.
Holy crap, we would be lucky if everyone else did that. So they won't let you *resell their installer*. Big friggin deal. It's a great piece of work, works really well, and I've never had a major problem with SUSE. Since I can not say the same for Redhat, guess which one I use.