the other issue about recomennding firefox in corporate environments is accountability. In my short work experience and that of my friends, many who've tried to (or have been successful in) installing firefox on work machines (desktops as well as notebooks) were sternly rebuked and chastised. Sometimes warned against it during orientation, etc. IE all the way.
I'm not sure the reason why. Accountability seems to be a major issue. to recommend firefox and have mission critical failures puts the blame solely on IT. IE failures means you can point (the lawyers) to Redmond.
agreed. a lot of IT departments still use 2000 professional. mature, stable, smaller footprint, etc.
pharmaceutical companies and financial companies I've freelanced at for the most part use 2000 professional. i found it surprising. The other reason is they found no value in upgrading and still don't.
I'm just thinking that here we're talking about the seamless integration of the soldier and the exoskeleton. I can imagine that the bulkiness of the unit itself might preclude certain movements completely.
But the assumption here, (and I'm not a physicist or engineer) is that there has to be minimal lag between the soldier's reactions and the reaction time of the exoskeleton in order to realistically move as quickly as one would without the armor. So in order for there to be no drop-off in reaction time, the lag between soldier X's reaction and the reaction of his exoskeleton would have to be zero, which seems unlikely.
So I can imagine that if soldier X has a top running speed of 15 miles an hour, he'd still be able to reach a top speed of 15 miles an hour with an extra hundred pounds of stuff on his back. But what would his 0 to 15 be? And does it even matter?
I agree. Treads or some hovering mechanism to obviate terrain issues. But bipedal? naahh. Specialized moving parts, too many points of failure, readily exposed weak points.
You can probably deploy cheap UAVS by the dozens for the cost of one mech. Swarming hordes.
Right... I was thinking about it as controlled dial-in resistance as well. I can imagine that you can use it to work out with as well. Dial in resistance, and do arm curls against the exoskeleton. Same with the legs in a seated position; just switch into workout mode and have an incremental resistance program that is always with you.
Part of your frustration with the limited success of Firefly may be that you assume its main reason for existing is its exploration of science fiction themes. I don't claim they are entirely absent but feel it is a mistake to put too great an emphasis on that aspect of the story. The appeal of Firefly is the collection of diverse characters and the writing that makes their interaction so entertaining to a fairly large group of people.
Wow. Ok.. I'll definitely concede that. I do indeed get frustrated with the limited exploration of science fiction themes. In that, you are absolutely correct, so much so that I didn't see it before. It makes perfect sense. In that regard, I want it to be something that its not, so I in turn get more frustrated by what it is. Absolutely. I'll buy that.
In regards to other authors, the point isn't whether or not I have someone better in particular, it's more that as far as science fiction and genre projects are concerned, Hollywood is definitely prepared to produce what the audience embraces. To say that there is better sci-fi out there than Whedon's stuff is readily apparent if we both concede that the strength of his material isn't the sci fi. My point is merely to point out the power that the genre audience in particular has to shape what hollywood produces.
That was my original point, back in the original post... that the geek audience has critical mass; they can choose what they want to see. This is also readily apparent in that Serenity is a film that has received wide distribution. I'm merely stating that if I could choose, I wouldn't choose Whedon's stuff, and I wanted to understand the reason why other genre fans felt differently. I do know, for the most part.
I worked as a research associate on a pharmaceutical study for benzodiazepines and their effect on movement disorders such as Tourette's.
Our subjects had to honestly disclose drug use as we did extensive testing. We did imaging on our subjects at the end of the study. EVERY user of ecstacy in our study had some form of (visible to the naked eye) brain lesions. Every one. We had a large pool of participants.
The reality of my experience is that I would not recommend the recreational use of MDMA.
lol... more personal attacks from behind the AC pointy hood: let's count them off.
a. dipshit(self explanatory term typically used by emasculated middle management types. I can dig it)
b. I guess you went to public school though. (mature)
c. No, that would be the Democrats in 2000 and 2004, even though they can't dry their teary little eyes long enough to see it. (more immature, unimaginative banter from someone accusing me of immaturity! lol).
d. But I guess if you're not a Democrat (which I find impossible to belive) (more pedestrian spiteful dickery from our masked marvel of a poster)
e. you're just one of those "anybody but Bush" children. Maybe when you graduate high school you can actually form an opinion of your own that you didn't read on a blog somewhere. (alarming number of teenage references lends to notion of AC's fixation with adolescents. creepy. Good thing you're posting anonymously.)
f. Here's a hint: Anyone can tear things down, but adults have constructive opinions about alternatives. When you just bash and bash without a credible alternative (in your case, you at least suggested election fraud, kudos!) (more references to me being a child. You like browbeating youngsters, AC?)
g. you look like a typical teenager who's really really good at telling you how much everything sucks and is wrong. (dammit, that does it. This AC is a pedophile. lol)
It's so cool that we can't go back and change our posts. This will exist for the forseeable future of Slashdot, and the editors will forever know you as a pedophile and a dreadful bore of a writer.
Dude, we can do this all day. At least take the hood off and make it interesting. lol.
dude, where did I imply that that wasn't the case? Please point out the time when I implied that democrats had better ethics than republicans or vice versa?
If you read the AC post I'm replying to, he made a disparaging remark towards democrats, which I replied to with the same argument that you are putting forth, namely, no politican has claim to moral high ground.
Re: Democrats moving around to adjust electoral votes: Why would republicans have to move around? They won those swing states as well as the last two elections. *shrugs* That doesn't imply that I'm a democrat, it implies that the losers have to make adjustments if they want to win.
wow, dude. really well fucking said. I'll cosign on this.
I also submit that the anti-piracy argument goes both ways. No one admits to downloading free content, but no one wants for measures to be taken against those who do. Those sentiments seem diametrically opposed at times.
I live in new york and I have friends who were outraged when Bush basically ignored the state during the past election.
he knows his bullshit won't fly here, so he doesn't even try. he knows his constituency.
on the other hand, i was thinking about starting some kind of dynamic voter constituency. Starting now, we'd get democrats to register for dual citizenship in swing states; there would be host homes in the swing state to accomodate the "swinger". During elections, places with a superabundance of democratic votes would have mini-migrations of excess voters to their secondary "homes" where they would vote in force to potentially upset the state. Just bus trips the night before election day with voters returning the day of.
I confess that i haven't looked into the particulars, but we either need to get rid of the electoral college or be faced with horrid presidential choices as I fear the country getting redder with each passing day.
The issue with these non-competes, I think, is the possibility of trade secret cross-pollination. In other words, (and I'm not a coder), but it can be possible for this guy Lee to naturally introduce some concepts from his work with Microsoft while at Google, especially becasue he'll be working in the same capacity. All of the things he did at Microsoft is Microsoft's intellectual property now, right? Microsoft is rightly fearful of the competitive advantage that Google gains by having potential inside knowledge of Microsoft's search strategy and deployment solutions going forward.
So in light of how unenforceable the suit is, it just seems like Microsoft wants to drag Google through the mud a bit... get them dirty and throw some shade on "don't be evil."
It's an interesting issue about trade secrets and non-disclosure in code, cause if your source is closed... who can verify? Can the courts order the opening of code? Can you just change your code to get around it?
The Sixth Sense was released on 8/6/99. It was summer movie.
The Passion of the Christ is a religious movie that was marketed to Church groups and released during the holiest time of the year on the Christian calendar. The Passion of Christ mobilized the Bible Belt, a demographic that is consistently underrepresented at the box office. Quite simply, many who went to see "Passion" don't go to the movies. So the performance, while spectacular, is a statistical aberration.
Re: Assuming it to be a typical movie. Should I asusme that it will be a blockbuster and build a model around that? That doesn't make much sense. Of course I assume it to be typical. Most asumptions are made based on typical outcomes, I imagine. I have no reason to believe this film will perform spectacularly; it couldn't draw enough of an audience to remain on the air. It does not have a name cast to appeal to the MTV crowd (who won't be going anyway because they're back in school). The 45-64s rely on reviews and product with pedigree, which this doesn't have.
It's being release during a soft time in the box office anyway. I just don't see it.
Third quarter earnings would probably be a better indicant, as well as comparable sales of the game from 2nd to 3rd quarter. It's just too soon to tell.
Isn't this game a bit past its prime already as a retail commodity?
Like all things retail, the youngest consumer tends to the be the impulse buyer, which in this case means that the audience most affected by this ratings change would have purchased their game already.
<conspiracy theory> It could be interesting to see if there's a spike in the sales pattern after this *free publicity* scandal involving the ESRB and Rockstar. If the target audience in general for games is the adult gamer, this could be the kind of press to motivate the adult buyer into making a purchase if he hasn't done so. </conspiracy theory>
I feel like Rockstar walks away unscathed in this whole deal. They just stand to make more cash from the free press.
It has nothing to do with my "vastly superior intelligence" as you put it.
My point is that there is a lot of sci fi out there, most of it better than Whedon's crap, that will never see the light of day because the INDUSTRY assumes it too intelligent for the audience (read: you) that goes crazy for Whedon's crap.
Regardless, I was interested in hearing some intelligent postings as to Whedon's appeal, but for the most part have gotten emotional cheap shots.
I don't even mind you calling it a cheap shot if you can honestly disagree with my points with evidence to the contrary. you haven't, as the show includes all of those formulaic things I described.
My point is and will remain, that it is fans like you that reinforce the formula. Why should they change anything when it's clear they've got it right? Care to enlighten me with your so called "vastly superior intelligence?"
The two biggest moviegoing demographics are 12-25 and 45-64 at about 26% and 25% respectively.
the film industry targets 12-25s significantly because that audience is "review proof" - they'll see anything they like regardless of how the film is reviewed. They aren't in school during the summer, hence Hollywood being a summer and Christmas holiday phenomenon.
45-64s are smart, monied, well-educated, discriminating. They like going to the movies, but they have reviewers they respect, actors and directors they have long-standing relationships with. And they go to the movies in the fall when the kids are in school. Hollywood doesn't chase this audience as much - there's just not enough good movie material to please them. So they develp so called "specialty divisions" which make smart artistic films that cater to this audience.
So September is considered throwaway becasue kids are back in school. February for the same reason, although the dead-zone is disputed: some include January in the dead-zone, but the market is occasionally invigorated by kids on extended break.
I agree with you. I'm not a fan of Star Wars either.
And I do agree with you about encouraging them. That was my point about finding the properties you want to see and advocating them on sites like this. Once the audience hits critical mass, someone will make it. It's just the way the busienss works.
Slashdot Mirror
the other issue about recomennding firefox in corporate environments is accountability. In my short work experience and that of my friends, many who've tried to (or have been successful in) installing firefox on work machines (desktops as well as notebooks) were sternly rebuked and chastised. Sometimes warned against it during orientation, etc. IE all the way.
I'm not sure the reason why. Accountability seems to be a major issue. to recommend firefox and have mission critical failures puts the blame solely on IT. IE failures means you can point (the lawyers) to Redmond.
agreed. a lot of IT departments still use 2000 professional. mature, stable, smaller footprint, etc.
pharmaceutical companies and financial companies I've freelanced at for the most part use 2000 professional. i found it surprising. The other reason is they found no value in upgrading and still don't.
At some point, AOL was considered gatekeeper of the internet. It's what Time Warner thought anyway.
A healthy dose of scepticism is exactly that. Healthy.
wait, you can just build it to compensate for expected reaction time lags, etc. and it won't be an issue.
I'm just thinking that here we're talking about the seamless integration of the soldier and the exoskeleton. I can imagine that the bulkiness of the unit itself might preclude certain movements completely.
But the assumption here, (and I'm not a physicist or engineer) is that there has to be minimal lag between the soldier's reactions and the reaction time of the exoskeleton in order to realistically move as quickly as one would without the armor. So in order for there to be no drop-off in reaction time, the lag between soldier X's reaction and the reaction of his exoskeleton would have to be zero, which seems unlikely.
So I can imagine that if soldier X has a top running speed of 15 miles an hour, he'd still be able to reach a top speed of 15 miles an hour with an extra hundred pounds of stuff on his back. But what would his 0 to 15 be? And does it even matter?
I agree. Treads or some hovering mechanism to obviate terrain issues. But bipedal? naahh. Specialized moving parts, too many points of failure, readily exposed weak points. You can probably deploy cheap UAVS by the dozens for the cost of one mech. Swarming hordes.
Right... I was thinking about it as controlled dial-in resistance as well. I can imagine that you can use it to work out with as well. Dial in resistance, and do arm curls against the exoskeleton. Same with the legs in a seated position; just switch into workout mode and have an incremental resistance program that is always with you.
Part of your frustration with the limited success of Firefly may be that you assume its main reason for existing is its exploration of science fiction themes. I don't claim they are entirely absent but feel it is a mistake to put too great an emphasis on that aspect of the story. The appeal of Firefly is the collection of diverse characters and the writing that makes their interaction so entertaining to a fairly large group of people.
Wow. Ok.. I'll definitely concede that. I do indeed get frustrated with the limited exploration of science fiction themes. In that, you are absolutely correct, so much so that I didn't see it before. It makes perfect sense. In that regard, I want it to be something that its not, so I in turn get more frustrated by what it is. Absolutely. I'll buy that.
In regards to other authors, the point isn't whether or not I have someone better in particular, it's more that as far as science fiction and genre projects are concerned, Hollywood is definitely prepared to produce what the audience embraces. To say that there is better sci-fi out there than Whedon's stuff is readily apparent if we both concede that the strength of his material isn't the sci fi. My point is merely to point out the power that the genre audience in particular has to shape what hollywood produces.
That was my original point, back in the original post... that the geek audience has critical mass; they can choose what they want to see. This is also readily apparent in that Serenity is a film that has received wide distribution. I'm merely stating that if I could choose, I wouldn't choose Whedon's stuff, and I wanted to understand the reason why other genre fans felt differently. I do know, for the most part.
dude, that sucks. I definitely hope your mom feels better.
lol. I've been trolled, AC?
The worst fiction you've ever read? Cool, I guess I have a lot of time to work on it, since I'm still in school, right?
I guess that means in twenty years or so, it'll be great fiction, and you'll be dead.
good luck with that. lol.
and for somebody who doesn't have any time, you sure did a lot of research!!!! lol.
Still anonymous, eh? Lol.
I worked as a research associate on a pharmaceutical study for benzodiazepines and their effect on movement disorders such as Tourette's.
Our subjects had to honestly disclose drug use as we did extensive testing. We did imaging on our subjects at the end of the study. EVERY user of ecstacy in our study had some form of (visible to the naked eye) brain lesions. Every one. We had a large pool of participants.
The reality of my experience is that I would not recommend the recreational use of MDMA.
lol... more personal attacks from behind the AC pointy hood: let's count them off.
a. dipshit(self explanatory term typically used by emasculated middle management types. I can dig it)
b. I guess you went to public school though. (mature)
c. No, that would be the Democrats in 2000 and 2004, even though they can't dry their teary little eyes long enough to see it. (more immature, unimaginative banter from someone accusing me of immaturity! lol).
d. But I guess if you're not a Democrat (which I find impossible to belive) (more pedestrian spiteful dickery from our masked marvel of a poster)
e. you're just one of those "anybody but Bush" children. Maybe when you graduate high school you can actually form an opinion of your own that you didn't read on a blog somewhere. (alarming number of teenage references lends to notion of AC's fixation with adolescents. creepy. Good thing you're posting anonymously.)
f. Here's a hint: Anyone can tear things down, but adults have constructive opinions about alternatives. When you just bash and bash without a credible alternative (in your case, you at least suggested election fraud, kudos!) (more references to me being a child. You like browbeating youngsters, AC?)
g. you look like a typical teenager who's really really good at telling you how much everything sucks and is wrong. (dammit, that does it. This AC is a pedophile. lol)
It's so cool that we can't go back and change our posts. This will exist for the forseeable future of Slashdot, and the editors will forever know you as a pedophile and a dreadful bore of a writer.
Dude, we can do this all day. At least take the hood off and make it interesting. lol.
It's ok. Don't be afraid. lol.
dude, where did I imply that that wasn't the case? Please point out the time when I implied that democrats had better ethics than republicans or vice versa?
If you read the AC post I'm replying to, he made a disparaging remark towards democrats, which I replied to with the same argument that you are putting forth, namely, no politican has claim to moral high ground.
Re: Democrats moving around to adjust electoral votes: Why would republicans have to move around? They won those swing states as well as the last two elections. *shrugs* That doesn't imply that I'm a democrat, it implies that the losers have to make adjustments if they want to win.
wow, dude. really well fucking said. I'll cosign on this.
I also submit that the anti-piracy argument goes both ways. No one admits to downloading free content, but no one wants for measures to be taken against those who do. Those sentiments seem diametrically opposed at times.
Lie, Cheat, and Steal?
are you serious?????
dude, can we get a recount on those Florida and Ohio votes?
dude, can we let independent coders analyze algorithms in the new voting machines?
dude, what's really good with those WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION??????
are you fucking serious?
And isn't being an anonymous coward akin to wearing a hood with eyeholes cut out? can you even stand behind your statements? Loser.
Lol... and its interesting that you associate my "proposed mass election fraud" with democrats, since I don't have any party affiliation. lol.
well said colin.
I live in new york and I have friends who were outraged when Bush basically ignored the state during the past election.
he knows his bullshit won't fly here, so he doesn't even try. he knows his constituency.
on the other hand, i was thinking about starting some kind of dynamic voter constituency. Starting now, we'd get democrats to register for dual citizenship in swing states; there would be host homes in the swing state to accomodate the "swinger". During elections, places with a superabundance of democratic votes would have mini-migrations of excess voters to their secondary "homes" where they would vote in force to potentially upset the state. Just bus trips the night before election day with voters returning the day of.
I confess that i haven't looked into the particulars, but we either need to get rid of the electoral college or be faced with horrid presidential choices as I fear the country getting redder with each passing day.
dude, I know. And even with the divisions that lose cash (all the other ones) they are amazingly liquid. Scarily so, actually.
It's really scary.
The issue with these non-competes, I think, is the possibility of trade secret cross-pollination. In other words, (and I'm not a coder), but it can be possible for this guy Lee to naturally introduce some concepts from his work with Microsoft while at Google, especially becasue he'll be working in the same capacity. All of the things he did at Microsoft is Microsoft's intellectual property now, right? Microsoft is rightly fearful of the competitive advantage that Google gains by having potential inside knowledge of Microsoft's search strategy and deployment solutions going forward.
So in light of how unenforceable the suit is, it just seems like Microsoft wants to drag Google through the mud a bit... get them dirty and throw some shade on "don't be evil."
It's an interesting issue about trade secrets and non-disclosure in code, cause if your source is closed... who can verify? Can the courts order the opening of code? Can you just change your code to get around it?
no shooting. merely observing. carry on. lol.
The Sixth Sense was released on 8/6/99. It was summer movie.
The Passion of the Christ is a religious movie that was marketed to Church groups and released during the holiest time of the year on the Christian calendar. The Passion of Christ mobilized the Bible Belt, a demographic that is consistently underrepresented at the box office. Quite simply, many who went to see "Passion" don't go to the movies. So the performance, while spectacular, is a statistical aberration.
Re: Assuming it to be a typical movie. Should I asusme that it will be a blockbuster and build a model around that? That doesn't make much sense. Of course I assume it to be typical. Most asumptions are made based on typical outcomes, I imagine. I have no reason to believe this film will perform spectacularly; it couldn't draw enough of an audience to remain on the air. It does not have a name cast to appeal to the MTV crowd (who won't be going anyway because they're back in school). The 45-64s rely on reviews and product with pedigree, which this doesn't have.
It's being release during a soft time in the box office anyway. I just don't see it.
Third quarter earnings would probably be a better indicant, as well as comparable sales of the game from 2nd to 3rd quarter. It's just too soon to tell.
I agree, and will try and take it further.
Isn't this game a bit past its prime already as a retail commodity?
Like all things retail, the youngest consumer tends to the be the impulse buyer, which in this case means that the audience most affected by this ratings change would have purchased their game already.
<conspiracy theory> It could be interesting to see if there's a spike in the sales pattern after this *free publicity* scandal involving the ESRB and Rockstar. If the target audience in general for games is the adult gamer, this could be the kind of press to motivate the adult buyer into making a purchase if he hasn't done so. </conspiracy theory>
I feel like Rockstar walks away unscathed in this whole deal. They just stand to make more cash from the free press.
Again with the personal attacks:
wow, everyone gets so sensitive.
It has nothing to do with my "vastly superior intelligence" as you put it.
My point is that there is a lot of sci fi out there, most of it better than Whedon's crap, that will never see the light of day because the INDUSTRY assumes it too intelligent for the audience (read: you) that goes crazy for Whedon's crap.
Regardless, I was interested in hearing some intelligent postings as to Whedon's appeal, but for the most part have gotten emotional cheap shots.
I don't even mind you calling it a cheap shot if you can honestly disagree with my points with evidence to the contrary. you haven't, as the show includes all of those formulaic things I described.
My point is and will remain, that it is fans like you that reinforce the formula. Why should they change anything when it's clear they've got it right? Care to enlighten me with your so called "vastly superior intelligence?"
Lol
The two biggest moviegoing demographics are 12-25 and 45-64 at about 26% and 25% respectively.
the film industry targets 12-25s significantly because that audience is "review proof" - they'll see anything they like regardless of how the film is reviewed. They aren't in school during the summer, hence Hollywood being a summer and Christmas holiday phenomenon.
45-64s are smart, monied, well-educated, discriminating. They like going to the movies, but they have reviewers they respect, actors and directors they have long-standing relationships with. And they go to the movies in the fall when the kids are in school. Hollywood doesn't chase this audience as much - there's just not enough good movie material to please them. So they develp so called "specialty divisions" which make smart artistic films that cater to this audience.
So September is considered throwaway becasue kids are back in school. February for the same reason, although the dead-zone is disputed: some include January in the dead-zone, but the market is occasionally invigorated by kids on extended break.
I agree with you. I'm not a fan of Star Wars either.
And I do agree with you about encouraging them. That was my point about finding the properties you want to see and advocating them on sites like this. Once the audience hits critical mass, someone will make it. It's just the way the busienss works.