Maybe the problem is that you have degree requirements. Most of the people I know who can handle that stuff don't have a degree in IS, but they have plenty of real-world experience doing exactly what you're looking for. Apparently that piece of paper is worth a lot more than knowledge and experience, so you get exactly what you're advertising for.
I'd be more annoyed if they switched all the time, since my HDTV takes a second to switch modes. Also, my TV seems to record the mode each station broadcasts in, so that would probably confuse the hell out of it as well.
Sorry that they can't please all the people all the time, but on my old 4:3 TV I have no problem zooming in (and not missing any of the picture.) It sounds like your receiver may be more of the problem if it's cropping part of the picture.
Plus, I don't know of any brand of monitor that comes with a HDMI input. I know plenty of televisions that have them, and those televisions can be used as monitors... but they are NOT monitors. I've seen cables that convert from DVI to HDMI, but that is only video. There is no audio portion to that cable.
Wait, what?
Suddenly if a monitor has a TV tuner, it's not a monitor? The only difference between my 37" TV and a 37" monitor sold under a different brand is the remote control and TV tuner functions.
I use it mostly as a monitor, but I do watch hockey and other TV on it since it has an ATSC tuner built in. But I mostly watch Hulu, or downloaded videos, or even YouTube on it.
But, since it has an ATSC tuner it mustn't be a monitor.
That's why not all cables will have Ethernet built in, you don't always need it.
But, what if your Playstation wants to get online, and you already have an HDMI cable connecting it and your receiver. Your receiver already has HDMI to the cable box. Why not make the cable box also act as a cable modem, so that one cable to the receiver makes it a router?
Then the receiver can distribute the network to your BluRay, PS4, Xbox720, WiiWii, and eventually the PC built into your TV to stream video.
This is a forward-looking solution. Just because your current TV/monitor doesn't have a PC built in now doesn't mean that won't be a common feature in 10 years.
The quoting is killing me, so I'll just use numbers:
1. The nuke appeared to be a bomb built into the base, not attached to a missile. I'm sure Skynet could have kept making nuclear missiles, but the humans probably could have too, and that wouldn't make for a very good movie. Remember, it's a movie, not a documentary.
That and, as I mentioned, there could well have been resources, information, or technologies at those bases that it wanted to capture rather than destroy.
2. It's not shown that Skynet gets the significance of Kyle Resse being John's father. I think they just assumed since John uses him in the future, John would come after him as bait.
4. It's possible I missed it from the sound, but even if they were gas-powered Skynet might be reusing engines it already had laying around. The large robot that launched them definitely has the size to store a good sized gas tank within it for in the field refueling.
5. There's other ways to write the story, but I don't think the character was completely worthless. Obviously she got through to John on some level since he agreed to work with Marcus after her antics.
6. The sub is pushing it, but it doesn't seem completely unreasonable that if there's a Resistance and Skynet presence overseas as it's implied, the Resistance would need a navy of some sort as well. They'd likely be fairly safe, until they blew their cover like they did in this movie. Plus having the existing leadership all in one place they can be wiped out sets up John to be in charge after that.
7. It was implied to be shortwave, but it's more likely that Skynet didn't want to screw up it's already intricate plan. Connor and Marcus did exactly what it thought it wanted them to do. Now maybe they will, but Connor could refute it through secure channels easily enough also.
Good points, but since it's a movie I'm willing to go with the plausible reasons rather than tear it apart. They're all possible-enough to make the movie work with continuity from the first 3.
They know Kyle Reese was sent back to protect Sarah, they want him eliminated for that reason alone. The police took his picture in 1984, so easy biometric data available as well. And as someone else posted, the TX in T3 could have uploaded the data as well.
1) The resistance has an air force? Well, I can see how it's easier to maintain some A-10s and Hueys rather than F22s and Apaches. But wouldn't skynet just drop a nuclear bomb on any airport that was launching attacks and patrols?
How do you know Skynet still has nukes left? Maybe it thought using them all at once in the initial attack would be more effective? Maybe they had technology/resources Skynet wanted to capture rather than completely obliterate?
2) How does Skynet know who Kyle Reese is? At that point, he's just some starving teenager. If Skynet does know Kyle Reese, why doesn't it just kill him on first site?
In T3 Skynet helped to create itself. It could have contained data on what future Reese would send back, or it could have gotten access to the police files from when he was arrested in T1. Biometrics don't change significantly with age, especially if you can guess an approximate age.
3) Why would Skynet bother capturing people and transporting them back to a base instead of just killing them? Maybe they'll answer this one in the next movie.
They mentioned in this movie they're doing research on them. I assume to perfect the artificial skin and to learn more about human behavior.
4) Why are all these robots using nuclear and battery power while the terminator motorcycles are on gas engines?
The only motorcycle I recall needing gas wasn't a Terminator based one, but either way it's possible it was an old military project (gas based) that Skynet re-purposed without changing the engines out.
5) Moon Bloodgood's character has no place in this movie. The story would've been just fine without her. Marcus could have escaped somehow on his own to advance the story. "I looked into his eyes and saw a man." HE'S AN INFILTRATOR TERMINATOR YOU STUPID FUCKING TWAT! WHY TAKE THE CHANCE???? Sure she turned out to be right, but that's not the point.
She served as the voice of reason, much like John did in T2. Also, how would have found the base without meeting someone who knew where it was?
6) The resistance can maintain a submarine and hide it from an ocean-wide network of active and passive sonars?
Apparently it wasn't able to do so very well. It was implied that there were areas they didn't want to go, like near the surface. It's possible the resistance had damaged the network a bit in the decade+ after the nukes.
7) Why doesn't Skynet just triangulate John Connor's pirate radio broadcast signals? Why not jam those signals or better yet, fake his voice and give out false information?
The only transmissions using non-military equipment were not calls to attack, but more motivational or trying to stop an attack. It's possible they were encrypted to a series of relays, so Skynet couldn't locate the original source of the transmission. I'm sure they had encrypted military equipment, given the jets and copters they had taken over as well.
8) If Skynet can build the Marcus style robot in 2018, why bother building the Arnold model? Even if interfacing the human organs into the robot was some kind of one-time thing that Skynet couldn't duplicate, the robot body was still pretty bad ass. It was much more advanced than the Arnold model.
It'd make sense that since it was easy for a Terminator to take out, it was done as a one-off since John would recognize a T-800 already anyway. He grew up around them.
Plus, with the human heart it wasn't very strong. It was implied they were still trying to master the T-800's flesh, so this was probably just a stopgap with a 'weaker' model that would at least work.
9) Marcus and John Connor just happen to have the same blood type and whatever other biological compatibilities they need? It was touching and all, but the story
You may want to see the last 3 Terminator movies. After the first one there's always been a good Terminator also, which they seem to try to turn into a somewhat philosophical plot point as well. The current one's main robot theme is where does the line between man and machine end.
I guess you only can get what you want to from a movie though.
Portland's MAX is powered in part by wind and hydro sources. I don't think it's all renewable, but I know TriMet buys a significant amount of renewable electric from the dams up the Columbia.
I'm sure other areas have wind or water moving they could use for similar projects. Just use whatever applies in your climate.
Slashdot Mirror
They could add an orange border, or a banner at the bottom, or any number of options not requiring user interaction just as easily.
Maybe the problem is that you have degree requirements. Most of the people I know who can handle that stuff don't have a degree in IS, but they have plenty of real-world experience doing exactly what you're looking for. Apparently that piece of paper is worth a lot more than knowledge and experience, so you get exactly what you're advertising for.
I'd be more annoyed if they switched all the time, since my HDTV takes a second to switch modes. Also, my TV seems to record the mode each station broadcasts in, so that would probably confuse the hell out of it as well.
Sorry that they can't please all the people all the time, but on my old 4:3 TV I have no problem zooming in (and not missing any of the picture.) It sounds like your receiver may be more of the problem if it's cropping part of the picture.
But if Sweden did it they'd be copying something.
I thought the Master was killed at the end of Fallout? Doesn't that mean he's destined to fail, like why you don't build an AI and name it Skynet?
The original story was that they had requested the info, so them saying they have not actually has significance in this case.
Plus, I don't know of any brand of monitor that comes with a HDMI input. I know plenty of televisions that have them, and those televisions can be used as monitors... but they are NOT monitors. I've seen cables that convert from DVI to HDMI, but that is only video. There is no audio portion to that cable.
Wait, what?
Suddenly if a monitor has a TV tuner, it's not a monitor? The only difference between my 37" TV and a 37" monitor sold under a different brand is the remote control and TV tuner functions.
I use it mostly as a monitor, but I do watch hockey and other TV on it since it has an ATSC tuner built in. But I mostly watch Hulu, or downloaded videos, or even YouTube on it.
But, since it has an ATSC tuner it mustn't be a monitor.
That's why not all cables will have Ethernet built in, you don't always need it.
But, what if your Playstation wants to get online, and you already have an HDMI cable connecting it and your receiver. Your receiver already has HDMI to the cable box. Why not make the cable box also act as a cable modem, so that one cable to the receiver makes it a router?
Then the receiver can distribute the network to your BluRay, PS4, Xbox720, WiiWii, and eventually the PC built into your TV to stream video.
This is a forward-looking solution. Just because your current TV/monitor doesn't have a PC built in now doesn't mean that won't be a common feature in 10 years.
What's the sentence Lori Drew is facing for bypassing MySpace's security?
Or have a really, really funny story to tell about it.
He may have also invoked the Streisand Effect by attempting to get it removed. Who'd have noticed until he got upset?
The quoting is killing me, so I'll just use numbers:
1. The nuke appeared to be a bomb built into the base, not attached to a missile. I'm sure Skynet could have kept making nuclear missiles, but the humans probably could have too, and that wouldn't make for a very good movie. Remember, it's a movie, not a documentary.
That and, as I mentioned, there could well have been resources, information, or technologies at those bases that it wanted to capture rather than destroy.
2. It's not shown that Skynet gets the significance of Kyle Resse being John's father. I think they just assumed since John uses him in the future, John would come after him as bait.
4. It's possible I missed it from the sound, but even if they were gas-powered Skynet might be reusing engines it already had laying around. The large robot that launched them definitely has the size to store a good sized gas tank within it for in the field refueling.
5. There's other ways to write the story, but I don't think the character was completely worthless. Obviously she got through to John on some level since he agreed to work with Marcus after her antics.
6. The sub is pushing it, but it doesn't seem completely unreasonable that if there's a Resistance and Skynet presence overseas as it's implied, the Resistance would need a navy of some sort as well. They'd likely be fairly safe, until they blew their cover like they did in this movie. Plus having the existing leadership all in one place they can be wiped out sets up John to be in charge after that.
7. It was implied to be shortwave, but it's more likely that Skynet didn't want to screw up it's already intricate plan. Connor and Marcus did exactly what it thought it wanted them to do. Now maybe they will, but Connor could refute it through secure channels easily enough also.
Good points, but since it's a movie I'm willing to go with the plausible reasons rather than tear it apart. They're all possible-enough to make the movie work with continuity from the first 3.
They know Kyle Reese was sent back to protect Sarah, they want him eliminated for that reason alone. The police took his picture in 1984, so easy biometric data available as well. And as someone else posted, the TX in T3 could have uploaded the data as well.
1) The resistance has an air force? Well, I can see how it's easier to maintain some A-10s and Hueys rather than F22s and Apaches. But wouldn't skynet just drop a nuclear bomb on any airport that was launching attacks and patrols?
How do you know Skynet still has nukes left? Maybe it thought using them all at once in the initial attack would be more effective? Maybe they had technology/resources Skynet wanted to capture rather than completely obliterate?
2) How does Skynet know who Kyle Reese is? At that point, he's just some starving teenager. If Skynet does know Kyle Reese, why doesn't it just kill him on first site?
In T3 Skynet helped to create itself. It could have contained data on what future Reese would send back, or it could have gotten access to the police files from when he was arrested in T1. Biometrics don't change significantly with age, especially if you can guess an approximate age.
3) Why would Skynet bother capturing people and transporting them back to a base instead of just killing them? Maybe they'll answer this one in the next movie.
They mentioned in this movie they're doing research on them. I assume to perfect the artificial skin and to learn more about human behavior.
4) Why are all these robots using nuclear and battery power while the terminator motorcycles are on gas engines?
The only motorcycle I recall needing gas wasn't a Terminator based one, but either way it's possible it was an old military project (gas based) that Skynet re-purposed without changing the engines out.
5) Moon Bloodgood's character has no place in this movie. The story would've been just fine without her. Marcus could have escaped somehow on his own to advance the story. "I looked into his eyes and saw a man." HE'S AN INFILTRATOR TERMINATOR YOU STUPID FUCKING TWAT! WHY TAKE THE CHANCE???? Sure she turned out to be right, but that's not the point.
She served as the voice of reason, much like John did in T2. Also, how would have found the base without meeting someone who knew where it was?
6) The resistance can maintain a submarine and hide it from an ocean-wide network of active and passive sonars?
Apparently it wasn't able to do so very well. It was implied that there were areas they didn't want to go, like near the surface. It's possible the resistance had damaged the network a bit in the decade+ after the nukes.
7) Why doesn't Skynet just triangulate John Connor's pirate radio broadcast signals? Why not jam those signals or better yet, fake his voice and give out false information?
The only transmissions using non-military equipment were not calls to attack, but more motivational or trying to stop an attack. It's possible they were encrypted to a series of relays, so Skynet couldn't locate the original source of the transmission. I'm sure they had encrypted military equipment, given the jets and copters they had taken over as well.
8) If Skynet can build the Marcus style robot in 2018, why bother building the Arnold model? Even if interfacing the human organs into the robot was some kind of one-time thing that Skynet couldn't duplicate, the robot body was still pretty bad ass. It was much more advanced than the Arnold model.
It'd make sense that since it was easy for a Terminator to take out, it was done as a one-off since John would recognize a T-800 already anyway. He grew up around them.
Plus, with the human heart it wasn't very strong. It was implied they were still trying to master the T-800's flesh, so this was probably just a stopgap with a 'weaker' model that would at least work.
9) Marcus and John Connor just happen to have the same blood type and whatever other biological compatibilities they need? It was touching and all, but the story
You may want to see the last 3 Terminator movies. After the first one there's always been a good Terminator also, which they seem to try to turn into a somewhat philosophical plot point as well. The current one's main robot theme is where does the line between man and machine end.
I guess you only can get what you want to from a movie though.
If you want to see T2, go rent it. This is a different movie, and it doesn't need to be a cookie cutter ripoff of the first few.
My big concern is when are they going to do an analogue to Alien 4, and make the story so stupid that I can't even tolerate sitting through it?
I was considering switching to Sprint next month when my contract with Verizon is up. This pretty well seals it.
Scarier still is for a moment I thought that Pete Townsend was investigating this. After his work with child pornography we don't need that.
Why does all infrastructure need to pay for itself? Does PHX cover all its costs from passenger revenues?
There's other benefits to having a system like this beyond making it strictly a business venture.
Portland's MAX is powered in part by wind and hydro sources. I don't think it's all renewable, but I know TriMet buys a significant amount of renewable electric from the dams up the Columbia.
I'm sure other areas have wind or water moving they could use for similar projects. Just use whatever applies in your climate.
I think you meant the Two Minutes Hate.
That's too easy.
Or hackers on steroids. The Internet just gets scarier by the day.
Oddly they'd then be pirates also, since not all bands/labels are RIAA members.