This should make for some really clear e-books. MS's ClearType and MS Reader (which, if you haven't tried it, really does blow the socks off of Adobe Acrobat in terms of readability and ease of use) now should display better than ever. I've course, I'm not going to spend the horrific prices that Dell is probably asking just to be able to enjoyably read Gutenberg e-texts, but I might buy one of these babies when TEXTBOOKS are commonly available in an e-book format. Imagine toting one slim laptop around, versus a back-braking collection of textbooks?
Does anyone know whether textbooks are available in e-book form?
Yes, I am replying to myself. I know, that officially makes me lame, but I have karma points to burn, so moderate away.
And moderation is precisely the reason I am writing this: someone moderated my previous post as "redundant," and wouldn't the word redundant mean, in this case, that the information had been provided before? I am not going to re-read all of the messages spawned by this article, but I _do_ know that no one had posted this information before I did.
Unless, on Slashdot, redundant has taken on some alternate meaning?
Go to the:CueCat website for details on the reader, including the Radio Shack promotion.
They will send you a:CueCat reader and:CRQ System Software for the cost of shipping (I'm assuming this is for those folks without a Radio Shack nearby). Click here to link directly to the order form. Note that they won't be taking orders until August 24th.
So far, the software only supports Windows 95, 98, NT 4, and Windows2000.
Their "10 Least influential TV list" missed the boat entirely. Any such list that doesn't include "Manimal" and Automan" is lacking indeed!
And does anyone remember the name of that series with the untalented little girl who played a robot? Not quite as bad as "Manimal," but it comes close...
Am I the only person on this forum who thought Zardoz kicked ass? Sure, it was obtuse, bizarre, and pretentious, but it _did_ have the erotic Charlotte Rampling in, and Sean Connery looking pretty buff. Besides, can a movie directed by the same man who brought us Deliverance, Excalibur, and Hope and Glory really be on a "least influential" list?
Zardoz was at least as good as Barbarella, and I don't see Barbarella on the list!
Zork was wonderful for its time, but Iif Myst killed the adventure game, it did so by raising the bar so high that few developers could surmount it.
It is fascinating how much opinions can differ. I consider Myst such a shallow and sterile game that it almost chills me that anyone can claim that it "rais[ed] the bar."
The detailed texture of the game's objects and scenery was immensely evocative and imaginative...
Again, wow. Banal and _unimaginative_ are adjectives that I might apply to Myst, but "evocative and imaginative?" I guess we have two mindsets here: I have never seen a film, no matter how excellent, which could even BEGIN to compare to a moderately entertaining book. And I love both films and books. But my mind's eye paints a more appealing picture than any cinematographer or director ever could.
What genre? Typing commands at a terminal until a program told you that you won?
If, as you say, you have always loved adventure games, then you know that there is much more to adventure games than your dismissive description. As for it being a genre, there is really no argument here, as a genre is merely a category of artistic or literary composition which is characterized by a particular style (to paraphrase from the dictionary).
The people you talk about aren't under you.
Did I say that they were? I didn't even infer that they were. What I did say, however (though perhaps implicitly), and I still maintain, is that their zealotry confused for all late-comers the distinctions between two entirely different genres: the point-and-click puzzle slideshow, and the wholly more atmospheric and interactive adventure game.
This game probably did more to damage the adventure genre than any other. It meant that people who hated adventure games could suddenly consider themselves fans of the genre, which spread the same deadly (anti-qualitative) memes that Star Wars had spread over Science Fiction. Millions of people -- people who didn't know or care what a slavering grue was! -- sat enraptured by a slideshow with polished but sterile graphics and token elements of gameplay. Meeting another fan of adventure games become a trepidatious, usually painful experience: "I love adventure games!" could now most-often be translated: "I've played Myst and Riven! What's a Zork? Isn't Scott Addams the guy who writes Dilbert?"
And on Slashdot, you can belong to any religion you want, so long as it's not Christianity.
There are isolated enclaves of US society where Xtianity is not the norm (Slashdot _possibly_ among them) , but it should be rather obvious that the US is a country biased towards Xtianity.
Our major holidays are religious, Congress opens with prayer, our currency invokes His name, we mention Him in our national pledge, and our two major presidential candidates have described themselves as "born again." Thousands of hours are spent arguing for and against nativity scenes in public places, prayer in public schools, and the display of the ten commandments in courtrooms.
Do you really ever expect to see a Hindu or a Jew or an atheist as President? Or even a Mormon (non-Xtians to many)?
And to the enlightened individual who mentioned "Mennenites" (sic) in another post, the Mennonites _are_ Xtians, tolerated for their differences in the US because they are considered harmless and quaint.
Look, in the US society supports individual rights over those of societal rights. So long as noone bugs us too much, you can do pretty much what you want, sue whomever you want, and that's just the way it is.
I disagree. In US society, prostitution is illegal, recreational drug use is illegal, professed public atheism can make you a pariah (you can belong to any religion you want in the US, as long as it is Xtianity), the practice of homosexuality is illegal in many states (and verboten in the military), the use of alcohol is forbidden until the age of 21, the state dictates that you must wear a helmet to ride a motorcycle, there are no nipples allowed in US tabloids (oh, the pain and suffering caused by a perky tit!), and anti-intellectualism is rife (this haven of geekdom aside - and, of course, I know there are other exceptions).
Each and every one of those restrictions violate my individual rights. Every country restricts some of the behaviors listed above, and some restrict all of them. However, my point is that the US is _not_ the sole claimant to the title "land of the free and home of the brave," despite what some of its more insular residents might think.
And, yes, I _am_ a US citizen, but I lived overseas for approximately 15 years (in many diverse locations), so I do know, firsthand, what I am talking about.
No, I don't need examples of places that are worse, as I've been to those places, too.
They are comparing apples and oranges in more ways than one.
Linux is being installed with increasing frequency, but out of those who have installed Linux, whether downloaded or purchased, how many are STILL running Linux, or are running it as their main OS?
My own experience and intuition tell me that a significantly larger portion of Windows users (whether the product was pirated or purchased) are STILL using Windows many years after their first exposure.
Does anybody have any statistics to contradict this?
>millenium isnt expected for another 24 months, and noone likes 2000
First of all, Windows Me is expected to ship on September 14th. Second, I sell more copies of Windows 2000 than any other OS, so many "noone['s]" [sic] appear to like it.
Apart from Windows Me (which I've been running for a month, and it is bloody marvelous), Windows 2000 is perhaps the best OS that MS has ever produced. I know, this will lead some wit to retort "that isn't saying much," and someone else will probably point out that I can't logically compare a 9x consumer OS upgrade to the latest version of NT, but I feel it is appropriate considering the upcoming convergence of the two cores.
I agree entirely. Here are my sentiments regarding Myst (posted previously at www.about.com):
This game probably did more to damage the adventure genre than any other. It meant that people who hated adventure games could suddenly consider themselves fans of the genre, which spread the same deadly (anti-qualitative) memes that Star Wars had spread over Science Fiction. Millions of people - people who didn't know or care what a slavering grue was! - sat enraptured by a slideshow with polished but sterile graphics and token elements of gameplay. Meeting another fan of adventure games become a trepidatious, usually painful experience: "I love adventure games!" could now most-often be translated: "I've played Myst and Riven! What's a Zork? Isn't Scott Addams the guy who writes Dilbert?"
As explicated, yes, it is more complete, but I disagree with your assertion that it is more "mature," as I hold exactly the same opinion regarding "grey hat" hackers as I did when I first posted in this thread.
IMHO, it shouldn't be necessary to spell out all steps of a cognitive process, especially on a forum like Slashdot, where, ostensibly, geeks rule the roost. A geek should be able to surmise the obvious elements, and ramifications, of a simple argument, without it being explicated. In other words, I knew that someone would bring up the "crowbar" anaology, but I hoped against hope that no one would, as its rebuttal is so self-evident (my previous message) that it seemed silly to preemptively counter it.
Acme Crowbar Corp. sells crowbars for tens of thousands of uses, most which do not involve burglary.
If they sold crowbars for the express purpose of burglary, or if crowbars were an implement specifically designed for the commission of burglaries, then you should definitely be able to sue.
A HACKING TOOL HAS NO OTHER PURPOSE EXCEPT TO HACK.
I know, you can claim educational benefits, and to an extent this may be true. However, your right to a criminal education does NOT give you a right to violate my person or property. Hacking tools are designed to aide and abet hackers, and hacking is (or certainly should be) a criminal activity.
So, someone finds an exploit in a program that I am using and publicizes this fact over the Internet. Now, instead of one person being privy to this information (the discoverer), or twenty persons (the simultaneous serendipitious co-discoverers), 50 MILLION cretins now have the power to utilize this exploit. Let's do the arithmetic: do I want 20 potential attackers, or 50 MILLION? Hello? Not a hard decision, is it? Further, why do these noble Hacker Knights find it necessary to provide explicit instructions and TOOLS so that any moron can utilize their exploit?
I'll agree that, if I were a public-minded hacker who had selflessly invested hundreds of hours of my time uncovering a dangerous exploit, and, after reporting it to the vendor, no action was taken after a reasonable interval, I might be a bit miffed that the vendor was so ungrateful. I would then certainly publicize the exploit, but WITHOUT GIVING DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS!
"Grey hat" hackers don't exist. They are publishing the results of their hacking for personal gain, whether that gain be fame or monetary.
I am violating my own.sig here, but I'll live with myself:
Dear Asshole,
There are no flaws in my argument. If a person finds a vulnerability in my system and then quietly, privately lets me know about it, that person is my friend. But if the bastard publicizes that vulnerability so that I become victim to myriad attacks by script kiddies and their ilk, _that_ person is my enemy.
To simplify for the simpleton, if you cause harm to my person or property, then you are a criminal. If you do anything to aide or abet harm to my person or property, you are also a criminal.
There are no "grey hat" hackers. There are those who hack maliciously, and with full self-knowledge of their evil intent, and there are those who pontificate, and rationalize their hacking and try to make it sound noble and imbue it with self-righteous virtue.
Fuck 'em. If I am using piece of software, closed source or open, and you provide the keys to compromise my safety and/or security, then you are a criminal who deserves to rot in hell. I don't care what color of hat you think you are wearing. Aryan Nation thugs justify their evil, too. "Gray hat" hackers are talented, but they are masturbating in thrall to their own "power."
First, there is no connection between wearing a straightjacket and being a droid. If I anthromorphize the droid sufficiently (a la Star Wars), it might be said to "like" or "dislike" something, but I seriously doubt that they will ever be programmed with predilictions (or not) for straightjackets. Second, as a human (non-droid) you and I have the liberty of wearing straightjackets or not wearing them; it might be part of our particular kink to wear them. I, myself, like to have all of the different kinks available for me to use or not to use. Replace the word "kink" or "choice" with "straightjacket" and you will see that MS are not confining us at all by introducing this new (or borrowed) technology. If we want to use it, use it, which is always better than wanting it and not having it available. Yes, I'm pointing out that your objection is simple-minded anti-MS bullshit.
I would take this a lot more seriously if an Anonymous Coward had not written it, especially in light of the sentiment:
"You must get involved NOW while you still can..."
Part of getting involved means stepping out of the shadows. It is easy to make claims such as "[I] spent 6 months of... [my] life in fear, and lost tens of thousands of dollars in cash because of sharing MP3s files..." when you are anonymous. If you were sued by the RIAA, then court records exist, which makes anonymity pointless, and even more cowardly than the Slashdot nom de plume normally implies.
Support your claims with details - not excluding your identity or the facts of the case.
I wish them more than luck (which, IMHO, doesn't exist, but it is still polite to wish upon those whom you wish success). So, I will do this: I wish them success.
Julian Morrison is a close personal friend, and, despite some misgivings about the philosophy spawning this endeavour, and despite the possible evils that might be wrought using it, I do believe that it is a technology which the world needs if it is to stay free (or become free?). I believe that without passion - and Julian posesses passion in abundance - such a project and such a goal would not ever get off the ground.
I guess I'm suggesting that Julian probably understands that for others in the OSS community to embrace this project, they need, first, to be aware of it, and, second, to feel ON FIRE about it. I feel that Julian has accomplished both of these things: early awareness (combined with the ostensible credibility that both hosting on sourceforge brings, and discussion on Slashdot), and the lighting of an emblematic fire with the force of his philosophy.
I believe that Arnie's decompression and the rapid pressurization of Mars were supposed to be "real," which is exactly what made the movie such a piece of shit. It entirely blew my ability to believe in those last moments of the film, when it had been mildly entertaining before then.
Nominations for other movies with horrendous endings:
The Abyss; Titan A.E; Star Trek V: The Final Frontier The Black Hole; The Deer Hunter.
Only The Deer Hunter was saved from being complete shit, and that only because of the otherwise brilliant direction of Michael Cimino.
Slashdot Mirror
This should make for some really clear e-books. MS's ClearType and MS Reader (which, if you haven't tried it, really does blow the socks off of Adobe Acrobat in terms of readability and ease of use) now should display better than ever. I've course, I'm not going to spend the horrific prices that Dell is probably asking just to be able to enjoyably read Gutenberg e-texts, but I might buy one of these babies when TEXTBOOKS are commonly available in an e-book format. Imagine toting one slim laptop around, versus a back-braking collection of textbooks?
Does anyone know whether textbooks are available in e-book form?
Yes, I am replying to myself. I know, that officially makes me lame, but I have karma points to burn, so moderate away.
And moderation is precisely the reason I am writing this: someone moderated my previous post as "redundant," and wouldn't the word redundant mean, in this case, that the information had been provided before? I am not going to re-read all of the messages spawned by this article, but I _do_ know that no one had posted this information before I did.
Unless, on Slashdot, redundant has taken on some alternate meaning?
Go to the :CueCat website for details on the reader, including the Radio Shack promotion.
:CueCat reader and :CRQ System Software for the cost of shipping (I'm assuming this is for those folks without a Radio Shack nearby). Click here to link directly to the order form. Note that they won't be taking orders until August 24th.
They will send you a
So far, the software only supports Windows 95, 98, NT 4, and Windows2000.
Thank you... you appreciated my point exactly.
.sig, which obviously does not apply to you. :-)
And, because you are a gentleman and a scholar, please ignore my impolite
Their "10 Least influential TV list" missed the boat entirely. Any such list that doesn't include "Manimal" and Automan" is lacking indeed!
And does anyone remember the name of that series with the untalented little girl who played a robot? Not quite as bad as "Manimal," but it comes close...
Am I the only person on this forum who thought Zardoz kicked ass? Sure, it was obtuse, bizarre, and pretentious, but it _did_ have the erotic Charlotte Rampling in, and Sean Connery looking pretty buff. Besides, can a movie directed by the same man who brought us Deliverance, Excalibur, and Hope and Glory really be on a "least influential" list?
Zardoz was at least as good as Barbarella, and I don't see Barbarella on the list!
I, Rafael, predict the majority of comments posted to this article will be lusers sharing their experiences with their least favorite movie.
To help fulfill this prophecy, and elevate Rafael above Jean Dixon status, I list my least favorite movies of all time:
1. The Black Hole;
2. Any Star Wars movie;
3. Any Patrick Wayne movie;
4. Any Doug McClure movie;
5. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.
Note that these are listed in no particular order.
Zork was wonderful for its time, but Iif Myst killed the adventure game, it did so by raising the bar so high that few developers could surmount it.
It is fascinating how much opinions can differ. I consider Myst such a shallow and sterile game that it almost chills me that anyone can claim that it "rais[ed] the bar."
The detailed texture of the game's objects and scenery was immensely evocative and imaginative...
Again, wow. Banal and _unimaginative_ are adjectives that I might apply to Myst, but "evocative and imaginative?" I guess we have two mindsets here: I have never seen a film, no matter how excellent, which could even BEGIN to compare to a moderately entertaining book. And I love both films and books. But my mind's eye paints a more appealing picture than any cinematographer or director ever could.
Just my opinion, of course.
What genre? Typing commands at a terminal until a program told you that you won?
If, as you say, you have always loved adventure games, then you know that there is much more to adventure games than your dismissive description. As for it being a genre, there is really no argument here, as a genre is merely a category of artistic or literary composition which is characterized by a particular style (to paraphrase from the dictionary).
The people you talk about aren't under you.
Did I say that they were? I didn't even infer that they were. What I did say, however (though perhaps implicitly), and I still maintain, is that their zealotry confused for all late-comers the distinctions between two entirely different genres: the point-and-click puzzle slideshow, and the wholly more atmospheric and interactive adventure game.
Whether you agree with or not is another matter.
Here is an opinion I expressed earlier about Myst on the Interactifiction site:
This game probably did more to damage the adventure genre than any other. It meant that people who hated adventure games could suddenly consider themselves fans of the genre, which spread the same deadly (anti-qualitative) memes that Star Wars had spread over Science Fiction. Millions of people -- people who didn't know or care what a slavering grue was! -- sat enraptured by a slideshow with polished but sterile graphics and token elements of gameplay. Meeting another fan of adventure games become a trepidatious, usually painful experience: "I love adventure games!" could now most-often be translated: "I've played Myst and Riven! What's a Zork? Isn't Scott Addams the guy who writes Dilbert?"
And on Slashdot, you can belong to any religion you want, so long as it's not Christianity.
There are isolated enclaves of US society where Xtianity is not the norm (Slashdot _possibly_ among them) , but it should be rather obvious that the US is a country biased towards Xtianity.
Our major holidays are religious, Congress opens with prayer, our currency invokes His name, we mention Him in our national pledge, and our two major presidential candidates have described themselves as "born again." Thousands of hours are spent arguing for and against nativity scenes in public places, prayer in public schools, and the display of the ten commandments in courtrooms.
Do you really ever expect to see a Hindu or a Jew or an atheist as President? Or even a Mormon (non-Xtians to many)?
And to the enlightened individual who mentioned "Mennenites" (sic) in another post, the Mennonites _are_ Xtians, tolerated for their differences in the US because they are considered harmless and quaint.
Look, in the US society supports individual rights over those of societal rights. So long as noone bugs us too much, you can do pretty much what you want, sue whomever you want, and that's just the way it is.
I disagree. In US society, prostitution is illegal, recreational drug use is illegal, professed public atheism can make you a pariah (you can belong to any religion you want in the US, as long as it is Xtianity), the practice of homosexuality is illegal in many states (and verboten in the military), the use of alcohol is forbidden until the age of 21, the state dictates that you must wear a helmet to ride a motorcycle, there are no nipples allowed in US tabloids (oh, the pain and suffering caused by a perky tit!), and anti-intellectualism is rife (this haven of geekdom aside - and, of course, I know there are other exceptions).
Each and every one of those restrictions violate my individual rights. Every country restricts some of the behaviors listed above, and some restrict all of them. However, my point is that the US is _not_ the sole claimant to the title "land of the free and home of the brave," despite what some of its more insular residents might think.
And, yes, I _am_ a US citizen, but I lived overseas for approximately 15 years (in many diverse locations), so I do know, firsthand, what I am talking about.
No, I don't need examples of places that are worse, as I've been to those places, too.
...any computer user "suspicious" enough to be compares (sic) to John Wayne Gacy or Kevin Mitnick.
Not a very good comparison. John Wayne Gacey was a sicko, whereas Kevin Mitnick was just a clever, if incautious, hacker.
They are comparing apples and oranges in more ways than one.
Linux is being installed with increasing frequency, but out of those who have installed Linux, whether downloaded or purchased, how many are STILL running Linux, or are running it as their main OS?
My own experience and intuition tell me that a significantly larger portion of Windows users (whether the product was pirated or purchased) are STILL using Windows many years after their first exposure.
Does anybody have any statistics to contradict this?
>millenium isnt expected for another 24 months, and noone likes 2000
First of all, Windows Me is expected to ship on September 14th. Second, I sell more copies of Windows 2000 than any other OS, so many "noone['s]" [sic] appear to like it.
Apart from Windows Me (which I've been running for a month, and it is bloody marvelous), Windows 2000 is perhaps the best OS that MS has ever produced. I know, this will lead some wit to retort "that isn't saying much," and someone else will probably point out that I can't logically compare a 9x consumer OS upgrade to the latest version of NT, but I feel it is appropriate considering the upcoming convergence of the two cores.
I agree entirely. Here are my sentiments regarding Myst (posted previously at www.about.com):
This game probably did more to damage the adventure genre than any other. It meant that people who hated adventure games could suddenly consider themselves fans of the genre, which spread the same deadly (anti-qualitative) memes that Star Wars had spread over Science Fiction. Millions of people - people who didn't know or care what a slavering grue was! - sat enraptured by a slideshow with polished but sterile graphics and token elements of gameplay. Meeting another fan of adventure games become a trepidatious, usually painful experience: "I love adventure games!" could now most-often be translated: "I've played Myst and Riven! What's a Zork? Isn't Scott Addams the guy who writes Dilbert?"
Both thumbs down to Myst.
As explicated, yes, it is more complete, but I disagree with your assertion that it is more "mature," as I hold exactly the same opinion regarding "grey hat" hackers as I did when I first posted in this thread.
IMHO, it shouldn't be necessary to spell out all steps of a cognitive process, especially on a forum like Slashdot, where, ostensibly, geeks rule the roost. A geek should be able to surmise the obvious elements, and ramifications, of a simple argument, without it being explicated. In other words, I knew that someone would bring up the "crowbar" anaology, but I hoped against hope that no one would, as its rebuttal is so self-evident (my previous message) that it seemed silly to preemptively counter it.
Acme Crowbar Corp. sells crowbars for tens of thousands of uses, most which do not involve burglary.
If they sold crowbars for the express purpose of burglary, or if crowbars were an implement specifically designed for the commission of burglaries, then you should definitely be able to sue.
A HACKING TOOL HAS NO OTHER PURPOSE EXCEPT TO HACK.
I know, you can claim educational benefits, and to an extent this may be true. However, your right to a criminal education does NOT give you a right to violate my person or property. Hacking tools are designed to aide and abet hackers, and hacking is (or certainly should be) a criminal activity.
So, someone finds an exploit in a program that I am using and publicizes this fact over the Internet. Now, instead of one person being privy to this information (the discoverer), or twenty persons (the simultaneous serendipitious co-discoverers), 50 MILLION cretins now have the power to utilize this exploit. Let's do the arithmetic: do I want 20 potential attackers, or 50 MILLION? Hello? Not a hard decision, is it? Further, why do these noble Hacker Knights find it necessary to provide explicit instructions and TOOLS so that any moron can utilize their exploit?
I'll agree that, if I were a public-minded hacker who had selflessly invested hundreds of hours of my time uncovering a dangerous exploit, and, after reporting it to the vendor, no action was taken after a reasonable interval, I might be a bit miffed that the vendor was so ungrateful. I would then certainly publicize the exploit, but WITHOUT GIVING DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS!
"Grey hat" hackers don't exist. They are publishing the results of their hacking for personal gain, whether that gain be fame or monetary.
Fuck 'em all with a broomstick.
I am violating my own .sig here, but I'll live with myself:
Dear Asshole,
There are no flaws in my argument. If a person finds a vulnerability in my system and then quietly, privately lets me know about it, that person is my friend. But if the bastard publicizes that vulnerability so that I become victim to myriad attacks by script kiddies and their ilk, _that_ person is my enemy.
To simplify for the simpleton, if you cause harm to my person or property, then you are a criminal. If you do anything to aide or abet harm to my person or property, you are also a criminal.
There are no "grey hat" hackers. There are those who hack maliciously, and with full self-knowledge of their evil intent, and there are those who pontificate, and rationalize their hacking and try to make it sound noble and imbue it with self-righteous virtue.
Fuck 'em. If I am using piece of software, closed source or open, and you provide the keys to compromise my safety and/or security, then you are a criminal who deserves to rot in hell. I don't care what color of hat you think you are wearing. Aryan Nation thugs justify their evil, too. "Gray hat" hackers are talented, but they are masturbating in thrall to their own "power."
The quicker we lock them up, the better.
First, there is no connection between wearing a straightjacket and being a droid. If I anthromorphize the droid sufficiently (a la Star Wars), it might be said to "like" or "dislike" something, but I seriously doubt that they will ever be programmed with predilictions (or not) for straightjackets. Second, as a human (non-droid) you and I have the liberty of wearing straightjackets or not wearing them; it might be part of our particular kink to wear them. I, myself, like to have all of the different kinks available for me to use or not to use. Replace the word "kink" or "choice" with "straightjacket" and you will see that MS are not confining us at all by introducing this new (or borrowed) technology. If we want to use it, use it, which is always better than wanting it and not having it available. Yes, I'm pointing out that your objection is simple-minded anti-MS bullshit.
I would take this a lot more seriously if an Anonymous Coward had not written it, especially in light of the sentiment:
... [my] life in fear, and lost tens of thousands of dollars in cash because of sharing MP3s files..." when you are anonymous. If you were sued by the RIAA, then court records exist, which makes anonymity pointless, and even more cowardly than the Slashdot nom de plume normally implies.
"You must get involved NOW while you still can..."
Part of getting involved means stepping out of the shadows. It is easy to make claims such as "[I] spent 6 months of
Support your claims with details - not excluding your identity or the facts of the case.
I wish them more than luck (which, IMHO, doesn't exist, but it is still polite to wish upon those whom you wish success). So, I will do this: I wish them success.
.02 cents worth, of course.
Julian Morrison is a close personal friend, and, despite some misgivings about the philosophy spawning this endeavour, and despite the possible evils that might be wrought using it, I do believe that it is a technology which the world needs if it is to stay free (or become free?). I believe that without passion - and Julian posesses passion in abundance - such a project and such a goal would not ever get off the ground.
I guess I'm suggesting that Julian probably understands that for others in the OSS community to embrace this project, they need, first, to be aware of it, and, second, to feel ON FIRE about it. I feel that Julian has accomplished both of these things: early awareness (combined with the ostensible credibility that both hosting on sourceforge brings, and discussion on Slashdot), and the lighting of an emblematic fire with the force of his philosophy.
Just my
I believe that Arnie's decompression and the rapid pressurization of Mars were supposed to be "real," which is exactly what made the movie such a piece of shit. It entirely blew my ability to believe in those last moments of the film, when it had been mildly entertaining before then.
Nominations for other movies with horrendous endings:
The Abyss;
Titan A.E;
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
The Black Hole;
The Deer Hunter.
Only The Deer Hunter was saved from being complete shit, and that only because of the otherwise brilliant direction of Michael Cimino.