"The quality of live performances certainly is almost* always worse than studio recordings, sometimes even dreadful. But no one really goes to live performances for the technical quality of the music do they?"
Depends. It depends on the quality of the performers, both as musicians, and as showmen.
I can speak mostly only from a historical standpoint on this. But, an example is Led Zeppelin. They did stuff on record that would be impossible to reproduce exactly the same on stage. However, their live performances (get the Led Zeppelin DVD if you don't have it) were something amazing. These guys would often put on 3+ hours concerts. They were talented musicians, and a talented group together, and would often improvise on stage, playing some fun and interesting stuff, different versions of songs, etc. In his day, Jimmy Page was a blast to watch on stage they way he moved around and emoted with music and movement. Sure, he probably has flubbed more notes in one show that some performers today could ever attempt, but, hey, he was playing 90 mph and drunk and on heroin, so I give him a break.:)
Another group, the Rolling Stones. They don't sound much at ALL live like they do on record, but, they are fantastic (especially in the mid 70's, get a copy of the bootleg "Ladies and Gentlemen The Rolling Stones" from '72) to go see live. They had stage presence, and would just get into a groove that made the audience jam with them.
One last example...Pink Floyd.
Ok...well, in concert, they can sound almost exactly like the album quite often, but, they also do some improve or extended versions of their songs. And I've yet to see anyone beat their stage show. You can't get that on a record, and I've seen the DVD's from the tours I went to, and the DVD cannot do the live show justice.
I think many of todays groups, have lost the performance ability. To lock into their audience and rock the whole place out. No lip sync'ing. And if you're really good...you don't need a huge spectacular stage and light show either. Again, look at those old Stones and Zeppelin performances. It was mostly just them on a stage with a light on them playing. And it was hard to beat.
"Well, since the most expensive movies are not worth watching outside of a *good* movie theater, I'd say the trend is clearly there."
I dunno about that really. Many people out there, self included, have invested in some pretty good gear to watch movies on at home. I have pretty high end projector, I have a screaming good stereo system (I do need to upgrade my surround processor) and can pretty much duplicate the best of a movie theater. In addition, I have an open bar, access to the kitchen, I can pick and choose the company I keep to watch it, and I can pause things whenever I need another drink or potty break.
I've only been to like two or so movies OUT at a public theater in like the past 7 years.
I can't be the only one out there doing this...as that the equipment, decent stuff is getting to the price level of more of the general public.
Besides, if you have a chick over to watch a movie...you are MUCH closer to your bedroom, than if you are at a movie house.
I think with even IE you can hit ctl-something, and another window opens...I'd as likely do that and go to the reference....
I don't usually keep a reference open when I do things..I only go to them when I need to see something I don't know, or when something blows up. When I'm doing DBA work..I don't always have a reference guide/book/website open when I'm doing things, only when something goes wrong I don't know how to solve off the top of my head, ya know?
"Sure, but if the wind is so far away that a huge portion of power is lost in transmission, you may want to look for more local sources of power (wind or otherwise)."
Well, for the people in the central states of the US, this would be local sources of power. So, what's the beef against it? The world doesn't revolve around those living in the NE of the USA.
"Testing what? Testing the w3schools site? Wouldn't you want to have your main browser open for references and things even though you might have another test browser open? Hell, I usually develop with 3 browsers open (Firefox, to use Firebug for debugging my Javascript stuff, Chrome to show the Javascript-heavy API docs, and Opera for everything else)."
Well, let's say your testing something with IE6...and it isn't working...if I was currently in that browser at that time, I would likely just go from there to the reference site to look around, rather than switch to another browser?
Maybe just a time saving thing...you're already in a browser window, why switch just to look something up?
"After all, we all know Germans are exact and punctual, Poles are thieves, Russians are drunk and Fins are even more so. Oh, and Mexicans are lazy and US people are simple minded. Any stereotype missing?"
That all Oriental people are great drivers, and the men are well endowed?
"You remember incorrectly. The purpose of receipts is so that they can verify that you have purchased the merchandise in your cart on exiting the store. Forcing you to do so before exiting is rather draconian, but they have every right to do so, should they choose."
Actually, they do not.
Only in a few states do the stores have some limited rights to detain you, and that is ONLY if they suspect you have shoplifted something, and they had better make damned they know you have or you can sue them pretty badly.
I don't put up with that receipt thing anywhere, with the exception of Sam's Club. I do believe I signed on the membership agreement (private club) that I would allow this. But any other public place, even if they post a sign on the store saying this policy, does not give them the right to stop you if you are not under suspicion of theft.
I walked out of Guitar Center awhile back, and the kid was almost coming after me "I have to check your receipt"...etc. I just kept walking and over my shoulder said, "No you do not, unless you suspect me of stealing something"...and with that said, he quickly shut up and went back inside. I wasn't a smartass about it, just calmly stated the facts and went about my way.
"If you're having sex with someone's brain, wouldn't that make the intelligent, clever, funny, and/or witty people of the world (not necessarily those with physically attractive shells) the more likely candidates for sex?
Logically this would be the case, as now the attraction would be at a level beyond the flesh."
I think you misunderstood.
You would hack into the brain of the really HOT chick, and make her want to fsck you!
In which case, again...the really hot girls would be VERY busy.
Well, maybe I need to learn a bit more how things work with OSX.
I've tried setting up the darwin ports and the other package management system, and haven't had a lot of success. I also found that these (when I could get it to work) usually had much older versions of everything I wanted to try. I find it easier to just put linux on sometimes, and just emerge
I find trying to put most open source things on OSX is more of a 'hack' than just having linux on it, and doing it the 'easy' way.
:)
But, it would be worthwhile for me to learn to do things within OSX. I do like the system for what is installed there, but, I've not yet had time to figure out and master how to install and run many of the open source apps I love so much with Linux.
It wouldn't be so bad, if they would just put in a 'classic' mode for Office.
I mean, they do it for Windows (I've not gone past XP yet, dunno if they do it for Vista). I prefer the classic mode, I like to use and view the directory structure, that's how I'm used to working. I don't like when they try to abstract too much for my 'benefit'.
"So, assuming your assumption is true (which is a pretty big assumption)... Still, why hack linux onto it. Linux has no hardware support for it at all, no application support etc. Hacking the supposedly locked down OS X (already possible with jailbreaking on iPhones etc) would result in having hardware and application support right there and ready."
I guess for the same reason people take Apple computers and laptops, remove (or dual boot) OSX and install Linux on them. They like the hardware, but prefer the different OS.
They may want to make the product more efficient (only install/compile what they want). They may want functionality and control of open source apps which are often MUCH easier to install, configure and manage with a Linux install rather than having to work it into the OSX environment.
There are often a good number of reasons people might want to do this...if for nothing else but for "because it can be done".
:-)
For such a new product, yes, drivers may be lagging for a little while, but, the Linux community usually comes up with them pretty quickly.
"Don't know if you've been to France recently, but they aren't doing any worse than any other Western power, the US included. Somehow, they manage to give all their citizens health care and they're not dropping dead in the streets or leaving the country to get treated."
Maybe I misunderstand your statement....but, I don't think we here in the US have a terrible problem of people dropping dead in the streets, nor fleeing to other countries to get treated....?
"Similar arguments were made in the 19th century here in the US in favor of keeping slavery: "They want to be slaves. They're only suited for field work."
Except one BIG difference. With my example...no one is forcing someone to be an idiot, not take advantage of an education, and do menial labor.
"If we educate people, after all, how are we going to fill the factories with minimum wage workers? "
You know...no matter HOW much you throw education, and opportunity at the populace, there are going to be a large number of them that don't want to learn, don't want to put forth the effort to learn, or by whatever reasons, just aren't blessed with intelligence to learn.
Due to this...there will always be people that are suited only for menial, low end, manual jobs...not that all of them will take it.
There's the old saying that " the world needs ditch diggers too".
"More recently this has expanded to include homophobia. "
I hate this terminology. A person that disagrees or finds homosexuality....is not necessarily afraid of homosexuality?!?!? They don't by definition have a fear of homosexuality.
"They also have pretty severe defense mechanisms having been hit on and flattered since they were 13 by everyone. Meanwhile, the more normal females who didn't get as much flattery are still open to it. In a way, being pretty sucks because they have trouble accepting compliments."
But that's part of what you have to cut through with a hot chick. You have to get THEM interested in you, by talking to them, slightly ignore them at times, give little digs at them or their looks (backhanded compliments and such). Quite often this works, and they're not used to it. They are used to guys fawning all over them, and when you do this type of thing, it can weird them out a little, and make them want you...etc.
Strange and hard to explain totally, but, I've seen it work really. In some ways, it works on most women. For some reason, maybe it is genetic, most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men, and yet go back to them.
A subtler version of this as I tried to describe above often works, especially on VERY hot women.
Slashdot Mirror
Careful there Mr. Coward,
Someone may brand you as a racist.
I have no idea what you just said here.
What does "rip the piss" mean? How do you rip the piss from an Amazon fake review?
Depends. It depends on the quality of the performers, both as musicians, and as showmen.
I can speak mostly only from a historical standpoint on this. But, an example is Led Zeppelin. They did stuff on record that would be impossible to reproduce exactly the same on stage. However, their live performances (get the Led Zeppelin DVD if you don't have it) were something amazing. These guys would often put on 3+ hours concerts. They were talented musicians, and a talented group together, and would often improvise on stage, playing some fun and interesting stuff, different versions of songs, etc. In his day, Jimmy Page was a blast to watch on stage they way he moved around and emoted with music and movement. Sure, he probably has flubbed more notes in one show that some performers today could ever attempt, but, hey, he was playing 90 mph and drunk and on heroin, so I give him a break. :)
Another group, the Rolling Stones. They don't sound much at ALL live like they do on record, but, they are fantastic (especially in the mid 70's, get a copy of the bootleg "Ladies and Gentlemen The Rolling Stones" from '72) to go see live. They had stage presence, and would just get into a groove that made the audience jam with them.
One last example...Pink Floyd.
Ok...well, in concert, they can sound almost exactly like the album quite often, but, they also do some improve or extended versions of their songs. And I've yet to see anyone beat their stage show. You can't get that on a record, and I've seen the DVD's from the tours I went to, and the DVD cannot do the live show justice.
I think many of todays groups, have lost the performance ability. To lock into their audience and rock the whole place out. No lip sync'ing. And if you're really good...you don't need a huge spectacular stage and light show either. Again, look at those old Stones and Zeppelin performances. It was mostly just them on a stage with a light on them playing. And it was hard to beat.
I dunno about that really. Many people out there, self included, have invested in some pretty good gear to watch movies on at home. I have pretty high end projector, I have a screaming good stereo system (I do need to upgrade my surround processor) and can pretty much duplicate the best of a movie theater. In addition, I have an open bar, access to the kitchen, I can pick and choose the company I keep to watch it, and I can pause things whenever I need another drink or potty break.
I've only been to like two or so movies OUT at a public theater in like the past 7 years.
I can't be the only one out there doing this...as that the equipment, decent stuff is getting to the price level of more of the general public.
Besides, if you have a chick over to watch a movie...you are MUCH closer to your bedroom, than if you are at a movie house.
I think with even IE you can hit ctl-something, and another window opens...I'd as likely do that and go to the reference....
I don't usually keep a reference open when I do things..I only go to them when I need to see something I don't know, or when something blows up. When I'm doing DBA work..I don't always have a reference guide/book/website open when I'm doing things, only when something goes wrong I don't know how to solve off the top of my head, ya know?
Well, for the people in the central states of the US, this would be local sources of power. So, what's the beef against it? The world doesn't revolve around those living in the NE of the USA.
Damn...now I want a smoke!!
Heck, they may not even be scared of homosexuals at all...?!?!
Well, let's say your testing something with IE6...and it isn't working...if I was currently in that browser at that time, I would likely just go from there to the reference site to look around, rather than switch to another browser?
Maybe just a time saving thing...you're already in a browser window, why switch just to look something up?
Who wants beer at freakin' room temperature?? Ick!
But, I do like the Monty Python quip:
"We find your American beer is a little like making love in a canoe..."
"Making love in a canoe?"
"Yeah, it is fucking close to water..."
That all Oriental people are great drivers, and the men are well endowed?
Actually, they do not.
Only in a few states do the stores have some limited rights to detain you, and that is ONLY if they suspect you have shoplifted something, and they had better make damned they know you have or you can sue them pretty badly.
I don't put up with that receipt thing anywhere, with the exception of Sam's Club. I do believe I signed on the membership agreement (private club) that I would allow this. But any other public place, even if they post a sign on the store saying this policy, does not give them the right to stop you if you are not under suspicion of theft.
I walked out of Guitar Center awhile back, and the kid was almost coming after me "I have to check your receipt"...etc. I just kept walking and over my shoulder said, "No you do not, unless you suspect me of stealing something"...and with that said, he quickly shut up and went back inside. I wasn't a smartass about it, just calmly stated the facts and went about my way.
I think you misunderstood.
You would hack into the brain of the really HOT chick, and make her want to fsck you!
In which case, again...the really hot girls would be VERY busy.
I've tried setting up the darwin ports and the other package management system, and haven't had a lot of success. I also found that these (when I could get it to work) usually had much older versions of everything I wanted to try. I find it easier to just put linux on sometimes, and just emerge
I find trying to put most open source things on OSX is more of a 'hack' than just having linux on it, and doing it the 'easy' way.
But, it would be worthwhile for me to learn to do things within OSX. I do like the system for what is installed there, but, I've not yet had time to figure out and master how to install and run many of the open source apps I love so much with Linux.
I mean, they do it for Windows (I've not gone past XP yet, dunno if they do it for Vista). I prefer the classic mode, I like to use and view the directory structure, that's how I'm used to working. I don't like when they try to abstract too much for my 'benefit'.
It take me forever to find anything I used to find simply in the past.
I'm guessing if you're kind of 'grown up' with the ribbon, it is easy, but, for someone like me, that is used to simple menus, it sure seems a PITA.
I guess for the same reason people take Apple computers and laptops, remove (or dual boot) OSX and install Linux on them. They like the hardware, but prefer the different OS.
They may want to make the product more efficient (only install/compile what they want). They may want functionality and control of open source apps which are often MUCH easier to install, configure and manage with a Linux install rather than having to work it into the OSX environment.
There are often a good number of reasons people might want to do this...if for nothing else but for "because it can be done".
For such a new product, yes, drivers may be lagging for a little while, but, the Linux community usually comes up with them pretty quickly.
Maybe I misunderstand your statement....but, I don't think we here in the US have a terrible problem of people dropping dead in the streets, nor fleeing to other countries to get treated....?
Except one BIG difference. With my example...no one is forcing someone to be an idiot, not take advantage of an education, and do menial labor.
Not nearly so many 'choices' with slavery.
Perhaps if we gave these jobs back to US citizens, then the uneducated, etc. would be able to make a living again.
And besides....someone has to operate the mechanical ditch diggers, I don't think we've made them into autonomous robots yet.
You know...no matter HOW much you throw education, and opportunity at the populace, there are going to be a large number of them that don't want to learn, don't want to put forth the effort to learn, or by whatever reasons, just aren't blessed with intelligence to learn.
Due to this...there will always be people that are suited only for menial, low end, manual jobs...not that all of them will take it.
There's the old saying that " the world needs ditch diggers too".
I hate this terminology. A person that disagrees or finds homosexuality....is not necessarily afraid of homosexuality?!?!? They don't by definition have a fear of homosexuality.
But that's part of what you have to cut through with a hot chick. You have to get THEM interested in you, by talking to them, slightly ignore them at times, give little digs at them or their looks (backhanded compliments and such). Quite often this works, and they're not used to it. They are used to guys fawning all over them, and when you do this type of thing, it can weird them out a little, and make them want you...etc.
Strange and hard to explain totally, but, I've seen it work really. In some ways, it works on most women. For some reason, maybe it is genetic, most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men, and yet go back to them.
A subtler version of this as I tried to describe above often works, especially on VERY hot women.
What? You actually talk/listen to them??
Wow..that's a new one. I figure if I'm fuckin' them...I'm getting along with them.