Actually, I agree with you to an extent about DS9. Most of the Dominion War arc was really good. Great acting and inventive storylines, and war episodes where the action took a back seat to character and story.
But seriously, the last two-hour episode was a disaster.
I know it's a big-time nerd-refrain, but Brannon and Braga have got to go. They've been running the franchise for almost ten years now, and guess what? DS9, Voyager, even the last season of TNG kind of sucked under them.
I think they keep trying to draw audiences by injecting episodes with BIG ACTION and SEXY SITUATIONS... well, that's not what made TNG good. TNG was good because of interesting ideas that were expanded on, often very subtly, sometimes without any threat to human life.
And every episode seems to follow a plot that's been done, what, like three, four times on previous Trek shows? My advice to save Enterprise is to fire Brannon and Braga, and hire only writer s that have never worked on any of the shows before. Keep around a 'bible' expert for continuity, but look for talented writers and producers. This is what will save the show.
Had a look - neat stuff, I might try it out, but still. Don't you want to see the original characters and themes with a truly modern engine and professionally done rendering/texturing? My point was that the new Doom, from the screenshots, doesn't really look like a Doom game at all.
The hype around this game in the gaming community is seeming to rival that of the new Star Wars prequels before they came out. We all remember what happened there, right? I'm not saying that hype=bad, necessarily, but looking at the screenshots, it looks nice graphically and all, but seriously, where are the imps? The floating eyeballs?
What I'm looking for in a new Doom game is a great graphical rendering of most of the original characters (and weapons) I came to love in the first game. And for god sake's, let me be able to unlock the maps for the first two games, newly rendered and with the new engine.
Well... maybe not quite the usual slashdotting. Thanks to your post, half the slashdotters are sitting on the page pressing reload over and over... making the count even higher.
Spammers have known this for years...
on
Can You Raed Tihs?
·
· Score: 1
Almost every spam I get (it always seems to be penis enlargement spam for some reason) always has the subject and most of the body mixed up - usually even worse than the example here. A great way to get past spam filters - and it's always obvious what "elnr3ge yxyrr m3imbr!" means - even if it has the effect of instantly making me know it's also spam.
So what is this info useful for? A spammer's tool? Perhaps know that we know how well we can read garbled words, we can (attempt) to build better spam filters?
Maybe it's just me, but every single logitech scroller I've used has really sucked. I'll move it one click, and nothing will happen, then two, then nothing will happen, then three, and the page will move about ten lines. Sometimes though, I'll move it one click, and it will move the specificed three lines. This has happened with every single Logitech mouse I've ever used. Anyone else have this problem?
To combat this they've already discussed creating a seperate category for blogs to help seperate these...
Okay, I don't quite understand the logic of this though. If Pagerank(tm) is supposed to be built off people linking a site because they recommend, aren't blogs a key tool in it? I've always seen Pagerank and a very grassroots tool; it uses people on the Web to suggest things. If thy separate blogs from searches and presumable Pagerank also, who's left to link sites for Pagerank, the corporate business sites? That doesn't seem too useful to me, and seems to open the whole thing up to corporate abuse.
This is what I do at work on the odd occasion I go to a site that Websense decides in inappropriate for viewing in my own office and for my own eyes...
Anyway, I'm not a techie, so I was wondering if anyone knows why it's not possible for Websense to block pages considering specific words, and not just specific domains. Is it because filtering words is by its nature buggy? You'd think a half-decent company would be able to write half-decent code to get around this.
I generally find a lot of things get modded funny that aren't really that funny, but I have to admit, even though your joke may have been in poor spirits, I was laughing out loud pretty hard at it.
They wanted $35! The movie only cost me ten bucks, and it had better acting.
Dude, $35 for a tabletop set is a pretty good deal considering most PC or console games start at around $60, and those games only last 20 hours on average. Invest in a couple of books and dice and you've got basically infinite playing time.
Re:I Think They Forgot One Thing
on
Dotcom Era Fads
·
· Score: 1
Where's Mahir though? I need to know where I kissyou.org fits in!
PS Bubble pops... ah, thanks for taking me back. I think that company had a staff of 600 and an IPO of $10 a share.
People should learn to live *with* the enviroment, not change/destroy it to suit them..
So should beavers stop building dams? Should birds stop building nests?
We are part of the environment. The environment changes all the time. Sometimes people change it, sometimes animals, sometimes germs or geologic forces.
We shouldn't follow old environmentalist dogma saying that we shouldn't change the environment because it's bad. We should be concerned with how we can change the environment in responsible ways so that it does not harm us in any way. Polluting the air is bad, because it makes us sick. Tearing down a mountain or draining an ocean (hypothetically speaking of course) would be fine if it proves useful to us and can be found not to have negative reprocussions on our species.
If you would have seen this on a computer exhibition it definetely would have looked very stylish
Yeah, as a promotional device, sure, people at an exhibition will be like the looks of it, I myself would probably think it looked pretty neat. But if it's designed to be a public terminal, why would it have trays for scanners and printers? Okay, on the rare occasion a public terminal might take need of these peripherals, I have to stand by my original point. Apple products (and I admit this isn't one) tend to look nice but not be as generally versatile and adaptable to peoples' needs.
I'm so glad that they've developed a manufacturing process for diamonds. Maybe this will bring them down to what the true market value should be? For all the complaining (and lawsuits) against MS, DeBeers is so much worse. Firstly, they basically create demand for the gem, by guilting young men into buying their fiancees diamond rings (a tradition DeBeers invented in the early 20th century) they buy up every diamond mine they can and keep a tight hold on supply to keep the prices high.
It's funny that now that diamonds are somewhat more accessible, people are starting to think of more uses for them. Diamonds are useful in so many more ways than rich-peoples' decoration. Sure, they're not as plentiful as silicone, but imagine if diamonds had been cheaper back in the heyday of microchip development? What kind of computers would we have now?
There are spammers/pr0no pages that try to get you to install a "porn downloader" ActiveX control.
This is why I really hate IE. Okay, ActiveX makes some things more convenient, but because it is downloading and installing a program on your computer, why does MS accept everything by default? Why doesn't MS try to educate people more about security settings on their browswer to stop this? I know before I set my ActiveX control to prompting whether to accept, I'd been infected with viruses and "xupiter" and auto-dialler type things.
Maybe this guy should sue MS for making such an unsecure browswer with terrible default security settings. Surely (if his story is indeed bonafide) this has to be one of the biggest single instances of personal damage done by IE's insecure default settings.
If we'd just spend all the money we waste on bombs on feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless throughout the world I'm sure we'd have alot fewer people to throw those bombs at.
I don't mean to sound cold-hearted and am not trying to insult you either, but I think your post is a little bit misguided.
The fact is, bombs exist, and they're going to be used by the military. Once a new weapon has been invented, there's no way it's ever going to go away unless it's replaced by something better. Period. Obviously it would be great if we lived in a totally peaceful society, it's just not the case. I think that this bomb is a genuine attempt to make more 'humane' bombs. The article didn't describe a bomb that's better because it kills more people, it's better because it kills less people. Sure, that's sort of a messed up way of looking at things, but you've got to look at the silver lining, right?
As far as spending the resources to feed and shelter the poor around the world, well, aid is great but it doesn't take the place of good infrastructure and responsible government in countries, which is exactly what many poor countries are lacking. I hate to say it, and I think the US went to war with Iraq for all the wrong reasons, but sometimes helping the world's poor and hungry means getting rid of repressive governments. How do we do that? Well, read above.
Um, the last time I remember, online RPGs are simply an extension of "offline" RPGs like D&D. And as I recall, people playing D&D don't write down what they want to say on little pieces of paper and show them to everybody. They talk to each other.
In my experience of playing D&D, people are way more into the roleplaying element when they're talking out-loud. My (brief) experience of MMORPGs is that people break character all the time.
Sure, not every case is the same, and everyone breaks character eventually all the time, but seriously, how will voice destroy the role playing element when voice comes from roleplaying's very foundation?
The whole point is making music or acting just isnt that much work, not compared to those who really do work., its definatly not worth anywhere near what they get for it.
Okay, I wont make a big deal about the poor spelling. But this is a really common misconception of the market economy. Sure, it might not seem fair that making music and acting are easier to do than other jobs and yet are paid better. But they are paid what they are worth, because someone has decided that they are worth it. That's how the market economy works.
Actors and sports players and musicians get paid a certain amount of money because they draw in a certain amount of sales. If a studio decided to just not pay its actors more than say $200,000 per film or anything, all the big-name actors would go do movies at other studios, and that studio would make more money because people generally like to go see movies with established names attached to them.
When you start talking about paying people only according to the actual amount of labour they do, judged on arbitrarily, say by the number of hours they work or something, you're basically talking about communism.
Dagnabbit, how hard is it to make your links sensible? I spend way too much time (~3 sec!) trying to figure out which of your links is the link and which are backstory.
I have to say I really agree.
I think some of the poster are better than others. Sure, link the parent site, but if you link the interview, the link should be embedded in the word 'interview' or better yet, 'interview with ###'. If you link somebody's name, that link should point to a bio or vanity page of that person.
Hey editors, maybe some guidelines on links in posts?
If the inquiry were to find something consequential, wouldn't the people being attacked by the RIAA have some grounds for a civil suit? Heck, even the support of a senator, if it doesn't go any further, might give good support for a class action lawsuit against the RIAA.
I could see class action cases started by lawyers working pro bono for recovery of settlement money, if it was shown to be coerced, or punitive damages for abuse to privacy, or even harm to minors (as many on the RIAA's list appear to be minors.)
When are we going to see a civil suit against the RIAA?
Slashdot Mirror
But seriously, the last two-hour episode was a disaster.
I think they keep trying to draw audiences by injecting episodes with BIG ACTION and SEXY SITUATIONS... well, that's not what made TNG good. TNG was good because of interesting ideas that were expanded on, often very subtly, sometimes without any threat to human life.
And every episode seems to follow a plot that's been done, what, like three, four times on previous Trek shows? My advice to save Enterprise is to fire Brannon and Braga, and hire only writer s that have never worked on any of the shows before. Keep around a 'bible' expert for continuity, but look for talented writers and producers. This is what will save the show.
Had a look - neat stuff, I might try it out, but still. Don't you want to see the original characters and themes with a truly modern engine and professionally done rendering/texturing? My point was that the new Doom, from the screenshots, doesn't really look like a Doom game at all.
What I'm looking for in a new Doom game is a great graphical rendering of most of the original characters (and weapons) I came to love in the first game. And for god sake's, let me be able to unlock the maps for the first two games, newly rendered and with the new engine.
Well... maybe not quite the usual slashdotting. Thanks to your post, half the slashdotters are sitting on the page pressing reload over and over... making the count even higher.
So what is this info useful for? A spammer's tool? Perhaps know that we know how well we can read garbled words, we can (attempt) to build better spam filters?
Maybe it's just me, but every single logitech scroller I've used has really sucked. I'll move it one click, and nothing will happen, then two, then nothing will happen, then three, and the page will move about ten lines. Sometimes though, I'll move it one click, and it will move the specificed three lines. This has happened with every single Logitech mouse I've ever used. Anyone else have this problem?
By the way, your speakers kinda suck too.
Okay, I don't quite understand the logic of this though. If Pagerank(tm) is supposed to be built off people linking a site because they recommend, aren't blogs a key tool in it? I've always seen Pagerank and a very grassroots tool; it uses people on the Web to suggest things. If thy separate blogs from searches and presumable Pagerank also, who's left to link sites for Pagerank, the corporate business sites? That doesn't seem too useful to me, and seems to open the whole thing up to corporate abuse.
This is what I do at work on the odd occasion I go to a site that Websense decides in inappropriate for viewing in my own office and for my own eyes...
Anyway, I'm not a techie, so I was wondering if anyone knows why it's not possible for Websense to block pages considering specific words, and not just specific domains. Is it because filtering words is by its nature buggy? You'd think a half-decent company would be able to write half-decent code to get around this.
Can anyone clue me in here?
Good work.
Dude, $35 for a tabletop set is a pretty good deal considering most PC or console games start at around $60, and those games only last 20 hours on average. Invest in a couple of books and dice and you've got basically infinite playing time.
PS Bubble pops... ah, thanks for taking me back. I think that company had a staff of 600 and an IPO of $10 a share.
We are part of the environment. The environment changes all the time. Sometimes people change it, sometimes animals, sometimes germs or geologic forces.
We shouldn't follow old environmentalist dogma saying that we shouldn't change the environment because it's bad. We should be concerned with how we can change the environment in responsible ways so that it does not harm us in any way. Polluting the air is bad, because it makes us sick. Tearing down a mountain or draining an ocean (hypothetically speaking of course) would be fine if it proves useful to us and can be found not to have negative reprocussions on our species.
Yeah, as a promotional device, sure, people at an exhibition will be like the looks of it, I myself would probably think it looked pretty neat. But if it's designed to be a public terminal, why would it have trays for scanners and printers? Okay, on the rare occasion a public terminal might take need of these peripherals, I have to stand by my original point. Apple products (and I admit this isn't one) tend to look nice but not be as generally versatile and adaptable to peoples' needs.
Style over substance, n'est pas?
Like, many Apple, products, seems nice on the eyes, but... just not functional for my needs.
Personally, I do more than just computer work at my desk. I need palces to put files, plants, phone, etc. Seriously, how functional is this deskspace?
It's funny that now that diamonds are somewhat more accessible, people are starting to think of more uses for them. Diamonds are useful in so many more ways than rich-peoples' decoration. Sure, they're not as plentiful as silicone, but imagine if diamonds had been cheaper back in the heyday of microchip development? What kind of computers would we have now?
Still cannot find a girlfriend.
This is why I really hate IE. Okay, ActiveX makes some things more convenient, but because it is downloading and installing a program on your computer, why does MS accept everything by default? Why doesn't MS try to educate people more about security settings on their browswer to stop this? I know before I set my ActiveX control to prompting whether to accept, I'd been infected with viruses and "xupiter" and auto-dialler type things.
Maybe this guy should sue MS for making such an unsecure browswer with terrible default security settings. Surely (if his story is indeed bonafide) this has to be one of the biggest single instances of personal damage done by IE's insecure default settings.
I don't mean to sound cold-hearted and am not trying to insult you either, but I think your post is a little bit misguided.
The fact is, bombs exist, and they're going to be used by the military. Once a new weapon has been invented, there's no way it's ever going to go away unless it's replaced by something better. Period. Obviously it would be great if we lived in a totally peaceful society, it's just not the case. I think that this bomb is a genuine attempt to make more 'humane' bombs. The article didn't describe a bomb that's better because it kills more people, it's better because it kills less people. Sure, that's sort of a messed up way of looking at things, but you've got to look at the silver lining, right?
As far as spending the resources to feed and shelter the poor around the world, well, aid is great but it doesn't take the place of good infrastructure and responsible government in countries, which is exactly what many poor countries are lacking. I hate to say it, and I think the US went to war with Iraq for all the wrong reasons, but sometimes helping the world's poor and hungry means getting rid of repressive governments. How do we do that? Well, read above.
Um, the last time I remember, online RPGs are simply an extension of "offline" RPGs like D&D. And as I recall, people playing D&D don't write down what they want to say on little pieces of paper and show them to everybody. They talk to each other.
In my experience of playing D&D, people are way more into the roleplaying element when they're talking out-loud. My (brief) experience of MMORPGs is that people break character all the time.
Sure, not every case is the same, and everyone breaks character eventually all the time, but seriously, how will voice destroy the role playing element when voice comes from roleplaying's very foundation?
tommer
Okay, I wont make a big deal about the poor spelling. But this is a really common misconception of the market economy. Sure, it might not seem fair that making music and acting are easier to do than other jobs and yet are paid better. But they are paid what they are worth, because someone has decided that they are worth it. That's how the market economy works.
Actors and sports players and musicians get paid a certain amount of money because they draw in a certain amount of sales. If a studio decided to just not pay its actors more than say $200,000 per film or anything, all the big-name actors would go do movies at other studios, and that studio would make more money because people generally like to go see movies with established names attached to them.
When you start talking about paying people only according to the actual amount of labour they do, judged on arbitrarily, say by the number of hours they work or something, you're basically talking about communism.
tommer
I have to say I really agree.
I think some of the poster are better than others. Sure, link the parent site, but if you link the interview, the link should be embedded in the word 'interview' or better yet, 'interview with ###'. If you link somebody's name, that link should point to a bio or vanity page of that person.
Hey editors, maybe some guidelines on links in posts?
Have you never seen Erin Brokovitch?
I could see class action cases started by lawyers working pro bono for recovery of settlement money, if it was shown to be coerced, or punitive damages for abuse to privacy, or even harm to minors (as many on the RIAA's list appear to be minors.)
When are we going to see a civil suit against the RIAA?
tommer
Who plays Doom anymore?