The cards for the Paris subway transport system are also that convenient -- just wave them over the sensor as you walk through --, but I don't think they use RFID, and though the cards are registered at your name, the signal doesn't carry that, so it's impossible to track your movements.
Well don't sit at the back of the theatre! I always sit at the front rows. And I know THX is only a certification, but given the fee to make the people from Skywalker sound come over and certify it, only theatres will have it. As a matter of fact there's only one THX theatre in Paris and I went to see Reloaded for the first time in that one, even if it meant paying extra (I've got a subscription for an other theatre franchise, 15 per month for as many movies as I want) and waiting a whole afternoon in line.
I'm sorry, but (if you're a purist, that is, and I know I am), you just can't beat the cinematic experience you get in a theatre.
I'm sorry, but I disagree. Sure, watching a movie at home is a lot more practical and now that home theater systems have evolved it's also become a worthwhile experience, but a 52 inch screen isn't a silver screen and 5.1 isn't THX.
I'm a positive movie lover and a purist, and the experience you get at a theater is really different to the one you get even on the best home theater system (unless that is of course an actual home theater, the kind you see in MTV Cribs). The DVD to the Japanese movie Avalon (extremely unknown, but probably the best photography ever in a movie) came out in Japan before the movie was out in Europe (where I am), so I got the opportunity to watch it on DVD before I could go see it in a cinema and I refused, because I know it's not going to be the same as in a theater, and I wanted to have that experience first. Now that the DVD came out in here, I bought it and watch it often.
Sorry, but home systems will never replace the cinema. For all its disadvantages, it remains the best motion picture experience possible.
Well first of all The Hulk was very good. And second of all, if I won't text my friends that a movie sucks, I'll e-mail them, call them, or *GASP* tell them when I meet them.
There were wars with Spain and Mexico, but that's not what I meant. The second Amendment was meant as protection from possible enemies, whether or not those exist.
I don't see how a fact is romantic bullshit. The regime was founded 230 years ago and is still in charge and that's unheard of. It made gun ownership into a right -- in order to defend that stability. That's unheard of. I'm simply stating that.
On the other hand "Picture yourself at Gettysburg" is pretty romantic, and extremely bullshit given the issue at hand. As a matter of fact all of your post is.
First of all, I wasn't defending the Second Amendment, I personally think allowing your citizens to buy guns is just ludicrous. I wasn't even playing devil's advocate, I was just mentioning little-known facts for my fellow Slashdotters' perusal.;-P
Second of all your post makes no real sense. Your point *seems* to be that Canada has been doing a lot better without guns. That's true, and the same can also be said about Great Britain. I could argue that neither of those countries have the population nor the history of the U.S., but that would get us into a comparison of sociohistoric, politic, etc. parameters and I believe that's an issue we don't have the knowledge nor the perspective to really discuss.
Either way, when you're not angry spewing out romantic bullshit (funny how when a French guy has a debate with a North American WW2 always pops up, no matter how irrelevant (and let's not forget fucking annoying and verging on the insulting, because us French are all arrogant cheese munching bastards who bend over at the first sign of trouble, aren't we? (see, I can be romantic after all.;-)))), you actually make some valid points but, as I said several times, I was merely pointing out a few facts.
Those facts are that most of the motivation behind the Second Amendment was to protect the regime both from outside and inside dangers, that it's worked for over two centuries so far and that it's something unheard of in modern history. That's hardly romantic bullshit.
Ever notice that the U.S. govt is the most stable democratic entity? The system has been clicking effortlessly for over two hundred years now and going strong. Of course it has its (big) problems, but for a democratic state such durability is practically unheard of.
Look at us (France), we had democracy about the same time as you did, but we've had coups, wars, revolutions, and our own current regime (called the Fifth Republic, and you guys are still on your first) is little over forty years old (old Europe, HA!).
It's pretty obvious you have the Second Amendment to thank for that. Anyone staging a coup would be extremely foolish, because anyone knows that even though most people don't have guns because they're in a "well-regulated militia" they would appear pretty soon and swarm over D.C.
Of course people shoot each other for wholly different reasons than the defense of democracy, but the guys who wrote the Constitution weren't stupid. 18th century or 21st century, if you give everyone guns, they will use them to shoot each other -- but they chose to pay that price for the durability of their system.
I'm not defending the Second Amendment, this is an extremely high price to pay and one has to wonder if in a modern state it really should be paid anymore, but I don't see that issue brought up in many 2nd Am debates, so I thought I'd share it.
Seriously, when I read the power outages I stopped for a few seconds and started thinking about what could be the explanations, and I terrorism never even crossed my mind.
Am I just stupid or have others thought about that too? Maybe it's because I'm European?
They also "knew" that headaches were caused by demons and the best way to get rid of them was to drill a little hole in the middle of your forehead. The assumption that women with wide hips are somehow more biologically fit for carrying a baby to term is the oldest, fakest dream there is. It's all internal.
Yeah, but it doesn't take ten grand in consulting fee to know that explaining how smart you are while writing like an AOLer isn't the best PR out there.;)
But wait a second -- Becquerel? Voltaire? Would you be... *shudder*...French?
I've been knowing (and doubting) about this project ever since it was confirmed, especially given the male lead (I have already decided that when my cat, Chuck Norris, is dead the next one will be called Ben Affleck) and John Woo's slow and pathetic descent from the epic style of his Hong Kong classics to the worst of Hollywood action trash.
And yet, each time he puts a new movie out the door I have faith, and I go see it on opening day, even though I know M:I-2 and Windtalkers are going to suck I go there faithfully because I'm a fan of Hong Kong directors and of John Woo!...
So yeah, I'm waiting for this one with, to say the least, apprehension. I watched the trailer like everyone else, and so far it looks neither good nor bad. So I'm crossing my fingers and praying to Linus that, for once, it'll be good.
Though, in all sincerity, hope is bleak.
All I know is that a director friend of mine got mighty pissed off when he heard of it. He wanted to adapt that story.
Actually, it is the size of the bassin bones which determines the easiness of child birth, and the bones that are concerned only show up on x-rays. How wide your hips are or how big your ass is has nothing to do with that.
...snail mail may be cheaper, like the SETI data, but for small amounts of data it's always better to use computers. I may be working in one room of the house and my wife in an other room and she'll IM me to tell me something's on TV.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
The cards for the Paris subway transport system are also that convenient -- just wave them over the sensor as you walk through --, but I don't think they use RFID, and though the cards are registered at your name, the signal doesn't carry that, so it's impossible to track your movements.
So, why use RFID in that context?
Getting out in the real world instead of playing with manipulative mechanics? Are you new here?
You mean centrifugally?
Now it sounds like the 2.2 kernel is up for grabs to someone who is 'good at refusing patches and being ignored'
I can do that! Pick me!
Well don't sit at the back of the theatre! I always sit at the front rows. And I know THX is only a certification, but given the fee to make the people from Skywalker sound come over and certify it, only theatres will have it. As a matter of fact there's only one THX theatre in Paris and I went to see Reloaded for the first time in that one, even if it meant paying extra (I've got a subscription for an other theatre franchise, 15 per month for as many movies as I want) and waiting a whole afternoon in line.
I'm sorry, but (if you're a purist, that is, and I know I am), you just can't beat the cinematic experience you get in a theatre.
I'm sorry, but I disagree. Sure, watching a movie at home is a lot more practical and now that home theater systems have evolved it's also become a worthwhile experience, but a 52 inch screen isn't a silver screen and 5.1 isn't THX.
I'm a positive movie lover and a purist, and the experience you get at a theater is really different to the one you get even on the best home theater system (unless that is of course an actual home theater, the kind you see in MTV Cribs). The DVD to the Japanese movie Avalon (extremely unknown, but probably the best photography ever in a movie) came out in Japan before the movie was out in Europe (where I am), so I got the opportunity to watch it on DVD before I could go see it in a cinema and I refused, because I know it's not going to be the same as in a theater, and I wanted to have that experience first. Now that the DVD came out in here, I bought it and watch it often.
Sorry, but home systems will never replace the cinema. For all its disadvantages, it remains the best motion picture experience possible.
Well first of all The Hulk was very good. And second of all, if I won't text my friends that a movie sucks, I'll e-mail them, call them, or *GASP* tell them when I meet them.
There were wars with Spain and Mexico, but that's not what I meant. The second Amendment was meant as protection from possible enemies, whether or not those exist.
So this discussion is a tie-in to the zealot poll, right?
I don't see how a fact is romantic bullshit. The regime was founded 230 years ago and is still in charge and that's unheard of. It made gun ownership into a right -- in order to defend that stability. That's unheard of. I'm simply stating that.
;-P
;-)))), you actually make some valid points but, as I said several times, I was merely pointing out a few facts.
On the other hand "Picture yourself at Gettysburg" is pretty romantic, and extremely bullshit given the issue at hand. As a matter of fact all of your post is.
First of all, I wasn't defending the Second Amendment, I personally think allowing your citizens to buy guns is just ludicrous. I wasn't even playing devil's advocate, I was just mentioning little-known facts for my fellow Slashdotters' perusal.
Second of all your post makes no real sense. Your point *seems* to be that Canada has been doing a lot better without guns. That's true, and the same can also be said about Great Britain. I could argue that neither of those countries have the population nor the history of the U.S., but that would get us into a comparison of sociohistoric, politic, etc. parameters and I believe that's an issue we don't have the knowledge nor the perspective to really discuss.
Either way, when you're not angry spewing out romantic bullshit (funny how when a French guy has a debate with a North American WW2 always pops up, no matter how irrelevant (and let's not forget fucking annoying and verging on the insulting, because us French are all arrogant cheese munching bastards who bend over at the first sign of trouble, aren't we? (see, I can be romantic after all.
Those facts are that most of the motivation behind the Second Amendment was to protect the regime both from outside and inside dangers, that it's worked for over two centuries so far and that it's something unheard of in modern history. That's hardly romantic bullshit.
Ever notice that the U.S. govt is the most stable democratic entity? The system has been clicking effortlessly for over two hundred years now and going strong. Of course it has its (big) problems, but for a democratic state such durability is practically unheard of.
Look at us (France), we had democracy about the same time as you did, but we've had coups, wars, revolutions, and our own current regime (called the Fifth Republic, and you guys are still on your first) is little over forty years old (old Europe, HA!).
It's pretty obvious you have the Second Amendment to thank for that. Anyone staging a coup would be extremely foolish, because anyone knows that even though most people don't have guns because they're in a "well-regulated militia" they would appear pretty soon and swarm over D.C.
Of course people shoot each other for wholly different reasons than the defense of democracy, but the guys who wrote the Constitution weren't stupid. 18th century or 21st century, if you give everyone guns, they will use them to shoot each other -- but they chose to pay that price for the durability of their system.
I'm not defending the Second Amendment, this is an extremely high price to pay and one has to wonder if in a modern state it really should be paid anymore, but I don't see that issue brought up in many 2nd Am debates, so I thought I'd share it.
...Only, not.
Seriously, when I read the power outages I stopped for a few seconds and started thinking about what could be the explanations, and I terrorism never even crossed my mind.
Am I just stupid or have others thought about that too? Maybe it's because I'm European?
Either way it's interesting.
True, but you're talking about evolution, not biometrics.
They also "knew" that headaches were caused by demons and the best way to get rid of them was to drill a little hole in the middle of your forehead. The assumption that women with wide hips are somehow more biologically fit for carrying a baby to term is the oldest, fakest dream there is. It's all internal.
Yeah, but it doesn't take ten grand in consulting fee to know that explaining how smart you are while writing like an AOLer isn't the best PR out there. ;)
...French?
But wait a second -- Becquerel? Voltaire? Would you be... *shudder*
I've been knowing (and doubting) about this project ever since it was confirmed, especially given the male lead (I have already decided that when my cat, Chuck Norris, is dead the next one will be called Ben Affleck) and John Woo's slow and pathetic descent from the epic style of his Hong Kong classics to the worst of Hollywood action trash.
And yet, each time he puts a new movie out the door I have faith, and I go see it on opening day, even though I know M:I-2 and Windtalkers are going to suck I go there faithfully because I'm a fan of Hong Kong directors and of John Woo!...
So yeah, I'm waiting for this one with, to say the least, apprehension. I watched the trailer like everyone else, and so far it looks neither good nor bad. So I'm crossing my fingers and praying to Linus that, for once, it'll be good.
Though, in all sincerity, hope is bleak.
All I know is that a director friend of mine got mighty pissed off when he heard of it. He wanted to adapt that story.
Actually, it is the size of the bassin bones which determines the easiness of child birth, and the bones that are concerned only show up on x-rays. How wide your hips are or how big your ass is has nothing to do with that.
Some people say my ideas are elitist, but i tell them there not smart enough
:-P
Good thing you tell them and not write them, 'cause they'd know how bad your grammar is.
(In case you don't see the problem, the contraction of "they are" is "they're" and not "there")
...the amount of jokes about smartness, body odour and slashdotters will soon be verging on the infinite.
Well... how?
I'd also like to mention the word is spelled 'courier', both in French and English. One too many r in thar...
...snail mail may be cheaper, like the SETI data, but for small amounts of data it's always better to use computers. :-)
I may be working in one room of the house and my wife in an other room and she'll IM me to tell me something's on TV.
So many links from so many different sources, and so thorough, congrats to the poster!
Maybe the carts were just too small for all three games?
Maybe they just feel like milking us for all the $$ we're worth?
I'll never understand game companies.
^ First post, I just realised.
;-)
Also, inertia instead of "inertion" obviously.
Mod parent up funny, mod this post down offtopic, karma unharmed.