I don't doubt what you say about what led to Farscape's demise. I completely understand that the final episode had a deus ex machina ending mainly because the producers through they'd have another season.
My point is, it's still Sci-Fi's fault. Sci-Fi commissioned Farscape from Jim Henson Studios if I'm not mistaken and it's Sci-Fi's fault for pulling the plug prematurely. If Sci-Fi owed anything to the fans of Farscape (for five great years of loyalty), it's to give the designers of Farscape the freedom to end the series properly and in a tasteful way - either through one last episode, or through a made-for-TV movie. That's what should have been done. What was done was not only a giant bash in the face to fans of the series, but perhaps the most flippant way you could possibly end a series that brought your meager network five years of attention.
Yeah, like you said, it's often times not so much what Sci-Fi cancels, but what replaces the empty space that gets left behind. It leaves me scratching my head, wondering how in the world the replacement could be more successful or profitable than what it replaced.
If AOL really wanted to save money, they'd stop supplying every friggen' store and consumer in America with two thousand CDs whenever a new version came out.:P
I've often wondered just what exactly is up with the Sci-Fi Channel. They seem notorious for taking really good ideas and then crushing or otherwise mauling them. Battlestar Galactica was never a show I watched nor can I say I was ever a fan enough. But the fact that this new one promises to be very different from the original prompts me to wonder why they didn't just create an entirely new series with new characters and hype it to death.
Anyhow, back to my original point. Sci-Fi has virtually no good programming. As the person way up above said, they spend a lot of time airing shows that have nothing to do with sci-fi (except for Crossing Over... of course;p). The final straw was when they killed Farscape. In their deus ex machina ending, Aeryn and John get vaporized and left to die. The crew screams and begs for mercy. And then Sci-Fi thanked the viewers for 5 great years. Yeah - that's what did it for me. The whole "You really don't give a rip about your fans, do you?"
Then there was Mystery Science Theater 3000. It was saved by Sci-Fi after Comedy Central decided to can it, it's true. But they stipulated that MST3K stick with sci-fi and horror movies (Horror is sci-fi? Since when?). Now they run the same five episodes ad nauseum every Saturday. Ironically, Sci-Fi's filler material consists of the same movies Mike and the crew would "pay homage to."
There also was the Saturday Morning Anime a long time ago, which was an introduction for many people to the art form and probably was one of the first major showings of anime on the cable networks. Even if it wasn't the greatest anime, it was better than the Ray Bradbury Theater. But Sci-Fi in their infinite wisdom scrapped that idea as well and the station continues to be decisively animephobic.
So, for me, Sci-Fi is a waste of a television station. A good idea marred by horrible execution and ignorance. Maybe someday they'll get the clue that I don't want to watch cheesy B-movies from the 1950s, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.
So it's not a complete diatribe (too late), you might ask what I would do if I were Sci-Fi. Well, first, I'd either surround myself with a combination of older space operas and have at least two exciting new ones. If we can't have the lavish sets of Farscape, we can scale it down a bit. Have some anime movies from time to time. Ditch all of the goth and horror nonsense that isn't sci-fi. It's probably okay to keep some of the new age programming, like the UFO secrets thing or even that show where they have the homebrew sci-fi clips, but don't rely on it. And for crist sake listen to your fans. Not the rabid fanboys who know what kind of underwear Captain Kirk wore in episode 24, but your typical casual fan. Fans make sci-fi work. Without them, you have nothing.
The idea of singling out one criteria, law enforcement, reminds me of the comic book industry having to police itself after that one psychologist argued the material in their work (back in the 1950s) was sabotaging young minds. Congress bought into this logic and the comic book industry responded by implementing the Comics Code Authority. By this, there were several rules. Law enforcement officials, also including members of the government in general, always had to be seen in a positive light. Crime would always have to be depicted as evil, never glorified, and villains were not allowed to be flashy or have desirable lifestyles, nor have any features that would garner sympathy from the reader. Even the usage of vampires, ghouls, and werewolves was either banned or restricted. The usages of slang terms was supposed to be kept at a minimum. And perhaps the most revolting - in every scene of good versus evil, the side of good had to win and evil punished.
I post this as a reminder of an event the comic book industry is still trying to recover from. If we aren't careful, this is where video games could end up.
I think what Oppenheimer insinuates is that Freenet is no more of a threat to them than Kazaa is, as in they are all a threat, but Freenet is not moreso a threat than the others.
Many research papers have been written about Freenet. If a few of these modifications were implemented, Freenet would not only be significantly faster, but the encryption would make it far harder to stop.
When will the RIAA ever understand? By constantly attacking the problem, they only make it worse!
No, you are quite right and that is the point of Freenet. Freenet isn't like other peer-to-peer systems because it traded in speed for security. As such, it is geared towards fetching material that is not very large - a web page, an image, and so far. If you ever tried to download an MP3 on there, you know what I'm talking about!;)
Whether it's in the EULA or not, adware should be outlawed. Companies like Gator, Bonzi Buddy, WebHancer and others do not deserve to exist and should have been blown out of existence years ago. The average computer user doesn't know about spyware or just how dangerous GAIN is, much less what to do about it.
These are vile programs. The kind whose deletion by anything other than the official uninstaller will kill your Internet connection. Programs whose tendrils wrap so tightly around your core components that they are like a weed you cannot kill. Programs designed to befuddle the average user and wreck havoc when they are crossed. In other words, they are completely legal viruses and trojan horses that hide behind the EULA's veil of "we're not responsible for damages to your system."
Now, I'll be the first to admit that I think people need to make themselves aware of this issue and take responsibility for what they download and use. They do need to have a look around the Internet prior to downloading a popular program, just to see what little "bonuses" come with it. However, I also think our government should step in and save those who are ignorant to the problem. Both government agencies and software designers can do a lot more to crackdown on this than they have. Legislation should be passed that outlaws programs whose sole purpose is to produce unwanted advertising and whose nature is elusive at best.
Let's face it. Someone out there is getting very rich off of our personal information. Rich enough to swamp the Internet with more ads to spread the infection to more computers. It has to stop.
Put it this way - it wasn't until this very thread before I knew the cartridges that came bundled with the printers were indeed "starter" cartridges. Maybe it varies by manufacturer or something, because I never noticed this.
I agree it's a complete and total waste and I would personally never buy into it. I'm just saying try explaining that to the average user.
... does it come across as incredibly stupid that:
- They plan to fix the bugs in SOCOM 2, but not address those in the original SOCOM at all? Down with consumer loyalty - who needs it! They'll all update like good little drones to the new version!
- That the ability to ban players was never a consideration in SOCOM? What, you think people will hack our system? No way! We are 1337. They don't stand a chance, banning is for sissy programmers!
Parts for the Famicom was actually still in production until about a month ago, when they were discontinued completely.
It's hard to read into Yamauchi's words since, on many occasions, he has been quoted as ferventing believing other companies are non-threats and being critical of them, even as Nintendo continues to lose to Sony. The absolute worst thing Nintendo can do is dismiss the threat Sony poses. I don't think Yamauchi has outright expressed that in this article, but both he and Nintendo in general have historically been arrogant about threats.
Sony knocked them from their throne with the PSX, and they probably have the best shot at tackling the Game Boy monopoly as well, especially if they can bring consistent, 3D games to the platform.
All printer manufacturers do this, especially those that try to reel consumers in with a cheap printer and charge a fortune for the refills.
The height of absurdity to me is the infamous HP example. On more than one occasion, I've walked into a store and learned that replacing my HP printer altogether was cheaper than buying ink cartridge refills. Compare, $25 for a B&W cartridge + $35 for a color cartridge = $60 total. Cost of that HP DeskJet on sale at Office Depot? $50, and you get an entirely new printer!
No, this is completely wrong. Standards must be developed. Good, compatible knock-offs must be designed. While there is competition for printers themselves, there is no competition for the ink cartridges. Once a company ropes a customer into their printer, they'll milk them for all its worth.
Perhaps one could convince those hackers mounting their attack on July 6th to go after these advertising servers. Then we'd see some real progress... and honestly, who could blame them? ^_^
To argue that innovation died back in 1998 is to ignore much of the progress Opera and Mozilla have made and continue to make. Both Opera and Mozilla offer new features like tabbed browsing and pop-up blocking. No, there hasn't been anything earthshattering, but we have seen many refinements of the general idea. The refinements are significant enough, in my opinion at least, to make Internet Explorer or even an old Netscape Communicator seem primitive in comparison.
Andreessen's funny assertion that innovation is dead reminds me of a story I once heard (and whose truth I question, but I digress) about some European country that, towards the end of the 19th century, had a government that voted on closing down its patent offices. Why? Because everything that would ever be invented had already been invented. Of course, we would look back on that and think it is absurd. To me, Andreessen's logic is really no different - it is bullish and stubborn.
Or, as another reader so aptly put it, bitter.
Yeah, I agree. You'll never sell everyone on Linux itself. But the open-source movement being pushed in programs like Mozilla that anyone can use is very relevant.:)
I've personally been witness to one Oregon school district that has switched over to K12LTSP. Over last summer, we built a hundred of those thin-client computers. Let me be the first to tell you, walking into that computer lab today and seeing all of those kids on those computers with Linux and enjoying it would put to rest any concern over the need for Microsoft. Who needs PowerPoint? They've got the OpenOffice equivalent. Why pay thousands for a site license for Adobe Photoshop when The Gimp is free? The whole thing is basically free, of course, which means saved cash in an already strapped sector of the government.
In this district alone, over $20,000 is saved annually. That's $20,000 that could be used to keep class sizes small, hire a new teacher, or update textbooks. In this economy, particularly one where schools are complaining everyday about lack of funding, every dollar saved is worth it. I see these other school districts with their pricy Dells and shiny iMacs and wonder just how much cash they blew through that they didn't need to. I don't insinuate that they didn't receive a steep discount, but I would be surprised if their technology spending for their labs was lower than this district. A thousand here, a thousand there - all of those little expenses lead to our state's current financial crisis.
Based on the success of Linux in Oregon schools, open-source proponents had moved to pass a bill by the Oregon legislature that would mandate the state consider open-source solutions prior to spending the big bucks for Microsoft. Alas, despite widespread support, the representative from Wood Village shot down the bill and refused to let it be heard, citing verbatim the same reasons the huge tech firms - adamant in their lobby to stop the bill - had argued. The bill eventually died. Proponents mourned.
Personally, I didn't see it as an open-source "power grab." I saw it as a way to hold the government accountable for its technology spending. The government should choose the most economical means of getting the job done and not waste taxpayer dollars on extravagant operating systems when all they need is simple word processing or whatnot. If that economical approach is open-source, so be it. If Microsoft decides to just hand over their wares for free, so be it. But always keep them on edge. It's clear this sort of thing scares Microsoft and a bit of fear is always a good thing if it means getting cheaper rates. The fact that the bill died showed Oregon's government is not ready to be held accountable for its decisions when it comes to technology spending.
Consequently, I hear the same legislature is trying to up our taxes again in November. Go figure.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't doubt what you say about what led to Farscape's demise. I completely understand that the final episode had a deus ex machina ending mainly because the producers through they'd have another season. My point is, it's still Sci-Fi's fault. Sci-Fi commissioned Farscape from Jim Henson Studios if I'm not mistaken and it's Sci-Fi's fault for pulling the plug prematurely. If Sci-Fi owed anything to the fans of Farscape (for five great years of loyalty), it's to give the designers of Farscape the freedom to end the series properly and in a tasteful way - either through one last episode, or through a made-for-TV movie. That's what should have been done. What was done was not only a giant bash in the face to fans of the series, but perhaps the most flippant way you could possibly end a series that brought your meager network five years of attention.
Yeah, like you said, it's often times not so much what Sci-Fi cancels, but what replaces the empty space that gets left behind. It leaves me scratching my head, wondering how in the world the replacement could be more successful or profitable than what it replaced.
If AOL really wanted to save money, they'd stop supplying every friggen' store and consumer in America with two thousand CDs whenever a new version came out. :P
Anyhow, back to my original point. Sci-Fi has virtually no good programming. As the person way up above said, they spend a lot of time airing shows that have nothing to do with sci-fi (except for Crossing Over... of course ;p). The final straw was when they killed Farscape. In their deus ex machina ending, Aeryn and John get vaporized and left to die. The crew screams and begs for mercy. And then Sci-Fi thanked the viewers for 5 great years. Yeah - that's what did it for me. The whole "You really don't give a rip about your fans, do you?"
Then there was Mystery Science Theater 3000. It was saved by Sci-Fi after Comedy Central decided to can it, it's true. But they stipulated that MST3K stick with sci-fi and horror movies (Horror is sci-fi? Since when?). Now they run the same five episodes ad nauseum every Saturday. Ironically, Sci-Fi's filler material consists of the same movies Mike and the crew would "pay homage to."
There also was the Saturday Morning Anime a long time ago, which was an introduction for many people to the art form and probably was one of the first major showings of anime on the cable networks. Even if it wasn't the greatest anime, it was better than the Ray Bradbury Theater. But Sci-Fi in their infinite wisdom scrapped that idea as well and the station continues to be decisively animephobic.
So, for me, Sci-Fi is a waste of a television station. A good idea marred by horrible execution and ignorance. Maybe someday they'll get the clue that I don't want to watch cheesy B-movies from the 1950s, but I wouldn't get my hopes up.
So it's not a complete diatribe (too late), you might ask what I would do if I were Sci-Fi. Well, first, I'd either surround myself with a combination of older space operas and have at least two exciting new ones. If we can't have the lavish sets of Farscape, we can scale it down a bit. Have some anime movies from time to time. Ditch all of the goth and horror nonsense that isn't sci-fi. It's probably okay to keep some of the new age programming, like the UFO secrets thing or even that show where they have the homebrew sci-fi clips, but don't rely on it. And for crist sake listen to your fans. Not the rabid fanboys who know what kind of underwear Captain Kirk wore in episode 24, but your typical casual fan. Fans make sci-fi work. Without them, you have nothing.
This site has the original code: http://www.comics.dm.net/codetext.htm
I post this as a reminder of an event the comic book industry is still trying to recover from. If we aren't careful, this is where video games could end up.
I think what Oppenheimer insinuates is that Freenet is no more of a threat to them than Kazaa is, as in they are all a threat, but Freenet is not moreso a threat than the others. Many research papers have been written about Freenet. If a few of these modifications were implemented, Freenet would not only be significantly faster, but the encryption would make it far harder to stop. When will the RIAA ever understand? By constantly attacking the problem, they only make it worse!
No, you are quite right and that is the point of Freenet. Freenet isn't like other peer-to-peer systems because it traded in speed for security. As such, it is geared towards fetching material that is not very large - a web page, an image, and so far. If you ever tried to download an MP3 on there, you know what I'm talking about! ;)
These are vile programs. The kind whose deletion by anything other than the official uninstaller will kill your Internet connection. Programs whose tendrils wrap so tightly around your core components that they are like a weed you cannot kill. Programs designed to befuddle the average user and wreck havoc when they are crossed. In other words, they are completely legal viruses and trojan horses that hide behind the EULA's veil of "we're not responsible for damages to your system."
Now, I'll be the first to admit that I think people need to make themselves aware of this issue and take responsibility for what they download and use. They do need to have a look around the Internet prior to downloading a popular program, just to see what little "bonuses" come with it. However, I also think our government should step in and save those who are ignorant to the problem. Both government agencies and software designers can do a lot more to crackdown on this than they have. Legislation should be passed that outlaws programs whose sole purpose is to produce unwanted advertising and whose nature is elusive at best.
Let's face it. Someone out there is getting very rich off of our personal information. Rich enough to swamp the Internet with more ads to spread the infection to more computers. It has to stop.
As I said in another thread, I wasn't aware that the HP printers shipped with half-filled cartridges. :)
I agree it's a complete and total waste and I would personally never buy into it. I'm just saying try explaining that to the average user.
- They plan to fix the bugs in SOCOM 2, but not address those in the original SOCOM at all? Down with consumer loyalty - who needs it! They'll all update like good little drones to the new version!
- That the ability to ban players was never a consideration in SOCOM? What, you think people will hack our system? No way! We are 1337. They don't stand a chance, banning is for sissy programmers!
It's hard to read into Yamauchi's words since, on many occasions, he has been quoted as ferventing believing other companies are non-threats and being critical of them, even as Nintendo continues to lose to Sony. The absolute worst thing Nintendo can do is dismiss the threat Sony poses. I don't think Yamauchi has outright expressed that in this article, but both he and Nintendo in general have historically been arrogant about threats.
Sony knocked them from their throne with the PSX, and they probably have the best shot at tackling the Game Boy monopoly as well, especially if they can bring consistent, 3D games to the platform.
The height of absurdity to me is the infamous HP example. On more than one occasion, I've walked into a store and learned that replacing my HP printer altogether was cheaper than buying ink cartridge refills. Compare, $25 for a B&W cartridge + $35 for a color cartridge = $60 total. Cost of that HP DeskJet on sale at Office Depot? $50, and you get an entirely new printer!
No, this is completely wrong. Standards must be developed. Good, compatible knock-offs must be designed. While there is competition for printers themselves, there is no competition for the ink cartridges. Once a company ropes a customer into their printer, they'll milk them for all its worth.
Perhaps one could convince those hackers mounting their attack on July 6th to go after these advertising servers. Then we'd see some real progress... and honestly, who could blame them? ^_^
Alright, I stand corrected. It was a US thing. :)
To argue that innovation died back in 1998 is to ignore much of the progress Opera and Mozilla have made and continue to make. Both Opera and Mozilla offer new features like tabbed browsing and pop-up blocking. No, there hasn't been anything earthshattering, but we have seen many refinements of the general idea. The refinements are significant enough, in my opinion at least, to make Internet Explorer or even an old Netscape Communicator seem primitive in comparison. Andreessen's funny assertion that innovation is dead reminds me of a story I once heard (and whose truth I question, but I digress) about some European country that, towards the end of the 19th century, had a government that voted on closing down its patent offices. Why? Because everything that would ever be invented had already been invented. Of course, we would look back on that and think it is absurd. To me, Andreessen's logic is really no different - it is bullish and stubborn. Or, as another reader so aptly put it, bitter.
On a very ironic side note, I'd like to add that Senator Minnis was the one responsible for the death of the Linux / open source bill. ;)
Yeah, I agree. You'll never sell everyone on Linux itself. But the open-source movement being pushed in programs like Mozilla that anyone can use is very relevant. :)
I've personally been witness to one Oregon school district that has switched over to K12LTSP. Over last summer, we built a hundred of those thin-client computers. Let me be the first to tell you, walking into that computer lab today and seeing all of those kids on those computers with Linux and enjoying it would put to rest any concern over the need for Microsoft. Who needs PowerPoint? They've got the OpenOffice equivalent. Why pay thousands for a site license for Adobe Photoshop when The Gimp is free? The whole thing is basically free, of course, which means saved cash in an already strapped sector of the government. In this district alone, over $20,000 is saved annually. That's $20,000 that could be used to keep class sizes small, hire a new teacher, or update textbooks. In this economy, particularly one where schools are complaining everyday about lack of funding, every dollar saved is worth it. I see these other school districts with their pricy Dells and shiny iMacs and wonder just how much cash they blew through that they didn't need to. I don't insinuate that they didn't receive a steep discount, but I would be surprised if their technology spending for their labs was lower than this district. A thousand here, a thousand there - all of those little expenses lead to our state's current financial crisis. Based on the success of Linux in Oregon schools, open-source proponents had moved to pass a bill by the Oregon legislature that would mandate the state consider open-source solutions prior to spending the big bucks for Microsoft. Alas, despite widespread support, the representative from Wood Village shot down the bill and refused to let it be heard, citing verbatim the same reasons the huge tech firms - adamant in their lobby to stop the bill - had argued. The bill eventually died. Proponents mourned. Personally, I didn't see it as an open-source "power grab." I saw it as a way to hold the government accountable for its technology spending. The government should choose the most economical means of getting the job done and not waste taxpayer dollars on extravagant operating systems when all they need is simple word processing or whatnot. If that economical approach is open-source, so be it. If Microsoft decides to just hand over their wares for free, so be it. But always keep them on edge. It's clear this sort of thing scares Microsoft and a bit of fear is always a good thing if it means getting cheaper rates. The fact that the bill died showed Oregon's government is not ready to be held accountable for its decisions when it comes to technology spending. Consequently, I hear the same legislature is trying to up our taxes again in November. Go figure.