Probably because normally those "activist" judges you hear about on the big media outlets are harming big business, while a ruling like this does nothing but help big business.
It's niggling, and they both "aren't men" and they both killed him together. My understanding of the text is that Merry's blow sundered his protective sorceries and Eowyn finished him off.
I can't believe I'm doing this -- I'm going to look nerdy even for Slashdot.
The reason they say that no man can kill the Witch King is because of Glorfindel (you may have remembered him from the movie, but his part in the book was given to Liv Tyler instead) who prophesized that not by the hand of man would he fall. The reason Eowyn was able to make good the prophecy is because the blade Merry stabbed the witch king with was made long ago by the Numenorians to defeat him specifically when Angmar was at war with them.
If google were hauling people off to concentration camps, I would agree with you. Google isn't violating anyone's civil rights. From the sounds of it, all they're doing is removing links that the government has banned and blocked people from seeing anyway That's not very nefarious - that's just making sure that your search engine doesn't seem "broken" to people in China.
If you all want to go after someone, go after the Chinese government. They're the evil party in this equation.
There is a difference between American censorship and Chinese censorship. Here in America, we self-censor. Television is owned by big (mostly conservative) media conglomerates. Thankfully, the intenret is not.
One could argue that the scope of the "goodness" of getting their product banned in another country over website results that the people there aren't going to be allowed to see anyway is pretty damn limited.
But yes, in general, when a company says they're good, they're usually selling themselves. That's the way it works. It's the same with people who go around talking about how good they are.
That being said, is it really *immoral* to remove links to websites that they aren't going to be able to see anyway? There's a difference between not being good, and being evil.
It's called catering to different markets. Nobody's forcing you to buy the extended editing. And I highly doubt they're throwing in *every* cut scene. Each movie would probably be 4 hours long if that were the case.
Well, Aragorn does present himself to Sauron using the Palantir. It's not like they're just making shit up willy nilly.. Except for the worg battle, Pippin sneaking around lighting beacons, the Ents deciding to hell with all this fighting stuff and go have a picnic, and Faramir being a total dick..
Important is a relative term. It's an opinion. Tom Bombadil, for many people, is one of the most memorable and entertaining characters in Lord of the Rings. I believe sacrifices must be made in movies.
To me, the loss of Tom Bombadil doesn't make the movies suffer so much for missing Tom Bombadil himself, but more the fact that they're never in the Barrow-Downs, Merry never recieves his Westernesse-enchanted blade, and the ability of him and Eowyn to kill the Witch King of Angmar makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But maybe only a Tolkien nerd would care about that.
The only downside to making movies of these wonderful books is that so much of the essence of the story in Lord of the Rings isn't about the destination, but the journey. In a movie, the journey is the first thing on the cutting room floor.
Most people (novice or otherwise) that I've ever introduced Firefox to are very thankful for that fact; I'm sorry your daddy wasn't. If you want something that works just like IE, my advice is stick with IE.
I have a hard time believing they are intended for serious commercial use. For the hobbyist who wants to make their own game for fun and challenge, though, it's definitely a big first step.
Slashdot Mirror
The only thing I want to see a doom movie for is to watch a real actor rocket jump to an otherwise-inaccessible ledge.
Oh yes, and I want to see someone telefragged on screen.
Now it makes you wonder why Google registered gbrowser.com
Just to keep you fuckers guessing.
Probably reading stories, comments, posting comments, you know.. the usual.
There's nothing wrong with Wikipedia, it's just not what I would consider a professional, coherent, "real" encyclopedia.
It does have its uses, though.
Not likely. If you think heroin junkies are rabid about getting their fix...
Probably because normally those "activist" judges you hear about on the big media outlets are harming big business, while a ruling like this does nothing but help big business.
Haven't been here very long? This is a pretty frequent occurance.
As someone once told me after looking at my personal weblog, "Here's a piece of advice, fire all your geeks and hire one news guy."
It's niggling, and they both "aren't men" and they both killed him together. My understanding of the text is that Merry's blow sundered his protective sorceries and Eowyn finished him off.
Actually, believe it or not, RotK is not "each movie," the term used in my comment. But very funny!
I can't believe I'm doing this -- I'm going to look nerdy even for Slashdot.
The reason they say that no man can kill the Witch King is because of Glorfindel (you may have remembered him from the movie, but his part in the book was given to Liv Tyler instead) who prophesized that not by the hand of man would he fall. The reason Eowyn was able to make good the prophecy is because the blade Merry stabbed the witch king with was made long ago by the Numenorians to defeat him specifically when Angmar was at war with them.
And the people who use the 5th amendment are "mostly" guilty. What kind of argument were you trying to make, exactly?
If google were hauling people off to concentration camps, I would agree with you. Google isn't violating anyone's civil rights. From the sounds of it, all they're doing is removing links that the government has banned and blocked people from seeing anyway That's not very nefarious - that's just making sure that your search engine doesn't seem "broken" to people in China.
If you all want to go after someone, go after the Chinese government. They're the evil party in this equation.
By your definition, every company that does business with China is evil. Google isn't the one denying anyone's human rights.
There is a difference between American censorship and Chinese censorship. Here in America, we self-censor. Television is owned by big (mostly conservative) media conglomerates. Thankfully, the intenret is not.
One could argue that the scope of the "goodness" of getting their product banned in another country over website results that the people there aren't going to be allowed to see anyway is pretty damn limited.
But yes, in general, when a company says they're good, they're usually selling themselves. That's the way it works. It's the same with people who go around talking about how good they are.
That being said, is it really *immoral* to remove links to websites that they aren't going to be able to see anyway? There's a difference between not being good, and being evil.
It's called catering to different markets. Nobody's forcing you to buy the extended editing. And I highly doubt they're throwing in *every* cut scene. Each movie would probably be 4 hours long if that were the case.
If this is how you feel about the movie, don't ever read the book. You might put it down five or six times thinking it's "over" before it really is.
Well, Aragorn does present himself to Sauron using the Palantir. It's not like they're just making shit up willy nilly.. Except for the worg battle, Pippin sneaking around lighting beacons, the Ents deciding to hell with all this fighting stuff and go have a picnic, and Faramir being a total dick..
Actually, nevermind.
Important is a relative term. It's an opinion. Tom Bombadil, for many people, is one of the most memorable and entertaining characters in Lord of the Rings. I believe sacrifices must be made in movies.
To me, the loss of Tom Bombadil doesn't make the movies suffer so much for missing Tom Bombadil himself, but more the fact that they're never in the Barrow-Downs, Merry never recieves his Westernesse-enchanted blade, and the ability of him and Eowyn to kill the Witch King of Angmar makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But maybe only a Tolkien nerd would care about that.
The only downside to making movies of these wonderful books is that so much of the essence of the story in Lord of the Rings isn't about the destination, but the journey. In a movie, the journey is the first thing on the cutting room floor.
For a movie that everyone HATED so damn much, you guys sure can't seem to stop talking about Star Wars. Ever.
News flash: Firefox is not IE.
Most people (novice or otherwise) that I've ever introduced Firefox to are very thankful for that fact; I'm sorry your daddy wasn't. If you want something that works just like IE, my advice is stick with IE.
I have a hard time believing they are intended for serious commercial use. For the hobbyist who wants to make their own game for fun and challenge, though, it's definitely a big first step.
I'd say you're probably the abnormal case here. That's a lot.
I guarantee this comment was only made because he is a Microsoft employee.