That is not the same thing.
Imagine asking the waiter how much the Roast duck and bottle costs, he states $9 and you order that and pay the bill when you leave, two weeks later receive a bill for $90 because the bill should have been $99. Would you have ordered it if would not have clearly stated $9?
For your analogy to be accurate, the menu would have to list the correct price, but the waiter tells you the wrong one and puts it on the bill. And he does this for multiple customers, one of whom orders one hundred roast ducks, then goes online and brags about it and tells other people to go to the restaurant and do the same thing.
Amazon is honoring the advertised price -- buy one, get one free. What they want to get out of is the price on their check-out page, which discounted the cost of the lesser item twice. The check-out page isn't an advertisement -- it can't be seen by anyone except a customer who's purchasing an item.
Amazon should still have to honor the price on the check-out page, since that's what the customers agreed to pay. Although they should make an exception for the ass-wipes who bought every set in the sale, getting thousands of dollars of free merchandise. Those people obviously knew there was something funky going on and took advantage of Amazon anyways.
These guys (energy crackpots) are always around on the sidelines; they pop up every once in a while when they need a new sucker^H^H^H^H^H^Hventure capitalist to invest.
The type of "communism" you are refering to is actually totalitarinism. Such regimes were fond of calling themselves communistic states because it made them sound nicer.
-Nae True Scotsman wears anything beneath his kilt.
-Angus MacNee does.
-Then he's nae True Scotsman.
Soviet-style centrally planned economies where all industry, resources, and capital is controlled by the government are communist, whether you like it or not.
Right now, I believe the consensus among the political parties is that blogging has helped Republicans more than Democrats - the CBS memo fiasco comes to mind.
Trent Lott's comments at Strom Thurmond's birthday party were barely noticed by the mainstream media until bloggers started raising a fuss, and the story kept going long enough to topple Lott in large part because bloggers kept stoking the fires.
Having failed to do the experiments once and declare the thing as "most likely a myth"!
Twice -- Adam and Jamie did it once on their own, and now revisited it with the MIT students. So that's two experiments with multiple trials -- good enough to qualify it "most likely a myth" in my book.
Television died a long time ago.
No, you stopped watching TV. But you are not normal -- the mere fact that you're posting to Slashdot should be ample proof of that. The average person still watches a ton of television each week.
Or you know, maybe, just maybe, we could avoid getting into a war?
And if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass when it hopped.
I prefer to live in a little place called reality, where experience tells me that wars are a common feature of human history no matter how hard people try to avoid it, and being prepared for it is much better than bending over a log with your pants around your ankles.
I'm just curious, is there anyone out there who actually likes this pile of crap?
25. 'The Jetsons'
It was just The Flintstones in Space, and the Flintstones was just The Honeymooners in the Paleolithic.
17. 'Firefly'
Should be in the top five.
16. 'Flash Gordon'
Apart from an extremely bad and shortlived Saturday morning cartoon, when was Flash Gordon a TV show? Maybe they meant The Flash, the sadly overlooked comic adaptation from the early '90s.
14. 'Star Trek Voyager'
Any credibility they had is hereby blown. STV is quite easily the worst SF show in history.
10. 'Sliders'
Enjoyable in the same spirit as Irwin Allen series, but not a Top 10 series.
4. 'The X-Files'
The most over-rated, perhaps.
3. 'Star Trek: The Next Generation'
TNG had about two good seasons, but even those weren't Top 10 material -- and certainly don't deserve to be on the list when DS9 isn't.
And what effect did this have on the average man on the street? Answer: none. The few episodes where they did film outside of the Village, e.g., in London, showed then contemporary London, not some Orwellian society.
One of the last scenes of the series shows the Prisoner returning to his London home and the door opening automatically with the same hum as the doors in the village. The intended implication is clear -- the world is the village.
The series is an allegory, and everything in it is about society at large.
Not to mention every other Star Trek spin-off. Having caught a couple early reruns of TNG recently, I have to wonder how bad SF television was in 1987 to make us think this was the good stuff.
Yes, TNG, with its whiney Mary Sue Crusher, didatic dialogue, reliance upon technobabble to create and solve problems, and increasingly toothless villains, is clearly better than DS9.
No, not really. If I told you I built a car from scratch, would you think I pimped my ride, or built a completely new vehicle from spare parts?
Saying someone created life from scratch suggests abiogenesis, which would be a truly phenomenonal acheivement, whereas gengineering some bacteria is common place.
Looks like sportsmanship, commeradery, and everything else the sporting event was about has been degraded by the all mighty dollar and corporate power houses.
Dollar? Try Pounds Sterling. Not every excess of capitalism can be blamed on the greenback.
BetaMax died because of its short tape lengths. You want a device to record movies off the TV. One has 30 minute and one hour tapes available.
Horsehockey. Back in the day, I had plenty of feature length movies on Beta, both store bought and recorded off TV. What Beta didn't have was the ability to change tape speed at the cost of quality (the LP/SP/SLP option on VHS machines).
But that's not what killed Beta. What killed Beta was that it was a proprietary format and Sony didn't want to lisence it -- any studio that wanted to mass produce tapes had to go through Sony. VHS didn't have any such limitation, so it was the one that studios decided to back.
A new hollywood movie is almost classified as failed if they don't do this ~$20mln in the first weekend, so I would say no to your question/suggestion.
That's true for big budget summer movies. Documentaries, independents, and low-budget art flicks can start slow and build -- indeed it's common practice for studios to open films like this in a half dozen theaters and then add more venues as word-of-mouth builds.
Um, no. Objects don't fall toward the 'center' of the Earth. Objects are pulled on by all the mass of the Earth (and everything else). The 'ground' is the outer surface of the mass that is pulling on the object. It is explicitly part of the process, not merely 'in the way'.
Imagine if the Earth was a cube with pefectly flat sides. Now imagine setting a marble near one of the corners. Would it just sit there? No. It'd be pulled towards the center of mass, which means rolling towards the middle of the face, which is closer to the center than the corners.
The ground is contributing to the mass of the planet, thereby increasing the earth's gravitational pull, correct?
No, the ground is the surface; it's the stuff under the ground that contributes to the mass. If I dug a hole to the center of the Earth, you would keep falling towards the center of mass even while you're below ground level.
A good analogy would be to liken closed (non-free) information to potential energy, such as a bolder on top of a hill. There is only one way it can go, and it's natural state is at rest at the bottom of the hill (lowest energy state). In the same way, the natural state of information is to be free and it requires resistance to prevent this.
Unfortunately, science does not work by analogy. PE is a quantifiable property of matter -- given a set of scales and a measuring stick, I can tell you the PE of every object on my desk. But "information wants to be free" is just a slogan someone made up with no scientific rationale.
People who do this, do it because they are paid to, and in some cases, because they're desperate for some kind of approval or attention. It's not normal.
No, it's not normal. Neither is being blonde-haired or black-skinned in the US (or blonde-haired and black skinned). Normalcy is a statistical concept, not a moral one.
If someone likes getting money for sex or being watched during it, good on them. It's their choice to make, not yours or mine.
Slashdot Mirror
That is not the same thing. Imagine asking the waiter how much the Roast duck and bottle costs, he states $9 and you order that and pay the bill when you leave, two weeks later receive a bill for $90 because the bill should have been $99. Would you have ordered it if would not have clearly stated $9? For your analogy to be accurate, the menu would have to list the correct price, but the waiter tells you the wrong one and puts it on the bill. And he does this for multiple customers, one of whom orders one hundred roast ducks, then goes online and brags about it and tells other people to go to the restaurant and do the same thing.
Amazon is honoring the advertised price -- buy one, get one free. What they want to get out of is the price on their check-out page, which discounted the cost of the lesser item twice. The check-out page isn't an advertisement -- it can't be seen by anyone except a customer who's purchasing an item. Amazon should still have to honor the price on the check-out page, since that's what the customers agreed to pay. Although they should make an exception for the ass-wipes who bought every set in the sale, getting thousands of dollars of free merchandise. Those people obviously knew there was something funky going on and took advantage of Amazon anyways.
2. You keep all your GMail on their servers.
Speak for yourself. I use Gmail as just another pop3 provider.
These guys (energy crackpots) are always around on the sidelines; they pop up every once in a while when they need a new sucker^H^H^H^H^H^Hventure capitalist to invest.
And they're always electrical engineers.
The type of "communism" you are refering to is actually totalitarinism. Such regimes were fond of calling themselves communistic states because it made them sound nicer.
-Nae True Scotsman wears anything beneath his kilt.
-Angus MacNee does.
-Then he's nae True Scotsman.
Soviet-style centrally planned economies where all industry, resources, and capital is controlled by the government are communist, whether you like it or not.
Right now, I believe the consensus among the political parties is that blogging has helped Republicans more than Democrats - the CBS memo fiasco comes to mind.
Trent Lott's comments at Strom Thurmond's birthday party were barely noticed by the mainstream media until bloggers started raising a fuss, and the story kept going long enough to topple Lott in large part because bloggers kept stoking the fires.
Having failed to do the experiments once and declare the thing as "most likely a myth"!
Twice -- Adam and Jamie did it once on their own, and now revisited it with the MIT students. So that's two experiments with multiple trials -- good enough to qualify it "most likely a myth" in my book.
Television died a long time ago. No, you stopped watching TV. But you are not normal -- the mere fact that you're posting to Slashdot should be ample proof of that. The average person still watches a ton of television each week.
Or you know, maybe, just maybe, we could avoid getting into a war?
And if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass when it hopped.
I prefer to live in a little place called reality, where experience tells me that wars are a common feature of human history no matter how hard people try to avoid it, and being prepared for it is much better than bending over a log with your pants around your ankles.
YMMV.
50. 'Earth - Final Conflict'
Only the first season.
47. 'Buck Rogers in the 25th Century'
This doesn't even belong on a Top 1000 list.
41. 'Futurama'
A top ten series.
37. 'Space 1999'
Worse than Buck Rogers.
26. 'Stargate Atlantis'
I'm just curious, is there anyone out there who actually likes this pile of crap?
25. 'The Jetsons'
It was just The Flintstones in Space, and the Flintstones was just The Honeymooners in the Paleolithic.
17. 'Firefly'
Should be in the top five.
16. 'Flash Gordon'
Apart from an extremely bad and shortlived Saturday morning cartoon, when was Flash Gordon a TV show? Maybe they meant The Flash, the sadly overlooked comic adaptation from the early '90s.
14. 'Star Trek Voyager'
Any credibility they had is hereby blown. STV is quite easily the worst SF show in history.
10. 'Sliders'
Enjoyable in the same spirit as Irwin Allen series, but not a Top 10 series.
4. 'The X-Files'
The most over-rated, perhaps.
3. 'Star Trek: The Next Generation'
TNG had about two good seasons, but even those weren't Top 10 material -- and certainly don't deserve to be on the list when DS9 isn't.
And what effect did this have on the average man on the street? Answer: none. The few episodes where they did film outside of the Village, e.g., in London, showed then contemporary London, not some Orwellian society.
One of the last scenes of the series shows the Prisoner returning to his London home and the door opening automatically with the same hum as the doors in the village. The intended implication is clear -- the world is the village.
The series is an allegory, and everything in it is about society at large.
Not to mention every other Star Trek spin-off. Having caught a couple early reruns of TNG recently, I have to wonder how bad SF television was in 1987 to make us think this was the good stuff.
Yes, TNG, with its whiney Mary Sue Crusher, didatic dialogue, reliance upon technobabble to create and solve problems, and increasingly toothless villains, is clearly better than DS9.
Well, in a sense, this is 'life from scratch'
No, not really. If I told you I built a car from scratch, would you think I pimped my ride, or built a completely new vehicle from spare parts? Saying someone created life from scratch suggests abiogenesis, which would be a truly phenomenonal acheivement, whereas gengineering some bacteria is common place.
Looks like sportsmanship, commeradery, and everything else the sporting event was about has been degraded by the all mighty dollar and corporate power houses.
Dollar? Try Pounds Sterling. Not every excess of capitalism can be blamed on the greenback.
ARGs are advertising.
BetaMax died because of its short tape lengths. You want a device to record movies off the TV. One has 30 minute and one hour tapes available.
Horsehockey. Back in the day, I had plenty of feature length movies on Beta, both store bought and recorded off TV. What Beta didn't have was the ability to change tape speed at the cost of quality (the LP/SP/SLP option on VHS machines).
But that's not what killed Beta. What killed Beta was that it was a proprietary format and Sony didn't want to lisence it -- any studio that wanted to mass produce tapes had to go through Sony. VHS didn't have any such limitation, so it was the one that studios decided to back.
A new hollywood movie is almost classified as failed if they don't do this ~$20mln in the first weekend, so I would say no to your question/suggestion.
That's true for big budget summer movies. Documentaries, independents, and low-budget art flicks can start slow and build -- indeed it's common practice for studios to open films like this in a half dozen theaters and then add more venues as word-of-mouth builds.
Um, no. Objects don't fall toward the 'center' of the Earth. Objects are pulled on by all the mass of the Earth (and everything else). The 'ground' is the outer surface of the mass that is pulling on the object. It is explicitly part of the process, not merely 'in the way'.
Imagine if the Earth was a cube with pefectly flat sides. Now imagine setting a marble near one of the corners. Would it just sit there? No. It'd be pulled towards the center of mass, which means rolling towards the middle of the face, which is closer to the center than the corners.
The ground is contributing to the mass of the planet, thereby increasing the earth's gravitational pull, correct?
No, the ground is the surface; it's the stuff under the ground that contributes to the mass. If I dug a hole to the center of the Earth, you would keep falling towards the center of mass even while you're below ground level.
A good analogy would be to liken closed (non-free) information to potential energy, such as a bolder on top of a hill. There is only one way it can go, and it's natural state is at rest at the bottom of the hill (lowest energy state). In the same way, the natural state of information is to be free and it requires resistance to prevent this.
Unfortunately, science does not work by analogy. PE is a quantifiable property of matter -- given a set of scales and a measuring stick, I can tell you the PE of every object on my desk. But "information wants to be free" is just a slogan someone made up with no scientific rationale.
Please go back to physics class. The ground is definately not merely "in the way" of the motion of the object falling into it.
Yes it is. A falling object "wants" to get to the center of the Earth, but the ground's there preventing it.
People who do this, do it because they are paid to, and in some cases, because they're desperate for some kind of approval or attention. It's not normal.
No, it's not normal. Neither is being blonde-haired or black-skinned in the US (or blonde-haired and black skinned). Normalcy is a statistical concept, not a moral one.
If someone likes getting money for sex or being watched during it, good on them. It's their choice to make, not yours or mine.
As someone who was once addicted to porn,
You say addicted, I say weak-willed. De gustibus.
How many married men get to bonk beutiful women without fearing the repercussions?
.... you either have too much confidence in condoms or the quality of people who you're hooking up with.
You mean like AIDS, herpes, syphillis, crabs