I think it has a good general premise. Parallel universes in a war, brought together by a genius scientist and his love for his son, fought by secret governmental organizations. Whats not to like. I think they have good acting, They are generally believable, have decent depth, and are engaging/intriguing.
I don't think however the writing has been the best. There is a difference between believable, amazing, fantastical, and just stupid. They seem to like to flirt somewhere between fantastical and just stupid. Many episodes I would categorizes as just "silly". Now silly every now and again is OK, I think it is good not to take yourself too seriously, and to poke fun every now and again at what you do. Fans generally like this I think, I know I do. Stargate was good at this. However when you look silly but are trying to be serious, it doesn't come off very well. I have found that the writing also stretches the boundary of what I would call normal human behavior which make it difficult to believe and also to relate. When I am thinking about the actions of a character and the thoughts "that doesn't make any sense", or "why would they do that", or "that's not really all that consistant" or "no one would do that", it tells me that either they are not paying enough attention to the roles or the story, or they don't care.
Anyway as I said I do like the show, and I do watch it, however it isn't one of those shows that I MUST see each week, and I am waiting for the next episode. If its on and I am flicking around I'll watch it, and every now and again I will play catch up on the internet but that's about it.
If I want to make a product called "Smoka-Bowla" I shouldn't have to worried about getting sued by Coke.
For those trying to actually knock off a product yes, I can see the use. So no if I am creating a soft drink, that is a cola, that uses a red and white label that also have a similar logo swoosh as coke AND I want to call my self "Soka-Cola", then yes perhaps they might have a point. Simply having a name or a phrase however in my view isn't enough.
Of course this case is even more stupid as they are using the editor tools provided to customers to do exactly that, create more content. Obviously in this case some inexperienced or paranoid lawyer got a little trigger happy.
I was just thinking that if you put it underwater you effectively shield it to pretty much any terrorist attack. Just finding the thing would be a lot harder. Maintenance might be a bitch though.
I did have a vision of that bond flick with the deep sea diving suits with the claws...
Rather than make underwater reactors for remote places, why not make mobile underwater nuke reactors? Basically a Nuke Sub with Jumper Cables minus all the fiddly war stuff. I mean you're going to have to have access to the thing from time to time for maintenance, and the mobility would add flexibility to your reactor "fleet", allowing you to move power to where it is most needed.
Though I thought there was one that the professor got the crew to go to that was named something like "Death Planet of the Doom Cluster" or something like that.
Just think in 1000 years, some guy looking at Google SpaceMap will see a reference for something like that... "Er... set a course for Planet Death, er in the Doom Cluster?"
Not everywhere has 3G or even cell coverage. This is one way to provide total mobile internet coverage. When considering mobile devices, ping, latency, and bandwidth are not as meaningful as when connecting with say a laptop or desktop. This could be very useful in a lot of places for tablets, hand helds, and WiFi cellphones.
Making it affordable to the masses is the key. If the Iridium experiment showed us anything it is that there is a very limited market for high cost low performance sat communications.
A couple months ago I saw some kid walking with a discman. I was surprised that anyone still used them. It looked retro to me now. I think the only CD's I ever play are in my car because it doesn't have an MP3 player.
While I agree in part, it is not always reasonable. Employers should look to supporting staff in keeping their skills current, particularly in what technology the employer is interested in. I know myself I have been interested in some various technologies, however not all of them (in fact MOST) are NOT offered at your local dinky community collage. If I want to learn html or java, sure there is something for that. However if they want something in something a bit shall we say more complicated or corporate (Powerbuilder comes to mind, GIS, and anything really that's enterprise level, of course I am talking more than just programming) just the licences alone can cost several thousands of dollars, or more not to mention having the private hardware to run the stuff. Universities in my experience do not even commonly teach the stuff, so the ONLY way to learn these things seems to be on the job somewhere that DOES support worker learning, or taking uber expensive private software seminars.
So yes, part of the job is keeping up, and yes I agree sometimes you might have to do it on your own time (though I would argue that the employer should be prepared to allow time for this as well), however in many cases I don't think it is reasonable to expect an employee to be able to learn it totally on their own and will require some support from their employer.
I suspect that in this instance, a particular client heard some stupid buzzword on the intertubes and demanded that their application be developed using X technology, the company likely doesn't commonly support it, nor has any big plans to in the future (or maybe not). Hiring someone short term for more money than senior staff I don't see as a big deal as when the project is done likely so are they. If however they plan on supporting this new technology, then perhaps they will stay. Perhaps the idea is this guy will also be introducing and training staff on the new technology and that is why his pay is reflected as such. I know sometimes it irks me to train someone that makes more money they me.
Anyway we don't really have enough information to base any sort of real judgment, I just think that in response to your message that the employer does and should have some responsibility in supporting staff learning initiatives where needed.
Would also be a lot of fun on a resume! Funny in a sort of self deprecating kind of way. Surely a fresh perspective from all the rosy aggrandizing that usually accompanies a resume self description...
Ya well I knew a "DBA" that was responsible for a MS Access DB. Not actually even creating it... just running it. Yes one. Couldn't even script, hired consultants for that. Seriously. Made more money than me.
Also I have known people that called themselves CEO or CFO, etc... but were basically a one man show working from home.
Titles are cheap. I always wanted to put "Supreme Overlord" as a title on a resume just as a joke. It has about as much meaning as some of the crap I have seen other people use.
I was thinking the same thing. Looking at the valuation, what GS invested for a very small piece, and what their leaked profits have been, they are doing everyone in the US a favor by the sounds of it.
Also for extra geek cred, if the Klingons have taught us nothing it is nothing bad can ever happen from mining from your moon, particularly for highly volatile fuel for spaceships!
I also get to piss off all hardcores by mentioning Star Trek and Starwars in the same breath!
OK I know no one read the article so I thought I would point out it a bit funny that the summary either cleverly or accidentally made a good pun on "PDF" (One being Portable Document Format and the other Probability Density Function):
"Canadian researchers are finding a way around this problem (PDF) with a new solution that combines the best of grid and cloud computing, allowing them to more efficiently reach their research goals.""
AND
"However, much more useful than a single scalar-valued redshift, is the assignation of a full probability density function (PDF) in redshift. This substantially increases the amount of information available to the next stage of the analysis.":)
Thought I am puzzled WTF this has to do with "Cloud Computing". As it isn't mentioned at all in the article and from what I read it sounds more like distributed and parallel processing to take advantage of current and future infrastructure, than any kind of centralized online collaboration. Unless you can classify SETI@HOME as cloud computing as well...
I think his point is that the scientists are making the presumption that their current understanding and calculations are correct and that it is some unknown that is causing the whole problem labeling it "Dark Matter" as defined as WTF something I can't observe with a a lot of mass. So rather than looking for this magical element that is screwing up their mass calculations of the universe, perhaps they should take a harder look at a) the calculations they use to measure, b) the methodology used to test those calculations, or c) the foundations on which those calculations are based.
I would think that doing an experiment, finding results different than what you expect, and then blaming magical fairies, to be somewhat insane rather than scientifically rational. Anyway nothing wrong with giving the unknown a name and perusing that avenue of thought, only that it would be my last option. Needless to say I am not a big fan of the term "Dark Matter". It is something unknown and that is it. Perhaps the name itself simply has connotations I do not like...
From my understanding (which is vague at best) "dark matter" is sort of BS. Basically it seems that that according to physics as we know it, the mass of the universe should be X, however when calculated (by observation I presume) it actually equals Y which just happens to be a hell of a lot more than X. Our current understanding of physics includes Black Holes so presumably they are included in the previous calculation. Scientists being all "Sciency" and stuff explain away this crazy discrepancy, not by saying that our understanding of the principles of physics is wrong, but by saying "Oh that must be "Dark Matter"!", and "Oh yeah it is completely invisible and undetectable"...
So when someone says they are explaining away phenomenon with a whole galaxy full of "Dark Matter", I ask myself if they are even trying anymore.
I used to work regulating aggregates used in building roads and infrastructure. Pits and Quarries are not the most prettiest things in the world but necessary for civilization.
I heard once it said: Where do you think these things come from? Fairy dust and Unicorn horn? By unnecessarily making it more difficult to obtain you are simply raising your own taxes... Do you like driving on roads and living in buildings?
Slashdot Mirror
I like Fringe. I don't love it however.
I think it has a good general premise. Parallel universes in a war, brought together by a genius scientist and his love for his son, fought by secret governmental organizations. Whats not to like.
I think they have good acting, They are generally believable, have decent depth, and are engaging/intriguing.
I don't think however the writing has been the best. There is a difference between believable, amazing, fantastical, and just stupid. They seem to like to flirt somewhere between fantastical and just stupid. Many episodes I would categorizes as just "silly". Now silly every now and again is OK, I think it is good not to take yourself too seriously, and to poke fun every now and again at what you do. Fans generally like this I think, I know I do. Stargate was good at this. However when you look silly but are trying to be serious, it doesn't come off very well. I have found that the writing also stretches the boundary of what I would call normal human behavior which make it difficult to believe and also to relate. When I am thinking about the actions of a character and the thoughts "that doesn't make any sense", or "why would they do that", or "that's not really all that consistant" or "no one would do that", it tells me that either they are not paying enough attention to the roles or the story, or they don't care.
Anyway as I said I do like the show, and I do watch it, however it isn't one of those shows that I MUST see each week, and I am waiting for the next episode. If its on and I am flicking around I'll watch it, and every now and again I will play catch up on the internet but that's about it.
Hey remember when I sued you? Yeah, goodtimes...
Yes because 2D Boy would be very upset.
I think these trademark fights are retarded.
If I want to make a product called "Smoka-Bowla" I shouldn't have to worried about getting sued by Coke.
For those trying to actually knock off a product yes, I can see the use. So no if I am creating a soft drink, that is a cola, that uses a red and white label that also have a similar logo swoosh as coke AND I want to call my self "Soka-Cola", then yes perhaps they might have a point. Simply having a name or a phrase however in my view isn't enough.
Of course this case is even more stupid as they are using the editor tools provided to customers to do exactly that, create more content. Obviously in this case some inexperienced or paranoid lawyer got a little trigger happy.
I was just thinking that if you put it underwater you effectively shield it to pretty much any terrorist attack. Just finding the thing would be a lot harder. Maintenance might be a bitch though.
I did have a vision of that bond flick with the deep sea diving suits with the claws...
Rather than make underwater reactors for remote places, why not make mobile underwater nuke reactors? Basically a Nuke Sub with Jumper Cables minus all the fiddly war stuff. I mean you're going to have to have access to the thing from time to time for maintenance, and the mobility would add flexibility to your reactor "fleet", allowing you to move power to where it is most needed.
Anyway just a thought.
The lobbied and legalized it really.
Hell just dropped 10 degrees...
http://www.associatepublisher.com/e/l/li/list_of_planets_in_futurama.htm
Though I thought there was one that the professor got the crew to go to that was named something like "Death Planet of the Doom Cluster" or something like that.
Just think in 1000 years, some guy looking at Google SpaceMap will see a reference for something like that... "Er... set a course for Planet Death, er in the Doom Cluster?"
Sulu: "Are you frickin' kidding me?"
Formerly Uranus, astronomers renamed this planet in 2620 "to end that stupid joke once and for all."
-Futurama
Next I guess you're going to tell me they also invented rail cars?
Not everywhere has 3G or even cell coverage. This is one way to provide total mobile internet coverage. When considering mobile devices, ping, latency, and bandwidth are not as meaningful as when connecting with say a laptop or desktop. This could be very useful in a lot of places for tablets, hand helds, and WiFi cellphones.
Making it affordable to the masses is the key. If the Iridium experiment showed us anything it is that there is a very limited market for high cost low performance sat communications.
This has got to be the oldest news story on Slasdot at about 4.6 Billion years too late.
A couple months ago I saw some kid walking with a discman. I was surprised that anyone still used them. It looked retro to me now. I think the only CD's I ever play are in my car because it doesn't have an MP3 player.
While I agree in part, it is not always reasonable. Employers should look to supporting staff in keeping their skills current, particularly in what technology the employer is interested in. I know myself I have been interested in some various technologies, however not all of them (in fact MOST) are NOT offered at your local dinky community collage. If I want to learn html or java, sure there is something for that. However if they want something in something a bit shall we say more complicated or corporate (Powerbuilder comes to mind, GIS, and anything really that's enterprise level, of course I am talking more than just programming) just the licences alone can cost several thousands of dollars, or more not to mention having the private hardware to run the stuff. Universities in my experience do not even commonly teach the stuff, so the ONLY way to learn these things seems to be on the job somewhere that DOES support worker learning, or taking uber expensive private software seminars.
So yes, part of the job is keeping up, and yes I agree sometimes you might have to do it on your own time (though I would argue that the employer should be prepared to allow time for this as well), however in many cases I don't think it is reasonable to expect an employee to be able to learn it totally on their own and will require some support from their employer.
I suspect that in this instance, a particular client heard some stupid buzzword on the intertubes and demanded that their application be developed using X technology, the company likely doesn't commonly support it, nor has any big plans to in the future (or maybe not). Hiring someone short term for more money than senior staff I don't see as a big deal as when the project is done likely so are they. If however they plan on supporting this new technology, then perhaps they will stay. Perhaps the idea is this guy will also be introducing and training staff on the new technology and that is why his pay is reflected as such. I know sometimes it irks me to train someone that makes more money they me.
Anyway we don't really have enough information to base any sort of real judgment, I just think that in response to your message that the employer does and should have some responsibility in supporting staff learning initiatives where needed.
Peon in Charge of Forms
Would also be a lot of fun on a resume! Funny in a sort of self deprecating kind of way. Surely a fresh perspective from all the rosy aggrandizing that usually accompanies a resume self description...
Ya well I knew a "DBA" that was responsible for a MS Access DB. Not actually even creating it... just running it. Yes one. Couldn't even script, hired consultants for that. Seriously. Made more money than me.
Also I have known people that called themselves CEO or CFO, etc... but were basically a one man show working from home.
Titles are cheap. I always wanted to put "Supreme Overlord" as a title on a resume just as a joke. It has about as much meaning as some of the crap I have seen other people use.
I said the dowry was a cow, not the bride!
I was thinking the same thing. Looking at the valuation, what GS invested for a very small piece, and what their leaked profits have been, they are doing everyone in the US a favor by the sounds of it.
Oh wait... yes it is.
Also for extra geek cred, if the Klingons have taught us nothing it is nothing bad can ever happen from mining from your moon, particularly for highly volatile fuel for spaceships!
I also get to piss off all hardcores by mentioning Star Trek and Starwars in the same breath!
OK I know no one read the article so I thought I would point out it a bit funny that the summary either cleverly or accidentally made a good pun on "PDF" (One being Portable Document Format and the other Probability Density Function):
"Canadian researchers are finding a way around this problem (PDF) with a new solution that combines the best of grid and cloud computing, allowing them to more efficiently reach their research goals.""
AND
"However, much more useful than a single scalar-valued redshift, is the assignation of a full probability density function (PDF) in redshift. This substantially increases the amount of information available to the next stage of the analysis." :)
Thought I am puzzled WTF this has to do with "Cloud Computing". As it isn't mentioned at all in the article and from what I read it sounds more like distributed and parallel processing to take advantage of current and future infrastructure, than any kind of centralized online collaboration. Unless you can classify SETI@HOME as cloud computing as well...
I think his point is that the scientists are making the presumption that their current understanding and calculations are correct and that it is some unknown that is causing the whole problem labeling it "Dark Matter" as defined as WTF something I can't observe with a a lot of mass. So rather than looking for this magical element that is screwing up their mass calculations of the universe, perhaps they should take a harder look at a) the calculations they use to measure, b) the methodology used to test those calculations, or c) the foundations on which those calculations are based.
I would think that doing an experiment, finding results different than what you expect, and then blaming magical fairies, to be somewhat insane rather than scientifically rational. Anyway nothing wrong with giving the unknown a name and perusing that avenue of thought, only that it would be my last option. Needless to say I am not a big fan of the term "Dark Matter". It is something unknown and that is it. Perhaps the name itself simply has connotations I do not like...
From my understanding (which is vague at best) "dark matter" is sort of BS. Basically it seems that that according to physics as we know it, the mass of the universe should be X, however when calculated (by observation I presume) it actually equals Y which just happens to be a hell of a lot more than X. Our current understanding of physics includes Black Holes so presumably they are included in the previous calculation. Scientists being all "Sciency" and stuff explain away this crazy discrepancy, not by saying that our understanding of the principles of physics is wrong, but by saying "Oh that must be "Dark Matter"!", and "Oh yeah it is completely invisible and undetectable"...
So when someone says they are explaining away phenomenon with a whole galaxy full of "Dark Matter", I ask myself if they are even trying anymore.
There are only 3 reasons:
1) Correction
2) Prevention
3) Punishment
It kind of sounds pretty much like a vindictive #3 to me.
I used to work regulating aggregates used in building roads and infrastructure. Pits and Quarries are not the most prettiest things in the world but necessary for civilization.
I heard once it said: Where do you think these things come from? Fairy dust and Unicorn horn? By unnecessarily making it more difficult to obtain you are simply raising your own taxes... Do you like driving on roads and living in buildings?
I think the best "Wall" would be to enforce already existing laws preventing the hiring of illegals.
I bet they would just stop coming if their were no jobs for them.
Just sayin'