Guess what? You have no constitutional rights outside US borders, buddy.
Not true. Members of the military of the US fall under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ which is provided for in the US constitution.
If I am attacking your country, killing members of your armed forces, I am breaking about a million of your country's laws (murder etc...). Wartime law is not the same as civilian law. You are confusing the two. Extradition treatys do not necessarily apply to war crimes.
One of the few correct decisions that President Bush made was to refuse our participation in the ICC. By doing so, he protects US citizens from prosecution by a US-hating political body. Bravo.
OK, please quote which section of the consitution, or the President's oath of office if you like, prohibits US citizens from being prosecuted by a non-US court.
Sure, easy:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."
And the constitution says:
"The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed."
If you don't like the ICC, fine. But at least get your facts straight before you criticise it.
Yep, facts are pretty straight.
And, while you're at it, stop treating the US constitution like some sort of magic piece of paper that has universal powers. It doesn't.
Actually it does. It is magical enough that it created the single most powerful nation in the history of the world in less than 200 years. Its magical enough that it protects me from most of the evils of government. Its magical enough that it has changed the face of the world by providing a model for every other country in the world to follow.
The US Constitution is the single most powerful and magical document ever written. Never before in the history of the world has a society had such protections from the government.
I wonder where your dislike for the constitution comes from? Could it be sour grapes?
The Internation Criminal Court would place US citizens under non-constitutional authority and law. All US citizens (even military) are protected by the US constitution and guaranteed certain "inalienable" rights.
The president would have been in gross violation of his oath of office to have allowed US citizens to be prosecuted by a non-US court.
How does the Gnome vector graphics rendering compare to SVG of Flash or is it apples and oranges?
Is it usable for non-game development (business app stuff)?
The reason I ask is I have been looking for a good vector based UI to use with Python (with standard widgets) but everything is either too raw (Cairo) to unsupported (SVG) or too proprietary (Flash).
1. A three-dimensional panning method comprising the steps of:
storing applied graphic information representing a three-dimensional object in a first three-dimensional coordinate modeling space;
defining a second three-dimensional coordinate space as a viewing space from which the object may be viewed, the viewing space being movable at a selected radial distance around a selected reference point in the modeling space;
inputting and storing further information including panning information specifying a position from which to view the object;
moving the viewing space to the specified position in response to the panning information, effecting a transform of the coordinates of the object to the viewing space and to a two-dimensional coordinate screen space; and
displaying a two-dimensional image of the transformed coordinates, providing a view of the object from the panned-to-position.
2. The method of claim 1 where the step of moving the viewing space includes the step of orienting said viewing space with respect to the object, by varying at least one of pitch, yaw, and roll attitudes of said viewing space.
3. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of identifying a center of projection relative to the specified view position.
4. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of specifying a radial distance at which the object may be viewed.
5. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of specifying viewing window size as a degree of magnification of the displayed image.
6. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of specifying one of parallel and perspective transforms.
7. Apparatus for performing a three-dimensional panning operation, comprising:
memory means for storing entered information including applied graphic and panning information and a control program, the graphic information representing a three-dimensional object in a first three-dimensional coodinate modeling space;
input means for entering information including panning information for panning to a selected position from which to view the object;
processing means coupled to the input and memory means, and responsive to the panning information and execution of the program, for defining a second three-dimensional coordinate space as a viewing space from which the object may be observed, and for moving the viewing space, a selected radial distance around a selected reference point in the modeling space, to the selected position, effecting a transform of the coordinates of the object to the viewing space and to a two-dimensional coordinate screen space; and
means for displaying a two-dimensional image of the transformed coordinates, providing a view of the object from the panned-to position.
8. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the processing means includes a means for orienting the viewing space with respect to the object, by varying at least one of pitch, yaw, and roll attitudes of said viewing space.
9. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input means includes a means for identifying a center of projection relative to the selected view position.
10. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input mean includes a means for specifying a radial distance at which the object may be viewed.
11. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input means includes a means for specifying a view window size as a degree of magnification of the displayed image.
12. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input means includes a means for specifying one of parallel and perspective transforms.
One of the things that has me baffled is why there are huge conversions to the libertarian party from both sides... I mean, they are the best of both parties, low taxes, minimalist government, and a strong focus on civil rights and the constitution.
I blame the way the party has been run over the last several years, pulling stunts and extremist tactics.
I mean really, the "Ladies of Liberty" calendar? Dammit, have some self respect.
You are my party, I expect more.
Still, with all said and done, you still have my vote.
Can someone explain why this is modded troll? There are alot of people in the game who ask the same question all the time, and in fact SS is avoided by alot of players for that exact reason. It wasn't intended to be a troll, I think it is a legit question about game design decision.
In a game where super speed is one of the 4 travel powers, why did you design levels that are impossible for players with SS to get around in? (Terra Volta, Faultline etc...)
I understand that without some risk, death in a MMORPG would lose alot of the "tension" that game designerns feel that players need in order to stay "hooked". As a player, I can tell you that the exp penalty of dying is usually what ends up getting me to cancel an account. When I see all that debt/exp loss/penalty I start thinking "Why am I wasting my time here? Its a nice day outside..." Even the illusion of "exp debt" that CoH has still amounts to the same thing: total playing time added to make up for dying. Since death is frequently not a player's fault (lag, imbalance, etc...) I can tell you that I am very attracted the the approach that WoW is taking with having no death penalty other than travelling as a ghost back to your corpse. My question is this: What goes into the decision for death penalties? Has anyone actually asked the players if this is what they want?
I've been playing CoH (way too much!) since beta, and have really enjoyed it, but I am running into some of the same issues that alot of others are running into, lack of content, lack of purpose, no new powers, nothing but "grind". My question is this: With all of the new MMORPGs coming out (EQ2, WoW etc) this month, what will CoH do to keep my interest (and paying account)? New powers? Anything?
Yes, it must be a diffrent ride, the one I went on was at 6 flags in PA, and you strapped yourself in and hung down below the track while whooosh whoooshing around.
It is things like this that make me believe wholeheartedly that I picked the correct charity to donate to. So many charities out there simply consume donations to feed their massive administration United Way and only a tiny fraction, if any, of your donation actually helps anyone.
With the EFF, I really feel like I am doing some good when I dontate.
If I remember correctly, the superman ride was 55 secs... I timed it 60+ times while waiting in line. Also, could be a little more depending on what you consider "Start" and "End" times, as various people causing problems left me hanging after the ride was done for about 2 minutes, so technically my ride was almost 3 minutes.
Step 1: License programmers and make commerial use of unlicensed code illegal (to protect national security from "cyber terrorists" and to "save the children" from the big bad interweb)
Step 2: Refuse to allow import of "non-licensed" code from other countries... force "compatibility" on other countries like was done with software patents.
Set up a "Dark Horse" fund. This could be implemented at the Federal, State and local levels.
Basically, it would work like this: A fund is set up with matching dollars to the average of the main party's campaign funds.
The person to whom the fund goes is selected by direct vote, tournament style. Anyone in the U.S. meeting the qualification reqs. for president would be eligible. All candidates intitally come up with a 1 page summary of what they are about. For the second round, 2-3 pages, etc... for the final round(s) hold public debates between the dark horse candidates. The final winner gets the pot for campaign use. Unused fund go into the pot for the next election.
The result of this: a candidate who actually represents what the majority of voters want, who is able to compete equally with with the major parties.
This strategy preserves the representive system, while also allowing for the "true voice" of the voters to be heard.
Only non-party/independent voters could vote in the dark horse primary/tournament.
Then for those arm-chair politicians, the question can be not "Did you vote" but "Why didn't you run for president?"
I, for one, am tired of being spoon fed platitudes and rhetoric. I'd love to see a system like this where Joe Normal could actually make it to the White House.
QuickTransit for x86. Allows application binaries compiled for a MIPS®, POWER(TM), PowerPC(TM) or mainframe processor to run on an x86-based computer. Application binaries compiled for other processors will be supported soon. Operating system call mapping from any Unix/Linux-like operating system or any mainframe operating system to any Unix/Linux-like operating system is supported.
I don't see any mention of Windows...
Re:a series of well planned coincidences.
on
Dive Into Python
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The "Why-to" question is the core of what separates good programmers from bad.
Inadvertantly, you question strikes to the core of modern IT, it is not language specific, but it is the root driving force behind all "geeks".
For too many people, the "Why-to" is "because I heard you can make lots of money as a programmer". To answer this demand, colleges and universities churn out rank and file incompetent and ambivalent programmers, weilding their Microsoft inspired toolchest of Visual Basic 6 or MS Access, they flood the resume pool, and pollute the code base with their lazy half-hearted attempts at development, causing project failures and frustration on a massive scale and dramtically increasing the costs of corporate IT.
These are the type of programmers who react with anger and fear when anyone mentions exploring different languages or technology. Who, when confronted with a problem or issue they don't understand are willing to shrug and say "I don't know" and pass the problem off to the true "geek" on the team.
On the other hand, you have the type of coder to which the "Why-to" question is like breathing... to whom coding grants god-like powers of creation, who is willing to stay up late solving obscure problems just for the rush of satisfaction when s/he gets the answer.
To this type of coder, the question is not so much "Why-to" but more, "How could I not?". Coding is not a job, it is a system of thought, the logical structuring of the chaotic real-world into discrete lines of code.
To this type of programmer, there is nothing more exhilarating than a new project, a blank file, a clean slate, from which they can craft the perfect solution. Starting from scratch and creating from nothing is the ultimate expression of their intellect, and they judge themselves critically by the result.
This is a quality that can not be taught in a univeristy, or measured by a multiple choice exam. These are the "basement geeks" who clutter their shelves with gadgets and obscure books.
They may have started on the IRC with the classic question "How do I make a game?", or as a sysop of a dial-up BBS who needed to add functionality.
The point is, for the true coder, the "Why-to" question was answered BEFORE the language question... they had some sort of need that could only be solved by learning to code... and after that they were hooked. They constantly evaluate new languages and more effecient/elegant methods of solving their problems.
There is no book that will make you _want_ to code, first you want to code _then_ you buy the book.
Asking "Why should I program?" is similar to picking up a shovel and saying "Why should I dig?". Unless you have a need, there is no point, and you will never understand why all those ditch-diggers keep debating the finer points of different shovels. You are out of context. For you, the answer is "You shouldn't".
I agree 100%, which is why my wife and I gave up on TV 7 years ago.
When a good series comes out, we buy the DVDs. We can watch the shows whenever we want, we are never left stuck at the end of an episode begin forced to wait for next week, and most importantly NO COMMERCIALS (though with the DVD stop flag, who knows how long this will last).
The only down side is that I didn't learn what an unbelievably great show Firefly was until after it was cancelled.
Everyone please please please buy the Firefly DVD's, and go see Serenity when it is released. This show deserves to live (I never thought I could be so passionate about a TV show!).
There must be some way that the fans of great shows like these can apply more pressure to the networks.
Or is there an alternative media distribution method that could be used? What about the idea of fan sponsored shows released on the internet?
Does anyone have any idea what sort of budget Joss needed for Firefly?
I, for one, would be more that willing to pitch in $50 for another season...
Socialogically, laziness is the root of efficiency.
With admitted exceptions for certain individuals, on the whole, the purpose of achieving greater efficiency is to allow more time for recreation, or "laziness".
The natural aversion to hard work, repetitive or mundane tasks is the key to human evolution. Its the reason the first tool was ever used.
Why bother being a sysadmin in the first place? Surely pumping gas 14 hours a day would be just as good? Or is so that you can make more money, have a higher quality of life, and a plan to retire and spend a large chunk of life "slacking"?
Achieving efficiency in your work contributes to the life end goal: pure and total relaxation/recreation.
We are driven by a universal and healthy motivation to slack, your natural aversion to doing repetive mundane tasks is what drives you to write the perl script, which is the same motivation which drives you to make more money, to plan for retirement etc...
All technological breakthroughs are driven by one common underlying theme: laziness.
Or in technical terms "quality of life".
Runnning water is great, now we don't have to carry buckets from the well, washing machines are great, now we don't need to stand around all day bent over a washboard, etc, etc...
The predominant measure of quality of life is how much time is spent on relaxation/recreation v/s work. By genetically redefining the meaning of quality of life, we threaten that which has driven all human progress.
If, at a genetic level, I _enjoy_ spending 12 hours bent over a washboard, what motivation is there to develop a washing machine?
If no one will buy the new widget that saves them 15 minutes doing task X, what motivation is there for a company to spend money on R & D to develop the time saving widget?
In closing, let me be the first to welcome our new hypo-manic overlords... the lithium is in the fridge.
Slashdot Mirror
Guess what? You have no constitutional rights outside US borders, buddy.
Not true. Members of the military of the US fall under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ which is provided for in the US constitution.
If I am attacking your country, killing members of your armed forces, I am breaking about a million of your country's laws (murder etc...). Wartime law is not the same as civilian law. You are confusing the two. Extradition treatys do not necessarily apply to war crimes.
One of the few correct decisions that President Bush made was to refuse our participation in the ICC. By doing so, he protects US citizens from prosecution by a US-hating political body. Bravo.
OK, please quote which section of the consitution, or the President's oath of office if you like, prohibits US citizens from being prosecuted by a non-US court.
Sure, easy:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."
And the constitution says:
"The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed."
If you don't like the ICC, fine. But at least get your facts straight before you criticise it.
Yep, facts are pretty straight.
And, while you're at it, stop treating the US constitution like some sort of magic piece of paper that has universal powers. It doesn't.
Actually it does. It is magical enough that it created the single most powerful nation in the history of the world in less than 200 years. Its magical enough that it protects me from most of the evils of government. Its magical enough that it has changed the face of the world by providing a model for every other country in the world to follow.
The US Constitution is the single most powerful and magical document ever written. Never before in the history of the world has a society had such protections from the government.
I wonder where your dislike for the constitution comes from? Could it be sour grapes?
You mean flouride isn't mind controlling? Sonofa... Guess I can start using toothpaste again.
And when your signed int overflows at 32,768, it starts counting backwards... sounds familiar...
The Internation Criminal Court would place US citizens under non-constitutional authority and law. All US citizens (even military) are protected by the US constitution and guaranteed certain "inalienable" rights.
The president would have been in gross violation of his oath of office to have allowed US citizens to be prosecuted by a non-US court.
How does the Gnome vector graphics rendering compare to SVG of Flash or is it apples and oranges?
Is it usable for non-game development (business app stuff)?
The reason I ask is I have been looking for a good vector based UI to use with Python (with standard widgets) but everything is either too raw (Cairo) to unsupported (SVG) or too proprietary (Flash).
What is claimed is:
1. A three-dimensional panning method comprising the steps of:
storing applied graphic information representing a three-dimensional object in a first three-dimensional coordinate modeling space;
defining a second three-dimensional coordinate space as a viewing space from which the object may be viewed, the viewing space being movable at a selected radial distance around a selected reference point in the modeling space;
inputting and storing further information including panning information specifying a position from which to view the object;
moving the viewing space to the specified position in response to the panning information, effecting a transform of the coordinates of the object to the viewing space and to a two-dimensional coordinate screen space; and
displaying a two-dimensional image of the transformed coordinates, providing a view of the object from the panned-to-position.
2. The method of claim 1 where the step of moving the viewing space includes the step of orienting said viewing space with respect to the object, by varying at least one of pitch, yaw, and roll attitudes of said viewing space.
3. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of identifying a center of projection relative to the specified view position.
4. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of specifying a radial distance at which the object may be viewed.
5. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of specifying viewing window size as a degree of magnification of the displayed image.
6. The method of claim 1 where the step of inputting further information includes the step of specifying one of parallel and perspective transforms.
7. Apparatus for performing a three-dimensional panning operation, comprising:
memory means for storing entered information including applied graphic and panning information and a control program, the graphic information representing a three-dimensional object in a first three-dimensional coodinate modeling space;
input means for entering information including panning information for panning to a selected position from which to view the object;
processing means coupled to the input and memory means, and responsive to the panning information and execution of the program, for defining a second three-dimensional coordinate space as a viewing space from which the object may be observed, and for moving the viewing space, a selected radial distance around a selected reference point in the modeling space, to the selected position, effecting a transform of the coordinates of the object to the viewing space and to a two-dimensional coordinate screen space; and
means for displaying a two-dimensional image of the transformed coordinates, providing a view of the object from the panned-to position.
8. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the processing means includes a means for orienting the viewing space with respect to the object, by varying at least one of pitch, yaw, and roll attitudes of said viewing space.
9. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input means includes a means for identifying a center of projection relative to the selected view position.
10. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input mean includes a means for specifying a radial distance at which the object may be viewed.
11. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input means includes a means for specifying a view window size as a degree of magnification of the displayed image.
12. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the input means includes a means for specifying one of parallel and perspective transforms.
One of the things that has me baffled is why there are huge conversions to the libertarian party from both sides
*aren't
One of the things that has me baffled is why there are huge conversions to the libertarian party from both sides... I mean, they are the best of both parties, low taxes, minimalist government, and a strong focus on civil rights and the constitution.
I blame the way the party has been run over the last several years, pulling stunts and extremist tactics.
I mean really, the "Ladies of Liberty" calendar? Dammit, have some self respect.
You are my party, I expect more.
Still, with all said and done, you still have my vote.
Can someone explain why this is modded troll? There are alot of people in the game who ask the same question all the time, and in fact SS is avoided by alot of players for that exact reason. It wasn't intended to be a troll, I think it is a legit question about game design decision.
I've had it working with WineX (Cedega or whatever) without any problems.
In a game where super speed is one of the 4 travel powers, why did you design levels that are impossible for players with SS to get around in? (Terra Volta, Faultline etc...)
I understand that without some risk, death in a MMORPG would lose alot of the "tension" that game designerns feel that players need in order to stay "hooked". As a player, I can tell you that the exp penalty of dying is usually what ends up getting me to cancel an account. When I see all that debt/exp loss/penalty I start thinking "Why am I wasting my time here? Its a nice day outside..." Even the illusion of "exp debt" that CoH has still amounts to the same thing: total playing time added to make up for dying. Since death is frequently not a player's fault (lag, imbalance, etc...) I can tell you that I am very attracted the the approach that WoW is taking with having no death penalty other than travelling as a ghost back to your corpse. My question is this: What goes into the decision for death penalties? Has anyone actually asked the players if this is what they want?
I've been playing CoH (way too much!) since beta, and have really enjoyed it, but I am running into some of the same issues that alot of others are running into, lack of content, lack of purpose, no new powers, nothing but "grind". My question is this: With all of the new MMORPGs coming out (EQ2, WoW etc) this month, what will CoH do to keep my interest (and paying account)? New powers? Anything?
If I wasn't voting for Badnarik I'd be voting for Bush, so be glad for 3rd party votes.
Yes, it must be a diffrent ride, the one I went on was at 6 flags in PA, and you strapped yourself in and hung down below the track while whooosh whoooshing around.
Go ahead and mod me offtopic, but damn thats a funny sig.
It is things like this that make me believe wholeheartedly that I picked the correct charity to donate to. So many charities out there simply consume donations to feed their massive administration United Way and only a tiny fraction, if any, of your donation actually helps anyone.
With the EFF, I really feel like I am doing some good when I dontate.
If I remember correctly, the superman ride was 55 secs... I timed it 60+ times while waiting in line. Also, could be a little more depending on what you consider "Start" and "End" times, as various people causing problems left me hanging after the ride was done for about 2 minutes, so technically my ride was almost 3 minutes.
Sure they can:
Step 1: License programmers and make commerial use of unlicensed code illegal (to protect national security from "cyber terrorists" and to "save the children" from the big bad interweb)
Step 2: Refuse to allow import of "non-licensed" code from other countries... force "compatibility" on other countries like was done with software patents.
Step 3: ???
Step 4: All your base are belong to us.
One possible solution to this:
Set up a "Dark Horse" fund. This could be implemented at the Federal, State and local levels.
Basically, it would work like this:
A fund is set up with matching dollars to the average of the main party's campaign funds.
The person to whom the fund goes is selected by direct vote, tournament style. Anyone in the U.S. meeting the qualification reqs. for president would be eligible. All candidates intitally come up with a 1 page summary of what they are about. For the second round, 2-3 pages, etc... for the final round(s) hold public debates between the dark horse candidates. The final winner gets the pot for campaign use. Unused fund go into the pot for the next election.
The result of this: a candidate who actually represents what the majority of voters want, who is able to compete equally with with the major parties.
This strategy preserves the representive system, while also allowing for the "true voice" of the voters to be heard.
Only non-party/independent voters could vote in the dark horse primary/tournament.
Then for those arm-chair politicians, the question can be not "Did you vote" but "Why didn't you run for president?"
I, for one, am tired of being spoon fed platitudes and rhetoric. I'd love to see a system like this where Joe Normal could actually make it to the White House.
Wouldn't that shake things up?
From the website:
QuickTransit for x86. Allows application binaries compiled for a MIPS®, POWER(TM), PowerPC(TM) or mainframe processor to run on an x86-based computer. Application binaries compiled for other processors will be supported soon. Operating system call mapping from any Unix/Linux-like operating system or any mainframe operating system to any Unix/Linux-like operating system is supported.
I don't see any mention of Windows...
The "Why-to" question is the core of what separates good programmers from bad.
Inadvertantly, you question strikes to the core of modern IT, it is not language specific, but it is the root driving force behind all "geeks".
For too many people, the "Why-to" is "because I heard you can make lots of money as a programmer". To answer this demand, colleges and universities churn out rank and file incompetent and ambivalent programmers, weilding their Microsoft inspired toolchest of Visual Basic 6 or MS Access, they flood the resume pool, and pollute the code base with their lazy half-hearted attempts at development, causing project failures and frustration on a massive scale and dramtically increasing the costs of corporate IT.
These are the type of programmers who react with anger and fear when anyone mentions exploring different languages or technology. Who, when confronted with a problem or issue they don't understand are willing to shrug and say "I don't know" and pass the problem off to the true "geek" on the team.
On the other hand, you have the type of coder to which the "Why-to" question is like breathing... to whom coding grants god-like powers of creation, who is willing to stay up late solving obscure problems just for the rush of satisfaction when s/he gets the answer.
To this type of coder, the question is not so much "Why-to" but more, "How could I not?". Coding is not a job, it is a system of thought, the logical structuring of the chaotic real-world into discrete lines of code.
To this type of programmer, there is nothing more exhilarating than a new project, a blank file, a clean slate, from which they can craft the perfect solution. Starting from scratch and creating from nothing is the ultimate expression of their intellect, and they judge themselves critically by the result.
This is a quality that can not be taught in a univeristy, or measured by a multiple choice exam. These are the "basement geeks" who clutter their shelves with gadgets and obscure books.
They may have started on the IRC with the classic question "How do I make a game?", or as a sysop of a dial-up BBS who needed to add functionality.
The point is, for the true coder, the "Why-to" question was answered BEFORE the language question... they had some sort of need that could only be solved by learning to code... and after that they were hooked. They constantly evaluate new languages and more effecient/elegant methods of solving their problems.
There is no book that will make you _want_ to code, first you want to code _then_ you buy the book.
Asking "Why should I program?" is similar to picking up a shovel and saying "Why should I dig?". Unless you have a need, there is no point, and you will never understand why all those ditch-diggers keep debating the finer points of different shovels. You are out of context. For you, the answer is "You shouldn't".
That is, until you need a ditch.
I agree 100%, which is why my wife and I gave up on TV 7 years ago.
When a good series comes out, we buy the DVDs. We can watch the shows whenever we want, we are never left stuck at the end of an episode begin forced to wait for next week, and most importantly NO COMMERCIALS (though with the DVD stop flag, who knows how long this will last).
The only down side is that I didn't learn what an unbelievably great show Firefly was until after it was cancelled.
Everyone please please please buy the Firefly DVD's, and go see Serenity when it is released. This show deserves to live (I never thought I could be so passionate about a TV show!).
There must be some way that the fans of great shows like these can apply more pressure to the networks.
Or is there an alternative media distribution method that could be used? What about the idea of fan sponsored shows released on the internet?
Does anyone have any idea what sort of budget Joss needed for Firefly?
I, for one, would be more that willing to pitch in $50 for another season...
Socialogically, laziness is the root of efficiency. With admitted exceptions for certain individuals, on the whole, the purpose of achieving greater efficiency is to allow more time for recreation, or "laziness". The natural aversion to hard work, repetitive or mundane tasks is the key to human evolution. Its the reason the first tool was ever used. Why bother being a sysadmin in the first place? Surely pumping gas 14 hours a day would be just as good? Or is so that you can make more money, have a higher quality of life, and a plan to retire and spend a large chunk of life "slacking"? Achieving efficiency in your work contributes to the life end goal: pure and total relaxation/recreation. We are driven by a universal and healthy motivation to slack, your natural aversion to doing repetive mundane tasks is what drives you to write the perl script, which is the same motivation which drives you to make more money, to plan for retirement etc...
All technological breakthroughs are driven by one common underlying theme: laziness.
Or in technical terms "quality of life".
Runnning water is great, now we don't have to carry buckets from the well, washing machines are great, now we don't need to stand around all day bent over a washboard, etc, etc...
The predominant measure of quality of life is how much time is spent on relaxation/recreation v/s work. By genetically redefining the meaning of quality of life, we threaten that which has driven all human progress.
If, at a genetic level, I _enjoy_ spending 12 hours bent over a washboard, what motivation is there to develop a washing machine?
If no one will buy the new widget that saves them 15 minutes doing task X, what motivation is there for a company to spend money on R & D to develop the time saving widget?
In closing, let me be the first to welcome our new hypo-manic overlords... the lithium is in the fridge.