>>When some thug Somewhere starts killing people en mass (Think Nazi Germany, Kosavo Bosnia etc)
Or the US.... Let's not forget that.
But you know what: Porn in itself (in moderation as everything) isn't something bad, the chances of sex / porn hurting someone is way less than a gun... After all, sex could create live and not destroy it, hardly something you can say about a gun, now can you?
Besides: If the US would actually loosen up a bit about the Sex issue, maybe you guys could stop showing around all your new high tech guns with which you are "protecting" the world.
Did anybody actually maintain the BB installation after you left?
I had it running at the last three companies where I was as well, but after I left nobody kept it's hand on it, and now it more or less died...
My current employer though would rather spent 250.000 on BMC than use BB... Well, it took me a day to roll out BB on all my boxes and it's working... BMC is still trying to figure out WHAT they actually have to monitor .
Quite frankly I don't want to be hawking over my kids 24/7... Instead I want to be able to be sure that I have given them the right values / ideas of life.
No clue yet how to do that though, as such... No kids yet:)
I would have agreed to you until this Big Brother craze started.... After that I am not so sure anymore... quite frankly TV is more and more fading out of my daily life anyways.
Well, I am in your target group (26, no kids), but you know what? I still don't like the idea too much with the V Chip.
Why? Because as much as I understand your reasoning, I think the original poster has a point as well. People here (Toronto) SEEM to be too busy to actually CARE about their kids. They hand them off on masses to Nanny's and Baby Sitters and are off. That is PERSONAL observation, not hear say.
If you teached your kids that TV is a bad thing, than Kudos to you because quite frankly I think that TV to 99% IS crap, but a chip won't fix this. And I don't like the idea to give people even MORE excuses for NOT looking after their kids.
One day I might have kids, but quite frankly I hope that when I do I do it in a way that I am involved with them, and if that's the case I don't need a V-Chip or anything like that to educate my kids.
>>Here's an interesting change: according to Robbins (he claims to have merely dramatizied history, and avoided changing documented facts), Zaitsev's snipers included several women, including our romantic interest, Tania. I gather the movie couldn't quite deal with the concept of female snipers, and made Tania a "translator".
What I have read in other sources it seems to be true. Both of them were lovers AND both were snipers (he trained her).
There also seemed to have been quite a lot of female snipers in Stalingrad at that point.
On a side note. I read somewhere that apparantly woman make BETTER snipers than man do... Wonder why?
>>One of the striking things shown was that women fought along side the men. I'm not sure how integrated the Soviet forces were gender-wise, but the socialist and anarchist forces that fought in the Spanish Civil War had plenty of women.
To my knowledge pretty integrated. In the sense that they needed everyhand that could pull a trigger, they even created an all female Squadron of Fighter Pilots.
Hitler expected to be in Moscow by October if I remember correctly. Moscow was his goal... He almost got there, just a couple of kilometers short of the city center.
If I remember correctly Stalin btw, didn't leave Moscow as such if he would have really managed to conquer the city he actually might have pulled it off.
>>Once again it is suggested that reading a little history would help here. Hitler invaded Russian on June 22, 1941. At that time, his forces were the best organized and equipped in all of Europe. His air fighters were made of metal, when the Russians where still using wood-and-cloth construction. His troops were rested, and consisted of veterans. They were in very good shape. I agree, however, that the move was stupid - by invading Russia, Hitler opened a second front. >So the fight was against an invader of their homeland, not because big, bad Stalin was standing over their heads cracking a whip.
Well, now this is an impression a lot of american have about russians, I guess the 50ths and McCarthy have something to do with that idea.
Reality is that for decades the russian people have had the short end of the stick, the Zar didn't care much about his people and when Lenin came to power (thanks to German support during WWI) he forgot about the people who got him in power (farmers, workers etc.). He also had to learn that it was way harder to get his dreams into reality.
As for "only so much"... Well look at the map today and you see that a lot of what was the Soviet Union fell apart once the iron curtain and the pressure was down. A lot of people in the Baltic despite Stalin and Russia and they are very wary about what is going on in this country today.
Russia has a very rich culture, way more so IMO than the US, and it is not as easy to grasp for outsiders as it might appear (and no, I am not an expert on this, I know some people from the former Soviet Union as such I have a bit of an insight what was going on there, but I am far from an expert).
Quite frankly I don't think that the normal foot soldier cares much about politics once the bullets are flying over your head. You're shooting back, and of course you have to convince yourself that you're doing the "right" thing.
A couple of years ago I read an interview with one guy who was 18 when he ended up on the russian front, and he said up until this day (though only some years later) he still looks at his family and grand chlildren and wonders who the two red army guy's were he shot and killed, and how their family would be now.
War is a very bad thing, and people do things in war that they wouldn't do normally, but I wouldn't say that ALL german soldiers were there to kill and torture people.
Besides, if you look closely you'll see that this is a two way street, all through history attrocities during war time existed. Yes, even your preciouse american army did this, world war 2, Korea, Vietnam it's all there.
As such: Stalingrad I think is way more accurate in that regards than most other movies.
BTW, one more thing. There is a reason why even german movies show the Nazis as the bad guys: That's the german mentality about this period, there is a collective guilt within germany about what has happened, and germany tends to take the blame for everything that happens (we not only accept, we actually ask for taking it).
Face it: War is a horrible thing, and people do horrible things.
[End of rant, the above post is not a political statement]
Stalingrad -- There is a better movie about this.
on
Enemy At The Gates
·
· Score: 2
I am about to see the movie tonight, but what I wanted to add is that there actually is a good movie about the Battle of Stalingrad out there already.
Sure, it's a german movie, less production value and not so many CGI Effects (after what I can tell from the trailer), but also no Love Story, no "Hollywoodniced" version of a war.
>>On a funny note, the best way I ever came out to someone (other than posting to Slashdot;-) was when a (straight) friend of mine and I were at dinner and he said, "well, Aaron, all the best sysadmins are fat, bearded and gay. So, I guess 2 out of 3 isn't bad." My reply was simply, "actually, that'd be 3."
So either I am a pretty bad SysAdmin or I am the exception to the rule.
Even if it's only 1 in 20 what's the big deal about it?
I don't know if I should find the fear of some people about homosexuality funny or not, but it's amazing how easily people freak out over that subject.
Most people in the field (not only consultants) are in there for just the money, they have no idea WHAT they are doing (or at least it doesn't look like it).
They throw around a lot of impressive words (sometimes not even in a way that it makes sense) and then when it goes wrong you're (or I) are the idiot who can pick it up.
People don't quite understand my reasoning why I am against most people in the industry, for them everybody is the same (the more certs you have the better), but I see this job like that of a doctor: I rather go to one who does it out of passion, not out of monetary reasons.
>>n top of that it seems like companies use the big 5 merely because of thier size. Why is this?
One word: Accountability.
They think that if they hire a big company then they get what they pay for (reads: Good service, and somebody to shout at).
They conclude that those companies have a reputation they have to maintain.
All fair and square, just one problem with it: They are soo big that they hardly care for ONE client, and even if that is a big company, if you fuck up in one department, you still have the rest, and the news hardly travels up to the ones who make the hiring decisions, if it goes that high you can bet that YOU (as the local guy) get blamed for all the problems.
Just FYI, animation movie are not strictly for kids, Akira was / is NOT a series it's a feature length movie and one of the best animated out there.
Yes, there are "bad" movies in Anime, but there are worse movies in real life (faces of death just to name one) and to blow everybody away here because of what you don't understand it typically troll.
Quite frankly every since I moved to North America I am surprised how loud Trucks and Buses ARE here.
I mean looking back to where I come from, Mercedes-Benz was testdriving a new bus that was running on an alternate Fuel Source (don't ask, I don't know, maybe Hydrogene?) and people complained it was too loud, but compared to an average Bus here in Toronto this bus was whispering.
The article is pretty interresting, and also paints a grim future.
What exactly do the companies have to loose? Total control I guess and the possiblity to get out of business.
Let's have a look at the moment.
I buy a DVD (yes I admit, I still buy them) and a friend of mine wants to borrow it. So I give it to him, he watches the movie and gives it back to me.
Did they just loose a buyer for the DVD?
No, the most he probably would have done is to rent the DVD, which would have given Blockbuster some money but that's it, the studio wouldn't have seen any more money.
Now let's fast forward a bit. Let's assume for a moment he can download the movie or make a copy of it for his own use.
Would they have lost a sale here? No, because unless he is a collector who wants to have all the nice packaging etc. that comes with DVDs he wouldn't care about the movie, he would have probably lived happily without ever having seen it.
Same goes for e-Books, yes I download some, and read them, but if I really like a book I either already have it as a hardcopy or I am going to buy it.I am simply not in the mood of dragging my notebook around with me all the time (bad to read on the subway). If I would have a PDA it might be different and we will see how that will be once I have one, but I still like the feel of the book and the fact that I can actually throw it at someone when I get pissed without being afraid of wrecking $1000 Device.
Fact is: If I like something I am willing to pay for it. Authors, get a web page, paypal or something similar and I drop you a buck or two (but the way King tried to milk money is pretty sad, much more so as I find him boring anyways).
All in all: I think electronic publishing will make it easier for a lot of people to get the word about their work out, and it is understandably that a lot of companies want to regain control. Don't believe me? Have a look at some of the movies that people upload to our site, what happened there qualitywise in the past 6 years is amazing (our video archive goes back around 6 years).
Also don't forget one thing. Right now the Digital Market, Broadband Internet etc. is still a VERY VERY LOW percentage of the overall market. The people who can stop that now in the end is US the people who know what it will do, how it works, once it hits the mainstream it will be TOO LATE to change anything, because Joe Sixpack won't care (in the beginning).
We run one ad per page, that's it, I am not a fan of the ad banners either, but guess what: We are unable to find ONE sponsor who would be willing to cover the Bandwith costs.
Merchandising is a nice idea and we are thinking about that. Trouble is: The team is spread worldwide: I am in Canada, one is in Spain and one in the Netherlands, so to sit together and mail stuff is not an option.
>>Where, exactly, is the promise to anyone that creates a web site that they should be able to "make a return on their investment", especially a monetary return? I'm working with a group that has put up a site purely for the hope of getting our work out there. We don't want to have pop-ups, so we don't. We don't like banner ads, so we don't have them. Nowhere did we see, when we were setting up our web site, the guarantee that we would recieve any sort of compensation just for doing what we enjoy doing.
There seems to be this overwhelming mentality anymore that just by having a web presence you should be entitled to make money. >But with the Internet it seems that people feel they are entitled to monetary compensation just for throwing some words and pictures up on a page. It just seems wrong to me.
The cable provider pays the creator of the Program some money based on the subscriber, so yes, you are paying.
You could go on the net like they do with empty CDs now: have a central authority who sends out grants to artists / websites.
But tell me, how that should work.
Advertising is the best way to keep content "free", remember nothing on this planet is for free, you always have to pay one way or the other.
Also, look at a newspaper, it contains ads, but yet you are BUYING a Newspaper every day, the Ads support it and keep the price low. Now imagine the web, you DON'T have to buy anything, you just have to handle one ad per page, and yet you complain.
Get real, ambitious(sp?) projects / big projects NEED funding to afford the bill.
>>Unlike people, businesses do NOT have a right to continued existence
Nice of you, but the website I am running is a hobby website, yet we produce easily 200 GB of Data every single month.
The fact that we DON'T get paid enough to pay for that means I have to chip in every month.
Fine it is a hobby so I am willing to pay a certain amount, but there is a pain level, and with advertising money drying up more and more every day (yes, we felt that too) I am question now long I can still support that.
Slashdot Mirror
>>When some thug Somewhere starts killing people en mass (Think Nazi Germany, Kosavo Bosnia etc)
Or the US.... Let's not forget that.
But you know what: Porn in itself (in moderation as everything) isn't something bad, the chances of sex / porn hurting someone is way less than a gun... After all, sex could create live and not destroy it, hardly something you can say about a gun, now can you?
Besides: If the US would actually loosen up a bit about the Sex issue, maybe you guys could stop showing around all your new high tech guns with which you are "protecting" the world.
Did anybody actually maintain the BB installation after you left?
I had it running at the last three companies where I was as well, but after I left nobody kept it's hand on it, and now it more or less died...
My current employer though would rather spent 250.000 on BMC than use BB... Well, it took me a day to roll out BB on all my boxes and it's working... BMC is still trying to figure out WHAT they actually have to monitor .
Quite frankly I don't want to be hawking over my kids 24/7... Instead I want to be able to be sure that I have given them the right values / ideas of life.
:)
No clue yet how to do that though, as such... No kids yet
Michael
I would have agreed to you until this Big Brother craze started.... After that I am not so sure anymore... quite frankly TV is more and more fading out of my daily life anyways.
Well, I am in your target group (26, no kids), but you know what? I still don't like the idea too much with the V Chip.
Why? Because as much as I understand your reasoning, I think the original poster has a point as well. People here (Toronto) SEEM to be too busy to actually CARE about their kids. They hand them off on masses to Nanny's and Baby Sitters and are off. That is PERSONAL observation, not hear say.
If you teached your kids that TV is a bad thing, than Kudos to you because quite frankly I think that TV to 99% IS crap, but a chip won't fix this. And I don't like the idea to give people even MORE excuses for NOT looking after their kids.
One day I might have kids, but quite frankly I hope that when I do I do it in a way that I am involved with them, and if that's the case I don't need a V-Chip or anything like that to educate my kids.
Just my 2 cents.
>>Here's an interesting change: according to Robbins (he claims to have merely dramatizied history, and avoided changing documented facts), Zaitsev's snipers included several women, including our romantic interest, Tania. I gather the movie couldn't quite deal with the concept of female snipers, and made Tania a "translator".
What I have read in other sources it seems to be true. Both of them were lovers AND both were snipers (he trained her).
There also seemed to have been quite a lot of female snipers in Stalingrad at that point.
On a side note. I read somewhere that apparantly woman make BETTER snipers than man do... Wonder why?
>>One of the striking things shown was that women fought along side the men. I'm not sure how integrated the Soviet forces were gender-wise, but the socialist and anarchist forces that fought in the Spanish Civil War had plenty of women.
To my knowledge pretty integrated. In the sense that they needed everyhand that could pull a trigger, they even created an all female Squadron of Fighter Pilots.
Hitler expected to be in Moscow by October if I remember correctly. Moscow was his goal... He almost got there, just a couple of kilometers short of the city center.
If I remember correctly Stalin btw, didn't leave Moscow as such if he would have really managed to conquer the city he actually might have pulled it off.
>>Once again it is suggested that reading a little history would help here. Hitler invaded Russian on June 22, 1941. At that time, his forces were the best organized and equipped in all of Europe. His air fighters were made of metal, when the Russians where still using wood-and-cloth construction. His troops were rested, and consisted of veterans. They were in very good shape. I agree, however, that the move was stupid - by invading Russia, Hitler opened a second front. >So the fight was against an invader of their homeland, not because big, bad Stalin was standing over their heads cracking a whip.
Well, now this is an impression a lot of american have about russians, I guess the 50ths and McCarthy have something to do with that idea.
Reality is that for decades the russian people have had the short end of the stick, the Zar didn't care much about his people and when Lenin came to power (thanks to German support during WWI) he forgot about the people who got him in power (farmers, workers etc.). He also had to learn that it was way harder to get his dreams into reality.
As for "only so much"... Well look at the map today and you see that a lot of what was the Soviet Union fell apart once the iron curtain and the pressure was down. A lot of people in the Baltic despite Stalin and Russia and they are very wary about what is going on in this country today.
Russia has a very rich culture, way more so IMO than the US, and it is not as easy to grasp for outsiders as it might appear (and no, I am not an expert on this, I know some people from the former Soviet Union as such I have a bit of an insight what was going on there, but I am far from an expert).
Quite frankly I don't think that the normal foot soldier cares much about politics once the bullets are flying over your head. You're shooting back, and of course you have to convince yourself that you're doing the "right" thing.
A couple of years ago I read an interview with one guy who was 18 when he ended up on the russian front, and he said up until this day (though only some years later) he still looks at his family and grand chlildren and wonders who the two red army guy's were he shot and killed, and how their family would be now.
War is a very bad thing, and people do things in war that they wouldn't do normally, but I wouldn't say that ALL german soldiers were there to kill and torture people.
Besides, if you look closely you'll see that this is a two way street, all through history attrocities during war time existed. Yes, even your preciouse american army did this, world war 2, Korea, Vietnam it's all there.
As such: Stalingrad I think is way more accurate in that regards than most other movies.
BTW, one more thing. There is a reason why even german movies show the Nazis as the bad guys: That's the german mentality about this period, there is a collective guilt within germany about what has happened, and germany tends to take the blame for everything that happens (we not only accept, we actually ask for taking it).
Face it: War is a horrible thing, and people do horrible things.
[End of rant, the above post is not a political statement]
I am about to see the movie tonight, but what I wanted to add is that there actually is a good movie about the Battle of Stalingrad out there already.
It's called "Stalingrad"
Sure, it's a german movie, less production value and not so many CGI Effects (after what I can tell from the trailer), but also no Love Story, no "Hollywoodniced" version of a war.
>>The new TV show Dark Angel is post-EMP apocalyse.
Yeah well, but quite frankly Dark Angel still looks very much like today to me.
Geez, one of the characters even has an Apple Cube standing on his desk.
Just to have some Graphitti on the Wall doesn't make it really Post Holocaust.
Interresting idea, but for that they would have to use their brains for a change... Now how likely is THAT?
>>On a funny note, the best way I ever came out to someone (other than posting to Slashdot ;-) was when a (straight) friend of mine and I were at dinner and he said, "well, Aaron, all the best sysadmins are fat, bearded and gay. So, I guess 2 out of 3 isn't bad." My reply was simply, "actually, that'd be 3."
So either I am a pretty bad SysAdmin or I am the exception to the rule.
Take your picks.
Even if it's only 1 in 20 what's the big deal about it?
I don't know if I should find the fear of some people about homosexuality funny or not, but it's amazing how easily people freak out over that subject.
Can anybody tell me WHY?
Most people in the field (not only consultants) are in there for just the money, they have no idea WHAT they are doing (or at least it doesn't look like it).
They throw around a lot of impressive words (sometimes not even in a way that it makes sense) and then when it goes wrong you're (or I) are the idiot who can pick it up.
People don't quite understand my reasoning why I am against most people in the industry, for them everybody is the same (the more certs you have the better), but I see this job like that of a doctor: I rather go to one who does it out of passion, not out of monetary reasons.
Just my 2 cents.
>>n top of that it seems like companies use the big 5 merely because of thier size. Why is this?
One word: Accountability.
They think that if they hire a big company then they get what they pay for (reads: Good service, and somebody to shout at).
They conclude that those companies have a reputation they have to maintain.
All fair and square, just one problem with it: They are soo big that they hardly care for ONE client, and even if that is a big company, if you fuck up in one department, you still have the rest, and the news hardly travels up to the ones who make the hiring decisions, if it goes that high you can bet that YOU (as the local guy) get blamed for all the problems.
That's how it is.
Nice troll..
Just FYI, animation movie are not strictly for kids, Akira was / is NOT a series it's a feature length movie and one of the best animated out there.
Yes, there are "bad" movies in Anime, but there are worse movies in real life (faces of death just to name one) and to blow everybody away here because of what you don't understand it typically troll.
>>Clinton signed the Communications Decency act, the DMCA, and several others. Who would have thought a democrat would restrict freedom like that?
That only shows that there is no left or right in this country, just middle (paved by money).
Just my 2 cents.
I guess here you want to know what that is?
It's an abortion pill (or rather the code name for it), it kicks in some hormons and so no surgery is required.
Quite frankly every since I moved to North America I am surprised how loud Trucks and Buses ARE here.
I mean looking back to where I come from, Mercedes-Benz was testdriving a new bus that was running on an alternate Fuel Source (don't ask, I don't know, maybe Hydrogene?) and people complained it was too loud, but compared to an average Bus here in Toronto this bus was whispering.
The article is pretty interresting, and also paints a grim future.
What exactly do the companies have to loose? Total control I guess and the possiblity to get out of business.
Let's have a look at the moment.
I buy a DVD (yes I admit, I still buy them) and a friend of mine wants to borrow it. So I give it to him, he watches the movie and gives it back to me.
Did they just loose a buyer for the DVD?
No, the most he probably would have done is to rent the DVD, which would have given Blockbuster some money but that's it, the studio wouldn't have seen any more money.
Now let's fast forward a bit. Let's assume for a moment he can download the movie or make a copy of it for his own use.
Would they have lost a sale here? No, because unless he is a collector who wants to have all the nice packaging etc. that comes with DVDs he wouldn't care about the movie, he would have probably lived happily without ever having seen it.
Same goes for e-Books, yes I download some, and read them, but if I really like a book I either already have it as a hardcopy or I am going to buy it.I am simply not in the mood of dragging my notebook around with me all the time (bad to read on the subway). If I would have a PDA it might be different and we will see how that will be once I have one, but I still like the feel of the book and the fact that I can actually throw it at someone when I get pissed without being afraid of wrecking $1000 Device.
Fact is: If I like something I am willing to pay for it. Authors, get a web page, paypal or something similar and I drop you a buck or two (but the way King tried to milk money is pretty sad, much more so as I find him boring anyways).
All in all: I think electronic publishing will make it easier for a lot of people to get the word about their work out, and it is understandably that a lot of companies want to regain control. Don't believe me? Have a look at some of the movies that people upload to our site, what happened there qualitywise in the past 6 years is amazing (our video archive goes back around 6 years).
Also don't forget one thing. Right now the Digital Market, Broadband Internet etc. is still a VERY VERY LOW percentage of the overall market. The people who can stop that now in the end is US the people who know what it will do, how it works, once it hits the mainstream it will be TOO LATE to change anything, because Joe Sixpack won't care (in the beginning).
We run one ad per page, that's it, I am not a fan of the ad banners either, but guess what: We are unable to find ONE sponsor who would be willing to cover the Bandwith costs.
Merchandising is a nice idea and we are thinking about that. Trouble is: The team is spread worldwide: I am in Canada, one is in Spain and one in the Netherlands, so to sit together and mail stuff is not an option.
Michael
>>Where, exactly, is the promise to anyone that creates a web site that they should be able to "make a return on their investment", especially a monetary return? I'm working with a group that has put up a site purely for the hope of getting our work out there. We don't want to have pop-ups, so we don't. We don't like banner ads, so we don't have them. Nowhere did we see, when we were setting up our web site, the guarantee that we would recieve any sort of compensation just for doing what we enjoy doing.
There seems to be this overwhelming mentality anymore that just by having a web presence you should be entitled to make money. >But with the Internet it seems that people feel they are entitled to monetary compensation just for throwing some words and pictures up on a page. It just seems wrong to me.
The cable provider pays the creator of the Program some money based on the subscriber, so yes, you are paying.
You could go on the net like they do with empty CDs now: have a central authority who sends out grants to artists / websites.
But tell me, how that should work.
Advertising is the best way to keep content "free", remember nothing on this planet is for free, you always have to pay one way or the other.
Also, look at a newspaper, it contains ads, but yet you are BUYING a Newspaper every day, the Ads support it and keep the price low. Now imagine the web, you DON'T have to buy anything, you just have to handle one ad per page, and yet you complain.
Get real, ambitious(sp?) projects / big projects NEED funding to afford the bill.
>>Unlike people, businesses do NOT have a right to continued existence
Nice of you, but the website I am running is a hobby website, yet we produce easily 200 GB of Data every single month.
The fact that we DON'T get paid enough to pay for that means I have to chip in every month.
Fine it is a hobby so I am willing to pay a certain amount, but there is a pain level, and with advertising money drying up more and more every day (yes, we felt that too) I am question now long I can still support that.