How much attempted acting/character/plot development will I have to sit through before the good stuff starts?
I was going to just write this movie off, maybe get it from Netflix later, but this trailer actually makes me want to spend the money and see this in a theater.
The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge was not cursed, just forbidden and it is was not identified as an apple, could just as likely been a pomegranate or an orange.
Other than that your spot on in your summary.
Apologies for adding this clarification but I have strong issues with the ongoing, unjust, persecution of snakes and apples by the followers of the aforementioned Jewish zombie.
1 Create a new document and fill the page with random text, really random like form a random password generator. 2 Create small clear area in middle of page and enter the password. 3 Print out page, fold page in thirds and seal in security envelop (the kind with pre-printed inner surface). 4 Sign/date, put in safe.
This way even if you make the outer envelope transparent with the canned air trick reading the password is next to impossible.
Even if the X-48 in the photos is just a big R/C model it doesn't change the point I was making, and since it seems that people keep missing the point in my comments here it is spelled out.
Your point "..they will look exactly the same in another 40 years"
My point; Maybe they won't. There are concepts and designs for aircraft that do NOT look like the planes 40 years ago, a cylinder with wings attached is not the only form that can fly, and not necessarily the only form that passenger aircraft will always have.
and yes, I know its just supposed to be funny, and I agree its worth a chuckle but it just pisses me off that congress will argue for weeks about things that really affect peoples lives and add all sorts of riders onto it for some pet project of theirs that has nothing to do with the main item but they trivial crap like this gets cleared in a few days.
I'm tired of all the talking, its time for deeds, not words.
Are you sure? I remember that being Grace Lee Whitney, Ensign Rand from the original series. She was definitely in ST:TMP as none other than Dr.Chapel
I know Mrs. Roddenberry was in ST4. At Star Fleet HQ ordering emergency power be redirected to medical when the Probe started screwing up the power grids on Earth.
And lets not forget her appearance in Babylon 5, as the third wife of the late Centari Emperor.
No matter who it was in ST3, I'm with you on her being missed.
why is it that everyone seems to be missing what I am saying?
All I did was point out that TrancePhreak's comment about Vista using 1GB of RAM being a myth was contradicted by the very next sentence saying that Vista did use 1GB for pre-caching.
Then I expressed my view that unless it is caching something the user is going to actually use then it is wasted effort, effort that could be better spent caching something the user will use, or any number of other things that benefit the user.
I work with embedded RTOSs, I know about the memory management and caching tricks you mentioned and likely a few others that you may not have heard of if your not into making every clock tick and available byte count.
So far for pointing out a simple self contradictory statement I have had my opinions called BS and been called a troll.
"I don't understand this fascination people have with making the "idle" memory usage number as small as possible" It is probably a hold over from the days when RAM was a very precious resource, just one Meg could set you back the cost of one of todays higher end systems, same goes for the CPU cycles, every one counted and if the OS was using up those LIMITED resources on eye candy it would tick a lot of people off.
Also if you actually parse my comment you'll see that I said "If you don't use any of those cached programs..." then its being wasted, kind of like if the OS cached a bunch of images of gay porn in RAM so they would load faster. Great, if you like gay porn but really a wasted effort if you would prefer pics of Natalie Portman.
If Vista could be told which programs to cache, and maybe it can for all I know, I don't use it, then I would agree that it was a great feature, but since it seems to just load what MS thinks your going to use its a waste of effort, time and RAM that could be better used for caching an application you where actually going to use.
Also, I think we have gotten way off topic here, so its time to just accept that everyone has different views and move on. Bye.
Sometimes, because if its not already in use you don't have to free it up or worry about a stray pointer executing arbitrary code.
If you've got RAM to waste and don't care then go for it, but if your on an older system that barely meets Vista requirements you might notice a performance hit. But that was not my point and looks like you missed it too (if your being facetious then please disregard that last remark).
If I was trolling I would be calling your, and others, opinions BS.
I program, and teach programming, for real time environments, hard real time where the difference between success or failure, and sometimes literally between life and death, can be measured by a few cpu cycles saved or wasted in a routine or system call. My view point and opinions are sculpted by what I do for a living, thats why I don't use MS Windows, it is too wasteful of system resources. Your posting that I was initially responding to claimed that Vista using 1GB of RAM while idle was a myth, then you contradicted that claim in the very next line.
I pointed that out, get told my opinions are BS and suddenly I'm a Troll? Or is it just you don't like to get your mistakes pointed out to you?
OK, NOW I'm trolling, and this has gotten far enough off topic that I'm finished.
All I said was that the original claim that the 1GB was a myth was invalidated by the very next line in the posting. Then I pointed out that unless you actually used some of the pre-cached data the RAM used to store it and the CPU overhead, slight it may be, was wasted. Yes the time it takes to "dump RAM" as you put it is minimal but that doesn't change the reported fact that Vista can burn up ~30% of the CPU just twiddling its thumbs.
My reasons for not liking Vista, "Hate" is a very strong emotion that I wouldn't waste on Vista, are completely valid to me, I do not use it nor will I advise people to use it if asked.
If you feel otherwise so be it, I'm not trying to change anyones mind about Vista one way or the other, just pointing out some logic errors in a posting, not ridiculing someone and calling their opinions and observations bullshit that they made up.
"that 1GB is a myth" So Vista doesn't use 1GB while sitting idle.
"It's just precaching all sorts of things in case you use them..." So it is using 1GB of RAM while sitting idle...
No matter what it uses the RAM for it is using it, loading it with programs that you might use at some point. If you don't use any of those cached programs then Vista is wasting RAM and cycles doing nothing that benefits the user.
"Yep, smaller companies are more progressive than very large companies,..." And they tend to have less money to spend on IT so they will just go with whatever comes with the computers they buy. The company I work for purchases only from Dell for the simple reason that we can still get XP, the boss has seen Vista and what it does to system resources. He hates Vista (he already complains about how slow his quad-core, 3GHz systems is with XP64) and has told me flat out that he will not use Vista in the company, I'm already under orders to research alternatives to the applications the company uses that will allow us to continue with XP and let us transition to Linux as needed.
But actually your right about smaller companies being more progressive in one regard, they are more willing and able to ditch Windows and go with alternatives.
or shot with live rounds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings
The ones killed weren't even involved in the protest, they where just in the line of fire.
Anytime someone says the US government would never use military force on US citizens or open fire on them I remind them of Kent State, May 4, 1970
Slashdot Mirror
You say "Mad Scientist"
I say "Grumpy Visionary"
cool site
IMO, Edison was a Business genius like Gates but Tesla was a true Creative Genius, not just an inventor.
How much attempted acting/character/plot development will I have to sit through before the good stuff starts?
I was going to just write this movie off, maybe get it from Netflix later, but this trailer actually makes me want to spend the money and see this in a theater.
it was a "Serpent" not a snake.
The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge was not cursed, just forbidden and it is was not identified as an apple, could just as likely been a pomegranate or an orange.
Other than that your spot on in your summary.
Apologies for adding this clarification but I have strong issues with the ongoing, unjust, persecution of snakes and apples by the followers of the aforementioned Jewish zombie.
Damn it!! You owe me a new keyboard!!
But they can't stand cold. Roaches are semi-tropical and will die in a frost.
We need to freeze them with truck full of liquid nitrogen, then nuke them from orbit.
Can't call him a "killer", the would be jumper didn't die.
Easy to defeat.
1 Create a new document and fill the page with random text, really random like form a random password generator.
2 Create small clear area in middle of page and enter the password.
3 Print out page, fold page in thirds and seal in security envelop (the kind with pre-printed inner surface).
4 Sign/date, put in safe.
This way even if you make the outer envelope transparent with the canned air trick reading the password is next to impossible.
Used this trick last place I worked.
Thanks for the cover fire. The photos in my original link are of the R/C flight test model. For more info check here
So sorry, try this one
Even if the X-48 in the photos is just a big R/C model it doesn't change the point I was making, and since it seems that people keep missing the point in my comments here it is spelled out.
Your point "..they will look exactly the same in another 40 years"
My point; Maybe they won't. There are concepts and designs for aircraft that do NOT look like the planes 40 years ago, a cylinder with wings attached is not the only form that can fly, and not necessarily the only form that passenger aircraft will always have.
Yep, the planes of tomorrow will look just like the ones from forty years ago.
Too true.
and yes, I know its just supposed to be funny, and I agree its worth a chuckle but it just pisses me off that congress will argue for weeks about things that really affect peoples lives and add all sorts of riders onto it for some pet project of theirs that has nothing to do with the main item but they trivial crap like this gets cleared in a few days.
I'm tired of all the talking, its time for deeds, not words.
Did anyone else read this and think "WTF?, why are they wasting time on motherfscking stupid crap like this?" or something to that effect?
So if Pol Pot had donated a few million dollars to the Red Cross it would have made the slaughter of millions of his people OK?
Not flaming and I know its an extreme example. I'm just pointing out that one good deed does not excuse violating the Law. Nokia's on my list now,
Lovley Angels, aka Dirty Pair
I'm with you and Scotty.
Drink to her memory, drink to the life she lived, and have another for all the times she made me laugh, smile, or just glade to hear her voice.
We'll all miss her, but we'll also remember her.
Are you sure? I remember that being Grace Lee Whitney, Ensign Rand from the original series. She was definitely in ST:TMP as none other than Dr.Chapel
I know Mrs. Roddenberry was in ST4. At Star Fleet HQ ordering emergency power be redirected to medical when the Probe started screwing up the power grids on Earth.
And lets not forget her appearance in Babylon 5, as the third wife of the late Centari Emperor.
No matter who it was in ST3, I'm with you on her being missed.
why is it that everyone seems to be missing what I am saying?
/. just isn't as much fun as it used to be.
All I did was point out that TrancePhreak's comment about Vista using 1GB of RAM being a myth was contradicted by the very next sentence saying that Vista did use 1GB for pre-caching.
Then I expressed my view that unless it is caching something the user is going to actually use then it is wasted effort, effort that could be better spent caching something the user will use, or any number of other things that benefit the user.
I work with embedded RTOSs, I know about the memory management and caching tricks you mentioned and likely a few others that you may not have heard of if your not into making every clock tick and available byte count.
So far for pointing out a simple self contradictory statement I have had my opinions called BS and been called a troll.
"I don't understand this fascination people have with making the "idle" memory usage number as small as possible"
..." then its being wasted, kind of like if the OS cached a bunch of images of gay porn in RAM so they would load faster. Great, if you like gay porn but really a wasted effort if you would prefer pics of Natalie Portman.
It is probably a hold over from the days when RAM was a very precious resource, just one Meg could set you back the cost of one of todays higher end systems, same goes for the CPU cycles, every one counted and if the OS was using up those LIMITED resources on eye candy it would tick a lot of people off.
Also if you actually parse my comment you'll see that I said "If you don't use any of those cached programs
If Vista could be told which programs to cache, and maybe it can for all I know, I don't use it, then I would agree that it was a great feature, but since it seems to just load what MS thinks your going to use its a waste of effort, time and RAM that could be better used for caching an application you where actually going to use.
Also, I think we have gotten way off topic here, so its time to just accept that everyone has different views and move on. Bye.
Sometimes, because if its not already in use you don't have to free it up or worry about a stray pointer executing arbitrary code.
If you've got RAM to waste and don't care then go for it, but if your on an older system that barely meets Vista requirements you might notice a performance hit. But that was not my point and looks like you missed it too (if your being facetious then please disregard that last remark).
If I was trolling I would be calling your, and others, opinions BS.
I program, and teach programming, for real time environments, hard real time where the difference between success or failure, and sometimes literally between life and death, can be measured by a few cpu cycles saved or wasted in a routine or system call. My view point and opinions are sculpted by what I do for a living, thats why I don't use MS Windows, it is too wasteful of system resources. Your posting that I was initially responding to claimed that Vista using 1GB of RAM while idle was a myth, then you contradicted that claim in the very next line.
I pointed that out, get told my opinions are BS and suddenly I'm a Troll? Or is it just you don't like to get your mistakes pointed out to you?
OK, NOW I'm trolling, and this has gotten far enough off topic that I'm finished.
Dude, calm down.
All I said was that the original claim that the 1GB was a myth was invalidated by the very next line in the posting. Then I pointed out that unless you actually used some of the pre-cached data the RAM used to store it and the CPU overhead, slight it may be, was wasted. Yes the time it takes to "dump RAM" as you put it is minimal but that doesn't change the reported fact that Vista can burn up ~30% of the CPU just twiddling its thumbs.
My reasons for not liking Vista, "Hate" is a very strong emotion that I wouldn't waste on Vista, are completely valid to me, I do not use it nor will I advise people to use it if asked.
If you feel otherwise so be it, I'm not trying to change anyones mind about Vista one way or the other, just pointing out some logic errors in a posting, not ridiculing someone and calling their opinions and observations bullshit that they made up.
"that 1GB is a myth"
..." ...
So Vista doesn't use 1GB while sitting idle.
"It's just precaching all sorts of things in case you use them
So it is using 1GB of RAM while sitting idle
No matter what it uses the RAM for it is using it, loading it with programs that you might use at some point. If you don't use any of those cached programs then Vista is wasting RAM and cycles doing nothing that benefits the user.
"Yep, smaller companies are more progressive than very large companies, ..."
And they tend to have less money to spend on IT so they will just go with whatever comes with the computers they buy. The company I work for purchases only from Dell for the simple reason that we can still get XP, the boss has seen Vista and what it does to system resources. He hates Vista (he already complains about how slow his quad-core, 3GHz systems is with XP64) and has told me flat out that he will not use Vista in the company, I'm already under orders to research alternatives to the applications the company uses that will allow us to continue with XP and let us transition to Linux as needed.
But actually your right about smaller companies being more progressive in one regard, they are more willing and able to ditch Windows and go with alternatives.
or shot with live rounds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings The ones killed weren't even involved in the protest, they where just in the line of fire. Anytime someone says the US government would never use military force on US citizens or open fire on them I remind them of Kent State, May 4, 1970