I assume South Park picked up 'aboot' from somewhere, but I'll be damned if I know where.
The first "aboot" reference/joke I can remember was in Chasing Amy, where Banky says he watches Degrassi High because "I got a weird thing for girls who say "aboot.""
Not saying that's where they got it from though, just the first time I can recall hearing it.
Why is it that so-called "intellectual" work should be rewarded forever, while other types of work are rewarded only once
Because Disney says so.
Once upon a time the creator of the IP only had a limited window with which to profit from the work, after which point it went into the public domain. Disney have changed that, they don't want their cash cow characters like Mickey and Donald to go public domain and they have the political influence to make sure it never happens.
It's unfortunate, but it's unlikely any work created post-Steambaot Willie will EVER go into the public's hands.
I'm guessing not, even Firefox doesn't support Firefox extensions properly on the Mac side. I wish it did, I so really want to use Firefox instead of Safari, but there's a couple features (that can be added via extensions that don't work on the Mac side) missing that keep me away.
If you have a dead iPod, maybe you should question the quality of the device, Skipper.
Unless the iPod's death was homicide and not suicide.:)
Like, it got dropped or stepped on or accidentally abused in some other way.
Personally, I have one of the original 5GB iPods laying about that I never use (long since replaced with a newer model) and probably couldn't sell for even $100 at this point, so it's almost tempting. Almost.
Incidentally, I agree that the Playboy chicks generally aren't that attractive. The pictures are so perfectly smooth, blemish-free, and artificial it looks like someone just posed the toys from realdoll.com. No thanks.
Even disregarding the airbrushing, the women themselves have mostly become so... skanky.
Comically large breast implants, tatoos, shaved naughty bits. Ugh. They look like porn star trash. Whatever happened to that whole "girl next door" thing?
Nope, I didn't care for it either. I LOVED Civ2 though, played that one hour after hour, day after day, for many, many months.:)
Admittedly, one of the reason I disliked Civ 3 was the fact that I got that back in my dark days of doing all my gaming on my Mac. Performance for Civ3 on the Mac was TERRIBLE, everything about it was sluggish and unresponsive, so I just gave up after barely playing it.
Well, there is a link to netscape.com right at the top of every page on CNN. It's not a direct link to download the browser, but it's at least something I suppose. *shrug*
Well, the fact that you can become infected with a trojan simply by VISITING a web site, with no user interaction at all required, tells me than NO, IE does NOT work.
But that's just a reflection of my personal criteria for whether or not something works.
If 10.0 had been release in 1995, this might be a valid comparison. But back in 1995 the Mac was still on System 7.5, so if you want a valid weighing of the cost to keep a system up-to-date you need to start counting a bit earlier than OS X.
Try: (leaving out free updates)
7.5 - 8.0 - 8.5 - 9.0 - 10.0 - 10.2 - 10.3
versus:
95 - 98 - ME - XP
Which means, to keep the Mac OS up-to-date has been nearly twice as expensive (assuming you never got any upgrades "free" with a new system purchase) over the last (almost) ten years.
I love my Mac, so I'd MUCH rather have those ten years of Mac Operating Systems than Windows (yes, even System 7.5!) but that doesn't change the fact that it IS more expensive to keep a Mac up-to-date.
As a youthful gamer, there were only two names whose games I looked forward to and were (more or less) never dissapointed by. Eugene Jarvis was one, Jeff Minter was the other.
Disappointing now though, to see him creating something so underwhelming.
<sarcasm>Yeah, cause there's such a wide variety of games available for the Mac and Linux.</sarcasm>
The only reason I even own a Windows system is to play games, and I generally keep it as far away from the internet as possible, to avoid spyware, adware, viruses, trojans, etc. As such, I don't think I "deserve" to be infected just because I installed a legitimate copy of a commercial game release.
They're probably not gone. Just go into Documents and Settings\Your User Name\Application Data\Phoenix\Profiles\default\ and then into the gibbersh folder and they're in there as bookmarks.html. Just import that file using the bookmarks manager.
Yeah, Firefox did a great job of importing my bookmarks, from frickin' Internet Explorer, which I don't even use, but not the bookmarks from the previous Firefox (0.8) install. Real helpful.
So maybe it does have a lot to do with the fact that at least someone that was involved with the movie was also involved with the development of the game as well, let alone the star.
Could help explain why this movie license didn't turn into a big bag of suck.
Regardless, it's still really interesting to see an actor form his own game development company just to develop the game tie-ins for his movies, especially as he's actually involved in the development process instead of just pawning it off on a squad of well-paid oompa loopas. I've gained a little respect for Vin as a result of this.:)
This was for a previous IE link related exploit. When MS is telling not to use their product in the most basic manner expected of the product then it should be painfully obvious that the product is broken.
And yet 90-some percent of users will continue to use the product. Why fix it? As long as the general public accept these problems and continue to use the broken product anyway, I can't see them being in any rush to devote resources to repairing it's issues.
As an end user, there is pretty much nothing I can do about this.
Yes, there is. Don't visit those sites and do not buy their products. If you just shrug your shoulders, fire up IE, and browse their site and/or buy their products anyway, why should they change it?
From what I've read/seen, Vin himself was involved in the game's design, to what extent I don't know, but was involved further than just recording some dialog and sitting still for a body scan.
He's said to be a pretty avid gamer, so maybe this made the difference in this case? Not saying he made the game better, but it could be assumed that he knows the difference between a good game and a bad game and wasn't going to let his image be used in a crap game.
So maybe the fact that he was able to pop his head in at various points in the game's development and put the kibosh on anything that sucked (and his ability to tell suck from not suck) kept the whole thing from turning into the usual fubar license.
If Half-Life had been Waterworld:The Game, would it have been as successful? Probably not, the stigma from it's association with a flop like that would hurt it some. Would it still have been a hit though? I think so, a good game is a good game. Period.
Hell, look at Goldeneye for the N64. The movie wasn't a flop, but it was no big hit either. But the game was one of the most successful N64 titles.
I'm guessing they thought of every possible method and did a cost/benefit analysis on all of them and decided against any of them.
Estimates I've read put it as high as $10,000/lb to launch something into orbit, so every little bit counts. Adding extra hardware like that probably just wasn't cost effective.
Slashdot Mirror
No. I deny that a Daredevil movie was ever made or released. No such creature.
I assume South Park picked up 'aboot' from somewhere, but I'll be damned if I know where.
The first "aboot" reference/joke I can remember was in Chasing Amy, where Banky says he watches Degrassi High because "I got a weird thing for girls who say "aboot.""
Not saying that's where they got it from though, just the first time I can recall hearing it.
That thing looks like an iPod in the same way that Rosie O'Donnell looks like Jennifer Garner. :)
But, as long as it does what you need it to do, who cares really?
cue obligatory "all your base" reference...
Why is it that so-called "intellectual" work should be rewarded forever, while other types of work are rewarded only once
Because Disney says so.
Once upon a time the creator of the IP only had a limited window with which to profit from the work, after which point it went into the public domain. Disney have changed that, they don't want their cash cow characters like Mickey and Donald to go public domain and they have the political influence to make sure it never happens.
It's unfortunate, but it's unlikely any work created post-Steambaot Willie will EVER go into the public's hands.
Does is support firefox extensions?
I'm guessing not, even Firefox doesn't support Firefox extensions properly on the Mac side. I wish it did, I so really want to use Firefox instead of Safari, but there's a couple features (that can be added via extensions that don't work on the Mac side) missing that keep me away.
If you have a dead iPod, maybe you should question the quality of the device, Skipper.
Unless the iPod's death was homicide and not suicide. :)
Like, it got dropped or stepped on or accidentally abused in some other way.
Personally, I have one of the original 5GB iPods laying about that I never use (long since replaced with a newer model) and probably couldn't sell for even $100 at this point, so it's almost tempting. Almost.
Incidentally, I agree that the Playboy chicks generally aren't that attractive. The pictures are so perfectly smooth, blemish-free, and artificial it looks like someone just posed the toys from realdoll.com. No thanks.
Even disregarding the airbrushing, the women themselves have mostly become so... skanky.
Comically large breast implants, tatoos, shaved naughty bits. Ugh. They look like porn star trash. Whatever happened to that whole "girl next door" thing?
Nope, I didn't care for it either. I LOVED Civ2 though, played that one hour after hour, day after day, for many, many months. :)
Admittedly, one of the reason I disliked Civ 3 was the fact that I got that back in my dark days of doing all my gaming on my Mac. Performance for Civ3 on the Mac was TERRIBLE, everything about it was sluggish and unresponsive, so I just gave up after barely playing it.
Well, there is a link to netscape.com right at the top of every page on CNN. It's not a direct link to download the browser, but it's at least something I suppose. *shrug*
IE works.
Well, the fact that you can become infected with a trojan simply by VISITING a web site, with no user interaction at all required, tells me than NO, IE does NOT work.
But that's just a reflection of my personal criteria for whether or not something works.
Neubauten, alternated with Merzbow, would be ideal. Assuming your goal is clearing out the phone queue, that is. :)
If 10.0 had been release in 1995, this might be a valid comparison. But back in 1995 the Mac was still on System 7.5, so if you want a valid weighing of the cost to keep a system up-to-date you need to start counting a bit earlier than OS X.
Try: (leaving out free updates)
7.5 - 8.0 - 8.5 - 9.0 - 10.0 - 10.2 - 10.3
versus:
95 - 98 - ME - XP
Assuming upgrade prices (and assuming I'm remembering prices correctly,) thats:
99 + 99 + 99 + 99 + 129 + 129 + 129 = 783
versus:
99 + 99 + 99 + 99 = 396
Which means, to keep the Mac OS up-to-date has been nearly twice as expensive (assuming you never got any upgrades "free" with a new system purchase) over the last (almost) ten years.
I love my Mac, so I'd MUCH rather have those ten years of Mac Operating Systems than Windows (yes, even System 7.5!) but that doesn't change the fact that it IS more expensive to keep a Mac up-to-date.
Yeah, and it's a damn shame too.
As a youthful gamer, there were only two names whose games I looked forward to and were (more or less) never dissapointed by. Eugene Jarvis was one, Jeff Minter was the other.
Disappointing now though, to see him creating something so underwhelming.
<sarcasm>Yeah, cause there's such a wide variety of games available for the Mac and Linux.</sarcasm>
The only reason I even own a Windows system is to play games, and I generally keep it as far away from the internet as possible, to avoid spyware, adware, viruses, trojans, etc. As such, I don't think I "deserve" to be infected just because I installed a legitimate copy of a commercial game release.
Heh, the Windows installer still says it's installing 0.8 too.
Are they sure this a release candidate? :)
They're probably not gone. Just go into Documents and Settings\Your User Name\Application Data\Phoenix\Profiles\default\ and then into the gibbersh folder and they're in there as bookmarks.html. Just import that file using the bookmarks manager.
At least they were for me.
Yeah, Firefox did a great job of importing my bookmarks, from frickin' Internet Explorer, which I don't even use, but not the bookmarks from the previous Firefox (0.8) install. Real helpful.
Ah well, at least it's not IE.
So maybe it does have a lot to do with the fact that at least someone that was involved with the movie was also involved with the development of the game as well, let alone the star.
Could help explain why this movie license didn't turn into a big bag of suck.
Regardless, it's still really interesting to see an actor form his own game development company just to develop the game tie-ins for his movies, especially as he's actually involved in the development process instead of just pawning it off on a squad of well-paid oompa loopas. I've gained a little respect for Vin as a result of this. :)
This was for a previous IE link related exploit. When MS is telling not to use their product in the most basic manner expected of the product then it should be painfully obvious that the product is broken.
And yet 90-some percent of users will continue to use the product. Why fix it? As long as the general public accept these problems and continue to use the broken product anyway, I can't see them being in any rush to devote resources to repairing it's issues.
As an end user, there is pretty much nothing I can do about this.
Yes, there is. Don't visit those sites and do not buy their products. If you just shrug your shoulders, fire up IE, and browse their site and/or buy their products anyway, why should they change it?
From what I've read/seen, Vin himself was involved in the game's design, to what extent I don't know, but was involved further than just recording some dialog and sitting still for a body scan.
He's said to be a pretty avid gamer, so maybe this made the difference in this case? Not saying he made the game better, but it could be assumed that he knows the difference between a good game and a bad game and wasn't going to let his image be used in a crap game.
So maybe the fact that he was able to pop his head in at various points in the game's development and put the kibosh on anything that sucked (and his ability to tell suck from not suck) kept the whole thing from turning into the usual fubar license.
I agree, for the most part.
If Half-Life had been Waterworld:The Game, would it have been as successful? Probably not, the stigma from it's association with a flop like that would hurt it some. Would it still have been a hit though? I think so, a good game is a good game. Period.
Hell, look at Goldeneye for the N64. The movie wasn't a flop, but it was no big hit either. But the game was one of the most successful N64 titles.
I'm guessing they thought of every possible method and did a cost/benefit analysis on all of them and decided against any of them.
Estimates I've read put it as high as $10,000/lb to launch something into orbit, so every little bit counts. Adding extra hardware like that probably just wasn't cost effective.
The company is doing well! Revenues are up! Profits are up! You're all fired!
Now pack up your stuff and get the hell out.