not as impressive to most people as running Microsoft Office on a tiny screen.
It's a tiny screen and fully half the screen is toolbars.
This article is really about the modern portables industry going off-mission, and sacrificing core features of portables in favour of gimmicks. The Samsung machine tries to be a swiss army knife of portable computing, and it does everything it claims, but it lacks the most important aspects of such a mini toolkit: portability. 2.5 hours isn't portable, that won't even last you a flight of any distance, and it actually places an upper limit on the length of movies you can watch with it's much praised video playing capabilities (chances are it's more like 2 hours with something as processor intensive anyway). The prime advantage of this is that you can amend, for example, powerpoint presentations last minute. But then you could already do it much better and faster on an ordinary laptop.
Remember those swiss army knifes? On the one hand you get the ones with 6 or 7 fold out tools... A mini toolkit in your pocket, very useful. Then you get the one with 150 tools that's so bulky you wouldn't want to carry it around in your pocket, and so it sits unused in your toolbox where you have better tools anyway.
"Beer bottles that use solar power to keep their precious contents cool in the height of summer could be a welcome fringe benefit of thin-film technology currently under development"
I'm pretty sure this wouldn't work in direct sunlight, as I doubt the heat pumps and solar cells are efficient enough. In diffuse light, which an ideal application of the less efficient thin film cells, it might work quite well. Haven't done the maths though.
Style - while I find it quite cool that my g4 has mirror doors, it's not the reason I think it's so great. So, style: I could care less.... but not much less. It's the experience of using the OS for everyday purposes that makes the difference for me. The style is a bonus.
Intuitive use - While everyone always takes this to mean "easy to learn" I find it has another aspect: I know my mac quite well, but sometimes I need to do something I've never done before. While with windows this would generally mean long hunting through menus and boxes, on the mac it takes mere seconds to figure it out. Sometimes you don't even realise at the time that you just learned something new, you just did it.
As for "being part of the club", well... I've had macs since the early ninties and believe you me, I was the only member of the "club" for the longest time. But I tell you what, NOW it's different. While it's still not the most frequent occurance, you now occasionally run into other mac users, and when you do, you can relate to them, for they undoubtedly felt the same ridicule at times that mac users were subject to over the years, resisted the peer pressure to switch to PCs, or tempted the above by switching over from PCs, and came out jubilant at the choice.
I suppose you're right; as a mac user you do feel part of the "club" - but it's nothing imagined, it has a very real presence and social implications. But it's not exclusive. Anyone can join.
But again, aside from all considerations, the real reason for why there is this cult of the mac, the tiny bit of devotion that mac users feel towards their machines/way of life stems from the experience. All the other points would be moot, if the experience weren't up to scratch. Whereas even an advanced windows or linux user has to wrestle with their machines every so often, advanced mac users can fly through their OS (they're just rare enough that you nearly never see them). Of course, all the wrestling is still there to be had if you want it, in the form of the bsd subsytem and all that jazz...
So why isn't everyone a mac user? The problem, the reason for the relative small proportion of mac users is just the sheer inertia of the industry and ways of thinking. The fact that apple is gradually overcoming this massive weight speaks volumes.
But I've rambled a lot and probably gone way off topic. The thing is, it can get very frustrating knowing that most of your friends are missing out, but really don't want to hear about what they're missing. It turns out people don't want to hear that they bought the wrong computer, and thus frown upon you when you preach macintosh - and so you can't... and it all pours out in a flood when you get the chance.:)
While it may seem really fast, when broken down into comprehendable units, light is not really that fast
You can't think of something incomprehensibly fast in terms of something incomprehensibly large and say you understand it.
If anything, the fact that it takes a measurable amount of time to traverse the earth-moon distance by something so fast it seems instantaneous to us is just an indication of how far the moon really is away. (385000 km, about ten times further than the circumference of the earth.)
And the circumference of the earth is a bloody long way. 40000 km. If you were to try walking this distance, it would take you more than a year of continuous walking (no sleep)
As said, the moon is about ten times further away than that, 385000 km, about ten years of walking.
The sun is one astronomical unit away. (150 Million kilometers) 4280 years of walking. You'd have to have started walking about the time the first pyramid was built to get there by today.
The nearest star to the sun is just over 4 light years away (40 Million Million km) One thousand million years of walking. I'm running out of timescales to compare this to now, because human experience doesn't date anywhere near as far back. This timescale now compares roughly to the age of life on earth, and even the age of the earth itself is only about four times as large.
The nebula in the article is about ten times that size. Ten thousand million years of walking. If you wanted to walk that distance, you'd have to start at a time where neither earth nor sun existed, or would exist for billions of years. The solar system around that time would probably be little more than a localised gravitational aggregation of spinning gas.
You're right that one could keep going for quite a lot longer. Once one starts considering the distances in the universe, you can think of them only in numbers, they're so huge. The upshot of this is that in a universe where all mayor distances are unimaginably huge, this one is one of them.
But if you're interested in experiencing these speeds and distances, I'd suggest you give Celestia a try. It's a 3d simulation that puts you smack bang into the middle of our solar system, and you can whiz around, visit nicely textured planets and even leave and visit other stars, other galaxies. Really beautiful graphics. You can actually move from the earth to the moon at walking speed, or at light speed.
Occam's Razor states that one should not increase the number of entities required to describe a thing beyond what's necessary.
ie, if you drop a hammer while the moon is shining, and you find it falls to the ground, Occam's Razor indicates that the theory "Hammers fall to the ground when dropped" is better than the theory "Hammers fall to the ground when dropped provided the moon is out"
Occam's razor doesn't necessarily point at an erroneous test. Probability and false positives point to that.
[Side note: If you want to include theories of gravity, use Chatton's Anti-Razor which states that if your simple theory doesn't explain things, you have to find a more complex one, ie "Hammers fall to the ground " -> "Hammers fall to the ground when let go"]
It seems that one of the biggest problems we'll be facing in the future is that people in general will react to a pandemic before it comes, and in their panic buy out supplies that would aid with the disease.
From what I've seen in the media, many countries are dealing with the problem. That site also contains, amongst other things, mentions of clinical trials of a pre-pandemic vaccine in france, prototype vaccine that should be ready in a few weeks in Germany, and plans for enough vaccine in the UK to innoculate the entire UK population.
In any case, pandemic or not, it seems that the best thing you can do is to leave the worrying to people who're in the health services, or governments. It seems to me that many governments are already well on their way to dealing with the problem.
Of course, would they have acted so pre-emptively if the public wasn't so worried? I don't know. In any case, try not to act on your worries - we'll surely run into trouble if a billion people panic and demand antivirals, or even antibiotics.
[sidenote to the handful of people who don't yet know: antibiotics are for bacteria. Flu is a virus, antibiotics won't protect you against it. If you take antibiotics for viruses, you make your bacteria tougher to kill, "superbugs". Don't get antibiotics for the flu.]
...did I commit murder? What if they respawn? You've me all confused.:)
Seriously though, what if there's a game where the whole point is to rob the other players? Would everyone playing it break the law? Clearly not.
What if it's just possible to rob people to "add flavour"? Where's the boundary?
If you can be arrested for stealing property in a game that simulates ownership, why not be arrested for treason in an espionage game, or for terrorism for playing "Destroy all humans"? Should you get civic awards for Sim City? What if I gain a point through subterfuge that my friend should by rights have gotten? Can he sue me? Clearly not. It shouldn't be different when money is involved.
What people have to get used to is that a virtual world is just that, virtual. A virtual crime is similarly virtual. Think about it as a simulated crime.
There aren't victims as much as there are losers (meaning non-winners). They paid extra money to give themselves an advantage in a game (which, frankly, I disapprove of... but I digress), and they still didn't win. But it wasn't their money that was stolen, it was simply that their advantage was removed. The money was gone long before that. Incidently, I also don't see that they ever owned the things that were stolen... They were granted use of a feature in exchange for money by someone that was previously in control of the feature.
I thought it was quite funny, and it actually makes sense. Gonna see a lot of that if you type without paying attention.
from the/. FAQ:
Troll -- A Troll is similar to Flamebait, but slightly more refined. This is a prank comment intended to provoke indignant (or just confused) responses. A Troll might mix up vital facts or otherwise distort reality, to make other readers react with helpful "corrections." Trolling is the online equivalent of intentionally dialing wrong numbers just to waste other people's time
Don't see how this could provoke indignant responses. Confused, perhaps, but there was a certain logic underlying the post, and it certainly isn't hard to decipher given the overall topic of discussion - and someone's already done so.
There were no distortions of truth in this, no attempts to mislead, it was relevant to the topic of discussion, and, well, if you're here you're probably wasting time anyway, so, no, I don't think it's a troll, I think someone went trigger happy with the moderator button.
In truth, what are the odds that this movie was anywhere near as good as the book/radio series? I mean, this is a modern adaptation, not origial Adams humour. What'd Shakespeare think of "Shakespeare in Love"? Asimov of "I, Robot"?
I'm going to see the movie, and I am willing to bet that I'll enjoy it, even though I could probably quote you whole chapters of the books. This is because I am not expecting Douglas Adams' work of genius, but a nifty little "hollywood" film based on a story I like.
On an slightly different note, it'd be interesting to note if anyone knows of any books/stories/shows that are akin to Adams' style of humour. Any ideas?
I'm too tired to work it out, but I bet that it would require more energy than could possibly have been harvested since the universe was able to sustain life to accellerate the mass of 80 galaxies to a speed that is large enough so that the mass reaches a central galaxy in less than the age of the universe, much less stop it again once it gets there.
That said, I encourage someone else to pick up a calculator and prove me wrong. Chances are I still wont believe that this is what happened, even if someone does prove that it is theoretically possible to harvest enough energy, but that's not really the point, is it?:)
The maximum size sphere you describe would require 1.6x10^15 jupiter masses of carbon. If every star in our galaxy (200 billion if I remember right) had a solar system, and every solar system had 10 (!) planets the mass of jupiter, and every planet was made of pure carbon, you would need all the carbon of about 80 such galaxies to build that bubble.
Then again if there were that many such planets in the universe, it'd be obvious what "dark matter" was.
23 is not a kid , I'm 23 I stopped being a kid a long time ago
Really? I'm 22, and I don't recall ever having stopped being a kid. Does this mean I get to suddenly grow up sometime during the next year?
Obviously, it's a gradual process. I know kids that are more mature than most adults, and I know thirty year old children. Growing up is in part a measure of the experience the world has thrown your way, and has no straight boundaries. It is most certainly possible that in this region his naivity is genuine.
That said, I agree with you, but he's not the only one playing with fire. I bet Apple stands to lose far more by alienating it's loyal customer base by altering its image than they can gain with this lawsuit, even considering it's potential discouragement of future pirates.
I find it amusing that you complain about the marketing when that was basically the deciding factor that made the pc popular in the first place... ah well.
I shant bother addressing your other "points". Most of them are countered somewhere within this thread, have a browse.
If your block inconveniences even just a few email users with honorable intentions, you worsen the effect spam has on our society significantly.
I know how annoying it is to have to deal with these kinds of restrictions, because my ISP made sure that all email not sent via their official servers was rejected by servers using the MAPS blacklist. In any case, it made contacting people a nightmare. I felt hard done by.
And that was just an ISP. Once you blacklist an entire country, you're crossing a very pertinent ethical line. It's discrimination by country of origin. A brand new internet prejudice that we can do without.
"Welcome to the internet. No chinese people allowed."
I'd hate to get all relativistic on you, but it's an official physics standpoint that objects at rest can be stopped if regarded from another frame of reference that is moving with respect to the original frame. Just so you know.;)
Have you actually ever listened to the lyrics? They are very appropriate, and deal with breaking free of constraints, reaching for the stars, that sort of thing.
I can sortof see your disappointment... You were expecting another star trek series, in star trek style and all that, but Enterprise is not Star Trek. Star Trek deals with the exploration of the galaxy by a well-established, powerful alliance. Gene Roddenberries vision of a ideal future is already in full swing. In contrast, Enterprise deals with the problems that the first human interstellar explorers might deal with. Things go wrong, supplies are a problem, they have to work things out as they go.
The entire thing has a significantly different mood than any star trek story, and the song reflects this quite well.
Also, I don't think that there is a basic star trek music. Elements of the theme music of TNG/DS9/Voyager are similar, and they're done in a similar style, but they are different. TOS on the other hand has a different style (if I remember correctly - it's been ages), and since it takes place in another time, that's fair enough.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a tiny screen and fully half the screen is toolbars.
This article is really about the modern portables industry going off-mission, and sacrificing core features of portables in favour of gimmicks. The Samsung machine tries to be a swiss army knife of portable computing, and it does everything it claims, but it lacks the most important aspects of such a mini toolkit: portability. 2.5 hours isn't portable, that won't even last you a flight of any distance, and it actually places an upper limit on the length of movies you can watch with it's much praised video playing capabilities (chances are it's more like 2 hours with something as processor intensive anyway). The prime advantage of this is that you can amend, for example, powerpoint presentations last minute. But then you could already do it much better and faster on an ordinary laptop.
Remember those swiss army knifes? On the one hand you get the ones with 6 or 7 fold out tools... A mini toolkit in your pocket, very useful. Then you get the one with 150 tools that's so bulky you wouldn't want to carry it around in your pocket, and so it sits unused in your toolbox where you have better tools anyway.
"Beer bottles that use solar power to keep their precious contents cool in the height of summer could be a welcome fringe benefit of thin-film technology currently under development"
rest on http://www.vnunet.com/2160151
I'm pretty sure this wouldn't work in direct sunlight, as I doubt the heat pumps and solar cells are efficient enough. In diffuse light, which an ideal application of the less efficient thin film cells, it might work quite well. Haven't done the maths though.
I utterly disagree,
:)
Style - while I find it quite cool that my g4 has mirror doors, it's not the reason I think it's so great. So, style: I could care less.... but not much less. It's the experience of using the OS for everyday purposes that makes the difference for me. The style is a bonus.
Intuitive use - While everyone always takes this to mean "easy to learn" I find it has another aspect: I know my mac quite well, but sometimes I need to do something I've never done before. While with windows this would generally mean long hunting through menus and boxes, on the mac it takes mere seconds to figure it out. Sometimes you don't even realise at the time that you just learned something new, you just did it.
As for "being part of the club", well... I've had macs since the early ninties and believe you me, I was the only member of the "club" for the longest time. But I tell you what, NOW it's different. While it's still not the most frequent occurance, you now occasionally run into other mac users, and when you do, you can relate to them, for they undoubtedly felt the same ridicule at times that mac users were subject to over the years, resisted the peer pressure to switch to PCs, or tempted the above by switching over from PCs, and came out jubilant at the choice.
I suppose you're right; as a mac user you do feel part of the "club" - but it's nothing imagined, it has a very real presence and social implications. But it's not exclusive. Anyone can join.
But again, aside from all considerations, the real reason for why there is this cult of the mac, the tiny bit of devotion that mac users feel towards their machines/way of life stems from the experience. All the other points would be moot, if the experience weren't up to scratch. Whereas even an advanced windows or linux user has to wrestle with their machines every so often, advanced mac users can fly through their OS (they're just rare enough that you nearly never see them). Of course, all the wrestling is still there to be had if you want it, in the form of the bsd subsytem and all that jazz...
So why isn't everyone a mac user? The problem, the reason for the relative small proportion of mac users is just the sheer inertia of the industry and ways of thinking. The fact that apple is gradually overcoming this massive weight speaks volumes.
But I've rambled a lot and probably gone way off topic. The thing is, it can get very frustrating knowing that most of your friends are missing out, but really don't want to hear about what they're missing. It turns out people don't want to hear that they bought the wrong computer, and thus frown upon you when you preach macintosh - and so you can't... and it all pours out in a flood when you get the chance.
You can't think of something incomprehensibly fast in terms of something incomprehensibly large and say you understand it.
If anything, the fact that it takes a measurable amount of time to traverse the earth-moon distance by something so fast it seems instantaneous to us is just an indication of how far the moon really is away. (385000 km, about ten times further than the circumference of the earth.)
And the circumference of the earth is a bloody long way. 40000 km. If you were to try walking this distance, it would take you more than a year of continuous walking (no sleep)
As said, the moon is about ten times further away than that, 385000 km, about ten years of walking.
The sun is one astronomical unit away. (150 Million kilometers) 4280 years of walking. You'd have to have started walking about the time the first pyramid was built to get there by today.
The nearest star to the sun is just over 4 light years away (40 Million Million km) One thousand million years of walking. I'm running out of timescales to compare this to now, because human experience doesn't date anywhere near as far back. This timescale now compares roughly to the age of life on earth, and even the age of the earth itself is only about four times as large.
The nebula in the article is about ten times that size. Ten thousand million years of walking. If you wanted to walk that distance, you'd have to start at a time where neither earth nor sun existed, or would exist for billions of years. The solar system around that time would probably be little more than a localised gravitational aggregation of spinning gas.
You're right that one could keep going for quite a lot longer. Once one starts considering the distances in the universe, you can think of them only in numbers, they're so huge. The upshot of this is that in a universe where all mayor distances are unimaginably huge, this one is one of them.
But if you're interested in experiencing these speeds and distances, I'd suggest you give Celestia a try. It's a 3d simulation that puts you smack bang into the middle of our solar system, and you can whiz around, visit nicely textured planets and even leave and visit other stars, other galaxies. Really beautiful graphics. You can actually move from the earth to the moon at walking speed, or at light speed.
Albeit somewhat more painful.
At first glance I read "Microsoft Acquires European Union ... ".
Oh, come on we can all see it coming!
Occam's Razor states that one should not increase the number of entities required to describe a thing beyond what's necessary.
ie, if you drop a hammer while the moon is shining, and you find it falls to the ground, Occam's Razor indicates that the theory "Hammers fall to the ground when dropped" is better than the theory "Hammers fall to the ground when dropped provided the moon is out"
Occam's razor doesn't necessarily point at an erroneous test. Probability and false positives point to that.
[Side note: If you want to include theories of gravity, use Chatton's Anti-Razor which states that if your simple theory doesn't explain things, you have to find a more complex one, ie "Hammers fall to the ground " -> "Hammers fall to the ground when let go"]
It seems that one of the biggest problems we'll be facing in the future is that people in general will react to a pandemic before it comes, and in their panic buy out supplies that would aid with the disease.
For example, in Guernsey, flu vaccine has run out due to unprecedented demand.
From what I've seen in the media, many countries are dealing with the problem. That site also contains, amongst other things, mentions of clinical trials of a pre-pandemic vaccine in france, prototype vaccine that should be ready in a few weeks in Germany, and plans for enough vaccine in the UK to innoculate the entire UK population.
In any case, pandemic or not, it seems that the best thing you can do is to leave the worrying to people who're in the health services, or governments. It seems to me that many governments are already well on their way to dealing with the problem.
Of course, would they have acted so pre-emptively if the public wasn't so worried? I don't know. In any case, try not to act on your worries - we'll surely run into trouble if a billion people panic and demand antivirals, or even antibiotics.
[sidenote to the handful of people who don't yet know: antibiotics are for bacteria. Flu is a virus, antibiotics won't protect you against it. If you take antibiotics for viruses, you make your bacteria tougher to kill, "superbugs". Don't get antibiotics for the flu.]
...did I commit murder? What if they respawn? You've me all confused. :)
Seriously though, what if there's a game where the whole point is to rob the other players? Would everyone playing it break the law? Clearly not.
What if it's just possible to rob people to "add flavour"? Where's the boundary?
If you can be arrested for stealing property in a game that simulates ownership, why not be arrested for treason in an espionage game, or for terrorism for playing "Destroy all humans"? Should you get civic awards for Sim City? What if I gain a point through subterfuge that my friend should by rights have gotten? Can he sue me? Clearly not. It shouldn't be different when money is involved.
What people have to get used to is that a virtual world is just that, virtual. A virtual crime is similarly virtual. Think about it as a simulated crime.
There aren't victims as much as there are losers (meaning non-winners). They paid extra money to give themselves an advantage in a game (which, frankly, I disapprove of... but I digress), and they still didn't win.
But it wasn't their money that was stolen, it was simply that their advantage was removed. The money was gone long before that. Incidently, I also don't see that they ever owned the things that were stolen... They were granted use of a feature in exchange for money by someone that was previously in control of the feature.
from the
Don't see how this could provoke indignant responses. Confused, perhaps, but there was a certain logic underlying the post, and it certainly isn't hard to decipher given the overall topic of discussion - and someone's already done so.
There were no distortions of truth in this, no attempts to mislead, it was relevant to the topic of discussion, and, well, if you're here you're probably wasting time anyway, so, no, I don't think it's a troll, I think someone went trigger happy with the moderator button.
#include <stdio.h>
int main (void)
{
char blah [20]="Hello, World!";
char bluh [3];
memcpy(bluh, blah, sizeof(blah));
printf("%s\n",bluh);
return 0;
}
1447582=2 x 723791. Coincidence? I think not!
In truth, what are the odds that this movie was anywhere near as good as the book/radio series? I mean, this is a modern adaptation, not origial Adams humour. What'd Shakespeare think of "Shakespeare in Love"? Asimov of "I, Robot"?
I'm going to see the movie, and I am willing to bet that I'll enjoy it, even though I could probably quote you whole chapters of the books. This is because I am not expecting Douglas Adams' work of genius, but a nifty little "hollywood" film based on a story I like.
On an slightly different note, it'd be interesting to note if anyone knows of any books/stories/shows that are akin to Adams' style of humour. Any ideas?
...try keeping a running total of casualties for both cases. Nuclear power is downright harmless.
I'm too tired to work it out, but I bet that it would require more energy than could possibly have been harvested since the universe was able to sustain life to accellerate the mass of 80 galaxies to a speed that is large enough so that the mass reaches a central galaxy in less than the age of the universe, much less stop it again once it gets there.
:)
That said, I encourage someone else to pick up a calculator and prove me wrong. Chances are I still wont believe that this is what happened, even if someone does prove that it is theoretically possible to harvest enough energy, but that's not really the point, is it?
The maximum size sphere you describe would require 1.6x10^15 jupiter masses of carbon. If every star in our galaxy (200 billion if I remember right) had a solar system, and every solar system had 10 (!) planets the mass of jupiter, and every planet was made of pure carbon, you would need all the carbon of about 80 such galaxies to build that bubble. Then again if there were that many such planets in the universe, it'd be obvious what "dark matter" was.
Exactly. Even governments can't agree on when people grow up. There is no clear line between being a child and being an adult.
Really? I'm 22, and I don't recall ever having stopped being a kid. Does this mean I get to suddenly grow up sometime during the next year?
Obviously, it's a gradual process. I know kids that are more mature than most adults, and I know thirty year old children. Growing up is in part a measure of the experience the world has thrown your way, and has no straight boundaries. It is most certainly possible that in this region his naivity is genuine.
That said, I agree with you, but he's not the only one playing with fire. I bet Apple stands to lose far more by alienating it's loyal customer base by altering its image than they can gain with this lawsuit, even considering it's potential discouragement of future pirates.
I find it amusing that you complain about the marketing when that was basically the deciding factor that made the pc popular in the first place... ah well.
I shant bother addressing your other "points". Most of them are countered somewhere within this thread, have a browse.
If your block inconveniences even just a few email users with honorable intentions, you worsen the effect spam has on our society significantly.
I know how annoying it is to have to deal with these kinds of restrictions, because my ISP made sure that all email not sent via their official servers was rejected by servers using the MAPS blacklist. In any case, it made contacting people a nightmare. I felt hard done by.
And that was just an ISP. Once you blacklist an entire country, you're crossing a very pertinent ethical line. It's discrimination by country of origin. A brand new internet prejudice that we can do without.
"Welcome to the internet. No chinese people allowed."
I find your disregard for human life disturbing.
You seem to rate the shopkeeper's cash as more important than the robber's life.
And YOU talk about getting priorities straight.
I'd hate to get all relativistic on you, but it's an official physics standpoint that objects at rest can be stopped if regarded from another frame of reference that is moving with respect to the original frame. Just so you know.
0.9999... = 3 * 0.3333... = 3 * 1/3 = 1 ;-)
I think we're going slightly offtopic here, though.
Have you actually ever listened to the lyrics? They are very appropriate, and deal with breaking free of constraints, reaching for the stars, that sort of thing.
I can sortof see your disappointment... You were expecting another star trek series, in star trek style and all that, but Enterprise is not Star Trek. Star Trek deals with the exploration of the galaxy by a well-established, powerful alliance. Gene Roddenberries vision of a ideal future is already in full swing. In contrast, Enterprise deals with the problems that the first human interstellar explorers might deal with. Things go wrong, supplies are a problem, they have to work things out as they go.
The entire thing has a significantly different mood than any star trek story, and the song reflects this quite well.
Also, I don't think that there is a basic star trek music. Elements of the theme music of TNG/DS9/Voyager are similar, and they're done in a similar style, but they are different. TOS on the other hand has a different style (if I remember correctly - it's been ages), and since it takes place in another time, that's fair enough.