Ironically, the solution to the MPAA "problem" that many people propose, including Kirby Dick in This Film is Not Yet Rated, is film ratings by a government agency! I remember in that documentary in particular the British (government) film rating system is held up as an exemplar of the way it's "supposed" to work.
Most European countries have government film ratings, that's pretty par for the course over there. That a European state government agency would do video game ratings is natural. (Setting aside the question of wether or not rating "sexism" is an advisable thing.)
In Los Angeles buses and trains will add about 30 minutes total to the commute, mainly because the trains avoid the freeways. If you drive 10 miles around LA in the morning, you're just going to end up in a car for 60 minutes, it's unavoidable. I noticed this fall we hit sort of a tipping point and my public transit trips to work were actually occasionally FASTER than driving my own car, the freeways are that atrocious.
I use Uber too, for short hops or to get to train stations I can't get an express bus. But Uber doesn't do anything about traffic congestion, and in most dense cities congestion is one of the main problems they're trying to solve.
Democrats never wanted to reduce the security state, I'm not sure they ever even promised to do this. The security state is unpopular in a very general way but the status quo represents a very broad, resilient, bipartisan consensus. Everybody is willing to mouth platitudes about privacy and the Constitution, but nobody wants any concrete decisions hung around their neck, least of all the electorate.
It's more likely to happen now than any other time.
One of the main reasons they don't make an even half-hearted attempt to reign in the intelligence services is that it offers exactly zero upside and huge downside risk: if they do it, it won't really be a big plus to voters, since voters are generally pretty meh on civil liberties and everyone running for office is vaguely "pro-privacy" or some such.
On the other hand, if congress were to, say cut the NSAs budget, and then some terrorist incident occurred afterward, the people who cut the NSA's budget will instantly be blamed for "tying our hands" and not being "serious" about terrorism. CIA analysts will testify for congress that they had almost been able to stop it, but some new rule about warrants or something had kept them from getting a vital clue. And the voters will eat it up; the voters have made it completely clear that they are bedwetting, panic-stricken twerps at the very thought of terrorism and would do anything to stop it.
The voters and congress seem to be in basic agreement that terrorism is caused by a lack of CIA and NSA power, and the only way to stop terrorism is to give the CIA and NSA more power.
So yeah, a bunch of lame ducks are exactly the kind of people who you'd expect to pass reforms.
Microsoft Corporation and its affiliates (“Microsoft”) promise not to assert any.NET Patents against you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing, or distributing Covered Code, as part of either a.NET Runtime or as part of any application designed to run on a.NET Runtime.
Because this language does not create an exchange, it probably does not form a legally binding agreement or covenant -- even if it did, this promise is certainly revocable at any time. Though, if Microsoft did refrain from "asserting patents" against developers for some amount of time, it would probably create an estoppel.
Avid has been in development and in release for about 25 years now; I think Adobe Premiere is been available since at least 1992. I think both have been available for longer than the Linux operating system, let alone any OSS video editing package.
Never say never. Don't underestimate the power of large numbers of people that have the same itch and are pointed in generally the same direction
Casual users will no change their platform in order to get a video editor. People cutting YouTubes and home videos, that want "image stabilization" and "hum removal" are going to continue to use whatever platform makes the most sense for their use case. If all an OSS editor has to offer is "works like iMovie but free," that won't be enough to get people to transition.
Professional users might switch an OS, most of them simply rent their equipment and the OS is less an issue. But in that case, the editing system has to support professional features -- media interchange with RED, ARRIRAW, AAF and OMF, ProRes quicktime, DPX, MXF, and a small army of color correction, machine control and metadata interchange platforms (most of these are licensed proprietary or FRAND standards); it has to offer realtime composition, color correction, LUTs for these at raw quality; it has to be able to manage and organize tens of terabytes of media, spanning hundreds of hours of shot material.
These are possible but this is totally not where an open source project's emphasis is going to be -- they're going to go for stability in the "home movie" use case, and amateur videographer features, because these will drive 99% of the feature requests. Also, because these people are developers, they'll make sure the program has an elaborate API and scripting interface, because OSS developers consider this a universal panacea for missing features, and anyone who wants unpopular features will be told to RTFM and write their own.
NB. I'm not sure if the Coen brothers ever made the transition to Final Cut Pro X. Most professionals haven't. After X came out most feature crews I know either have been keeping their FCP 7 installations going or transitioned back to Avid. A lot of the people on the very low end have mostly transitioned to Premiere Pro.
I know many emigres like you -- they all preach with the same zeal of the converted. They all come from Europe, they all despise their homelands, they all watch Fox News and adore their "adopted" homeland, right up to the point it dares not live up to their crank libertarianism and Euro-chauvinism. They have no homeland, they have no people, they have no loyalty to anything, to any place or anyone. They are in thrall to an idea, a magical chimera. Would you really rather live under Napoleon than François Hollande? Is it really worth a couple nice bridges and the Invalides? Napoleon's lust for glory probably would have killed you around Smolensk. It's all a stupendous fraud.
The "promise" of America, the golden door for teaming hordes yearning to breathe free, that's all gone. All that's left is a destination for Norwegian racists, and French people that hate pied-noirs, and Brits who want to save on their income taxes. That what America has become.
I always find it funny that despite all the blame on unions there's so much Hollywood outsourcing to places like Australia and Canada with much stronger unions.
I don't know if Australia has stronger film unions than the US, Britain is another common runaway production destination and their union is moribund (thanks Maggie). These place aren't attractive due to the cheap labor, they're attractive because Australia and Canada use government tax revenues and credits to pay producers to shoot there. Many medium-budget productions in Canada can expect 30-50% of their entire budget to be refunded by the state in rebates, a similar situation exists in many US states, that these states are also non-union is important but not decisive -- it makes sense though, considering production tax rebates are basically giveaways to producers, money they pocket and don't pass along to their employees.
A somewhat troubling trend over the last 20 years is more and more entertainment capital and patronage coming from governments, and those governments using this leverage to basically get propaganda -- American military films (including the likes of the Transformers films) would only be the most egregious example of this.
Politics aside, how is it that republicans want to fuck over everyone but the privileged and corporate, yet get such widespread support from the people who will suffer most from their policies?
This is the "What's the Matter with Kansas?" problem. The short answer is, most rural populist types would probably fare better under a Democratic economic regime, but it really wouldn't be that much better. On the other hand, Republicans make few concrete promises economically, but they make broad promises about how they will sustain rural culture -- they fight for gun rights, and for the protection of traditional religious values, and against abortion, and gays. And in the end both parties mostly work in the interests of large corporations. In the end, Democrats promise a Starbucks in every town, and Republicans promise a cross on every door.
Also Democrats are generally supportive of state services, and things like Obamacare, which would improve the lot of poor voters in general, but a lot of poor people are simply morally opposed to accepting "welfare," and the slightly-better-off people around them are all downright hostile to the idea. This persists even if the "welfare" in question is completely pro-market, means tested, economically justified and everything else -- it's because American culture has moralistic, puritanical beliefs about thrift and work that are impervious to facts. The liberal tendency in American politics promises poor people a leg up, at the cost of their soul and their meritocratic ideals -- they'll get ahead but "everyone" will know they don't deserve it; meanwhile the conservative tendency promises a boot on your neck, but offers the guarantee that when you get the boot, you'll feel like you deserve it. People are attracted to appearance of order and justice, even if it hurts them.
. This is the same in every western societies, especially in France, where People have lost all responsibilities... or actually, they have been raised that way, thinking that Government is the answer to all the problem create by... Government...
It doesn't matter what it is, Obama wants it under government control.
It's either the state, or it falls into the hands of a baronial overclass, pick your poison. Unless you'd propose radical syndicalist ownership of the Internet. Or maybe, in fact, there's actually a middle position where something is neither completely "under government control" nor completely laissez-faire. You know, a compromise where most everyone gets most of what they want.
Naturally this crankish false dichotomy between tyranny and freedom anticipates the obvious Republican rejoinder: Ted Cruz Calls Net Neutrality "Obamacare For The Internet". It's really beautiful how the nutball libertarian worldview of state power has so thoroughly permeated culture that all one needs to say is say something like "X is Obamacare for Y" and people instantly know what you're saying and that it's putatively bad.
Which might mean something, if its location at the time had anything to do with its history; it did not; the wall never divided Silicon Valley.
That's a little silly. The wall never divided south London, either, but a huge piece stands in front of the Imperial War Museum in Lambeth.
Also the wall never divided Burbank from Toluca Lake, but a piece of it was mounted right on the Warner Bros. lot, right across the street from the Starbucks and the Steve Ross memorial, where every employee on the lot will see it. Beside it is a plaque stating the obvious intention: "This is a piece of the Berlin Wall, which for 50 years prevented the free flow of ideas." This is a sentiment with which I would think Google would be broadly sympathetic.
The first thing I though of was, apart from being a (slightly) Red state, Florida is also one of those states that makes it impossible to form labor unions, which is quite relevant to a company that wants to make "cinematic" experiences. South Florida, Miami in particular, is a sorta notorious hothouse for non-union filmmaking and is a really popular destination for "venture capital" types that want to try to do movie or movie-like things while avoiding the entertainment guilds.
Sure, the Apple and Pixar people don't care about unions. But, if this company is a cover for some kind of content operation, they'll need need writers, actors, directors, camera crews that know all about 3D and MoCap, trained grips and stagehands, editors, sound people... South Florida is well stocked with relatively qualified people in all these job categories.
People who do VFX and animation generally haven't joined the stage guilds, but their employers here in LA have been so abusive (really just flaky) lately that there's been buzzing that the animation guild, IATSE 829, was finally making a push to get them signed -- 829 has jurisdiction in SF as well. But not in Florida.
Battery life for phones is getting better again, after 4-5 years of steep decline.
The G2 is a 5.2" smartphone. Battery life has been on the mend across the industry ever since the body sizes started enhugening.
(Of course, a consequence of phablets is that they're obnoxiously big to dig out of your pocket constantly, so people are like, "I want something more casual that I can just glance at while I leave my phone in the bag." Thus watch.)
I dunno, so why do you think the uptake on Google Wallet has been so poor? I think the other fella down there has a good point -- they never properly marketed the thing.
NB. Swillden is either an employee of has an "It's Complicated" relationship status with Google Inc.
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically, the solution to the MPAA "problem" that many people propose, including Kirby Dick in This Film is Not Yet Rated, is film ratings by a government agency! I remember in that documentary in particular the British (government) film rating system is held up as an exemplar of the way it's "supposed" to work.
Most European countries have government film ratings, that's pretty par for the course over there. That a European state government agency would do video game ratings is natural. (Setting aside the question of wether or not rating "sexism" is an advisable thing.)
In Los Angeles buses and trains will add about 30 minutes total to the commute, mainly because the trains avoid the freeways. If you drive 10 miles around LA in the morning, you're just going to end up in a car for 60 minutes, it's unavoidable. I noticed this fall we hit sort of a tipping point and my public transit trips to work were actually occasionally FASTER than driving my own car, the freeways are that atrocious.
I use Uber too, for short hops or to get to train stations I can't get an express bus. But Uber doesn't do anything about traffic congestion, and in most dense cities congestion is one of the main problems they're trying to solve.
Democrats never wanted to reduce the security state, I'm not sure they ever even promised to do this. The security state is unpopular in a very general way but the status quo represents a very broad, resilient, bipartisan consensus. Everybody is willing to mouth platitudes about privacy and the Constitution, but nobody wants any concrete decisions hung around their neck, least of all the electorate.
It's more likely to happen now than any other time.
One of the main reasons they don't make an even half-hearted attempt to reign in the intelligence services is that it offers exactly zero upside and huge downside risk: if they do it, it won't really be a big plus to voters, since voters are generally pretty meh on civil liberties and everyone running for office is vaguely "pro-privacy" or some such.
On the other hand, if congress were to, say cut the NSAs budget, and then some terrorist incident occurred afterward, the people who cut the NSA's budget will instantly be blamed for "tying our hands" and not being "serious" about terrorism. CIA analysts will testify for congress that they had almost been able to stop it, but some new rule about warrants or something had kept them from getting a vital clue. And the voters will eat it up; the voters have made it completely clear that they are bedwetting, panic-stricken twerps at the very thought of terrorism and would do anything to stop it.
The voters and congress seem to be in basic agreement that terrorism is caused by a lack of CIA and NSA power, and the only way to stop terrorism is to give the CIA and NSA more power.
So yeah, a bunch of lame ducks are exactly the kind of people who you'd expect to pass reforms.
I'm not a lawyer, but...
Because this language does not create an exchange, it probably does not form a legally binding agreement or covenant -- even if it did, this promise is certainly revocable at any time. Though, if Microsoft did refrain from "asserting patents" against developers for some amount of time, it would probably create an estoppel.
Avid has been in development and in release for about 25 years now; I think Adobe Premiere is been available since at least 1992. I think both have been available for longer than the Linux operating system, let alone any OSS video editing package.
Casual users will no change their platform in order to get a video editor. People cutting YouTubes and home videos, that want "image stabilization" and "hum removal" are going to continue to use whatever platform makes the most sense for their use case. If all an OSS editor has to offer is "works like iMovie but free," that won't be enough to get people to transition.
Professional users might switch an OS, most of them simply rent their equipment and the OS is less an issue. But in that case, the editing system has to support professional features -- media interchange with RED, ARRIRAW, AAF and OMF, ProRes quicktime, DPX, MXF, and a small army of color correction, machine control and metadata interchange platforms (most of these are licensed proprietary or FRAND standards); it has to offer realtime composition, color correction, LUTs for these at raw quality; it has to be able to manage and organize tens of terabytes of media, spanning hundreds of hours of shot material.
These are possible but this is totally not where an open source project's emphasis is going to be -- they're going to go for stability in the "home movie" use case, and amateur videographer features, because these will drive 99% of the feature requests. Also, because these people are developers, they'll make sure the program has an elaborate API and scripting interface, because OSS developers consider this a universal panacea for missing features, and anyone who wants unpopular features will be told to RTFM and write their own.
NB. I'm not sure if the Coen brothers ever made the transition to Final Cut Pro X. Most professionals haven't. After X came out most feature crews I know either have been keeping their FCP 7 installations going or transitioned back to Avid. A lot of the people on the very low end have mostly transitioned to Premiere Pro.
Saul of Tarsus, on the road to Damascus.
I know many emigres like you -- they all preach with the same zeal of the converted. They all come from Europe, they all despise their homelands, they all watch Fox News and adore their "adopted" homeland, right up to the point it dares not live up to their crank libertarianism and Euro-chauvinism. They have no homeland, they have no people, they have no loyalty to anything, to any place or anyone. They are in thrall to an idea, a magical chimera. Would you really rather live under Napoleon than François Hollande? Is it really worth a couple nice bridges and the Invalides? Napoleon's lust for glory probably would have killed you around Smolensk. It's all a stupendous fraud.
The "promise" of America, the golden door for teaming hordes yearning to breathe free, that's all gone. All that's left is a destination for Norwegian racists, and French people that hate pied-noirs, and Brits who want to save on their income taxes. That what America has become.
I don't know if Australia has stronger film unions than the US, Britain is another common runaway production destination and their union is moribund (thanks Maggie). These place aren't attractive due to the cheap labor, they're attractive because Australia and Canada use government tax revenues and credits to pay producers to shoot there. Many medium-budget productions in Canada can expect 30-50% of their entire budget to be refunded by the state in rebates, a similar situation exists in many US states, that these states are also non-union is important but not decisive -- it makes sense though, considering production tax rebates are basically giveaways to producers, money they pocket and don't pass along to their employees.
A somewhat troubling trend over the last 20 years is more and more entertainment capital and patronage coming from governments, and those governments using this leverage to basically get propaganda -- American military films (including the likes of the Transformers films) would only be the most egregious example of this.
This is the "What's the Matter with Kansas?" problem. The short answer is, most rural populist types would probably fare better under a Democratic economic regime, but it really wouldn't be that much better. On the other hand, Republicans make few concrete promises economically, but they make broad promises about how they will sustain rural culture -- they fight for gun rights, and for the protection of traditional religious values, and against abortion, and gays. And in the end both parties mostly work in the interests of large corporations. In the end, Democrats promise a Starbucks in every town, and Republicans promise a cross on every door.
Also Democrats are generally supportive of state services, and things like Obamacare, which would improve the lot of poor voters in general, but a lot of poor people are simply morally opposed to accepting "welfare," and the slightly-better-off people around them are all downright hostile to the idea. This persists even if the "welfare" in question is completely pro-market, means tested, economically justified and everything else -- it's because American culture has moralistic, puritanical beliefs about thrift and work that are impervious to facts. The liberal tendency in American politics promises poor people a leg up, at the cost of their soul and their meritocratic ideals -- they'll get ahead but "everyone" will know they don't deserve it; meanwhile the conservative tendency promises a boot on your neck, but offers the guarantee that when you get the boot, you'll feel like you deserve it. People are attracted to appearance of order and justice, even if it hurts them.
Have you ever met a French person? o_0
It's either the state, or it falls into the hands of a baronial overclass, pick your poison. Unless you'd propose radical syndicalist ownership of the Internet. Or maybe, in fact, there's actually a middle position where something is neither completely "under government control" nor completely laissez-faire. You know, a compromise where most everyone gets most of what they want.
Naturally this crankish false dichotomy between tyranny and freedom anticipates the obvious Republican rejoinder: Ted Cruz Calls Net Neutrality "Obamacare For The Internet". It's really beautiful how the nutball libertarian worldview of state power has so thoroughly permeated culture that all one needs to say is say something like "X is Obamacare for Y" and people instantly know what you're saying and that it's putatively bad.
That's a little silly. The wall never divided south London, either, but a huge piece stands in front of the Imperial War Museum in Lambeth.
Also the wall never divided Burbank from Toluca Lake, but a piece of it was mounted right on the Warner Bros. lot, right across the street from the Starbucks and the Steve Ross memorial, where every employee on the lot will see it. Beside it is a plaque stating the obvious intention: "This is a piece of the Berlin Wall, which for 50 years prevented the free flow of ideas." This is a sentiment with which I would think Google would be broadly sympathetic.
The first thing I though of was, apart from being a (slightly) Red state, Florida is also one of those states that makes it impossible to form labor unions, which is quite relevant to a company that wants to make "cinematic" experiences. South Florida, Miami in particular, is a sorta notorious hothouse for non-union filmmaking and is a really popular destination for "venture capital" types that want to try to do movie or movie-like things while avoiding the entertainment guilds.
Sure, the Apple and Pixar people don't care about unions. But, if this company is a cover for some kind of content operation, they'll need need writers, actors, directors, camera crews that know all about 3D and MoCap, trained grips and stagehands, editors, sound people... South Florida is well stocked with relatively qualified people in all these job categories.
People who do VFX and animation generally haven't joined the stage guilds, but their employers here in LA have been so abusive (really just flaky) lately that there's been buzzing that the animation guild, IATSE 829, was finally making a push to get them signed -- 829 has jurisdiction in SF as well. But not in Florida.
Just because a door is unlocked does not mean you may walk inside, even if it is to tell the owner their door is unlocked.
Is this Sarkeesian we're talking about? I've watched all of her videos and she never called any person a bigot.
I think we've found the Leader of GamerGate.
Paul Bearer
Emma Ballmer
Pearl E. Gates
The G2 is a 5.2" smartphone. Battery life has been on the mend across the industry ever since the body sizes started enhugening.
(Of course, a consequence of phablets is that they're obnoxiously big to dig out of your pocket constantly, so people are like, "I want something more casual that I can just glance at while I leave my phone in the bag." Thus watch.)
I dunno, so why do you think the uptake on Google Wallet has been so poor? I think the other fella down there has a good point -- they never properly marketed the thing.
NB. Swillden is either an employee of has an "It's Complicated" relationship status with Google Inc.
5) Police get warrant for health spa's credit records.
6) Police now have a list of hundreds of suspects. And the spa doesn't even know it's happened.
These people don't use credit cards, boss, it's like sticking a big flag on your head saying "arrest me."
Does TFA say how they got the emails? I just read yesterday that someone had discovered that you could enter arbitrary email addresses into CurrenC registration wizard, and if you were snooping the wire, the MCX server would return a completely filled-out user record for each entered email address.