I don't remember the the name, but Microsoft tried to kill flash once before. It was about 6 years ago. They had a browser plug in that was very similar to flash. They ended up dropping support for it. Anyone remember the name?
Are you actually trying to say that someone has to respect the person they marry? Thinking that getting married to someone means that you respect them is increadibly nieve at best. This gentleman very clearly defines people by the color of their skin. This is the very essence of racism. Calling me a racist because I point that out is simply 'newspeak'.
If you want to reduce racism, you have to accept that black people (as well as any other racial group) can do anything that white people can do. (and vica-versa) This includes being a racist.
"A statement isn't racist just because it mentions race. It's a complicated subject, and saying "just don't talk about it" won't solve all of our problems."
You see this guy wasn't just noting that there are people with different colored skin the same as someone might note the difference in eye color or hair color. He was defining himself and "his people" by the color of his skin. I am all for calling people out on being racest, but you have to be honest about it. White and racist are not synonymous.
I will say that you sound like you are making an effort, but in the end, you are still a racist. I would never even imagine stating my race to a prospective employer. You assume that YOU are discriminated against, but discrimination goes every direction. There are very few companies that have official policies against discrimination, with the exceptions of caucasions. Apparently you are not human, because Japanese are human, and you clearly don't consider her to be one of "your" people. I would certainly consider her one of MY people. Unless you mean racists by "your people". Really, you might find life a lot easier if you considered everyone to be "Your People". I know that I don't care what color a person is, but as soon as I hear someone seperating people by their race, I do my best to just avoid them in the future. That is both personally, and professionally.
So, why is it that cartoons produced now are of so much better quality than those produced when I was a kid. Even the ones I still love are obviously inferior to modern cartoons.
---Stra W. Man
Not only would I not copy, I would cancel my subcription to Netflix and not even rent.
The problem with iTunes is that it isn't cheaper than buying albums. I know that it might be cheaper for people to buy music from groups that are not talented enough to actually produce a good album, but for those of us that that buy albums, we not only pay just as much as if we got it on CD, we also have to pay for the manufacturing ourselves. Add to that that you usually cannot get the CD inserts when you download. You generally get a lower quality recording. You don't actually buy the music, but instead only rent it until you upgrade your equipment. All in all, legal downloads are a really crappy deal.
I suspect the popularity of iTunes has more to do with people just not doing the very simple math, and wanting to be cool.
If fingerprints ever start being widely used, muggers will just hit you over the head and cut off your fingers. They can check to see if you have a bank account later. If you think that there are not plenty of people that would cut your fingers off for the chance of a couple of hundred dollars, you are sadly mistaken, and a danger to the rest of society.
"put up or shut up, and don't criticize an industry when you don't understand how or why it works. I know this because I work in film."
That sounds like someone trying to rationalize bad behavior. Sorry to tell you this, but in the film industry you work in, $10,000 is a drop in the bucket. DVD releases could easily wait until after the film finished its run through theaters world wide. Up until recently, it was usually at least a year before a movie made it from theater to DVD, so the waiting wouldn't have happened anyway.
I don't believe that the region encoding is to prevent people from seeing foreign films, or to make people re-buy movies they have already purchased. (although that is an ugly side effect) The primary purpose of the region encoding would seem to be that a movie that might sell for $5 in Japan, might sell for $15 in the US, and $35 in Australia. The MPAA doesn't want the thieving Australians stealing $30 from them by using free trade to purchase the movie from Japan.
Spell checkers give you feedback at the time of writing. Either immediatly, or when you select the spell check feature, and yes, I would say that it does improve their spelling. If we are to assume that being told you have the wrong answer, and immediatly being shown the correct answer will not improve spelling, then all of the 'traditional' teaching methods also go down the drain. As for you looking up the words on your papers that were marked wrong...Yes, you are the exception to the rule. If every student was willing to go out and do self study, the need for professional teachers would be greatly reduced, and the effectiveness of computer learning would be greatly increased.
You see, when you watch TV, you also have to construct meaning from words. You are just doing it with sound instead of symbols. The biggest difference is that by the time reading even comes into play, most people have become so good at deriving meaning from sound, that they stop even thinking about it. The same thing happens with reading. Early on, practicing reading gives you very good results on improving your reading. There comes a point though, that you start to get diminishing result for your efforts. This is true of almost any skill, including the parsing of information in a book or TV program.
Your Olypic analogy is flawed though. It should read that watching the Olypics on TV is equivalent to reading about it in the newspaper. Your analogy is that exercise is a better way to get exercise than not exercising. Well, my original post already stated that I believe reading does improve your reading skill. It is all the other magical benefits that are claimed on which I called BS.
As for the reading being associated with intellegence. This is sort of true because historically only the well educated could read, and the well educated had access to more information. This meant that they had more information, but not necessarally the ability to properly understand it. None of the people that could not read would be able to use the written information, irrelevent to their capability to understand it. We live in a different world now. Learning to read is widely available in many countries. In this countries, once you get past approximatly a 6th grade education, you either have the reading skill necessary to get through the rest of your life, or you never will. So, yes, here in the US, you will be marginalized if you cannot read, of course you have to put in a lot of effort to not learn to read, and you may be marginalized anyways. Of course I would say that you are more likely to be marginalized if you cannot drive than if you cannot read.
I know that I went from being a terrible speller to being very good as a direct result of computers. I got my first spell checker in the 7th grade. Every teacher, as well as my parents were absolutely sure that spell checkers just make kids lazy. They were sure that I would never learn to spell if I used a spell checker. The fact was that the spell checker would immediately tell me when I misspelled a word, and would also give me the correct spelling. This was opposed to the "traditional" approach, consisting of the student turning in their writing, and a week later getting a paper back with red circles all over it. The typical student would then toss the paper in the trash, never seeing what their mistake actually was, and never finding out the correct spelling.
The funny thing is that prior to my first word processor, I don't believe I ever received a single grade higher than a C on any writing assignment. Immediately following my family getting a word processor, I started getting As. I still attribute some of that to lazy teachers who graded on how pretty your handwriting was, but a lot of it was that changing a single word in the middle of a paper didn't require an extra half of an hour to rewrite the paper.
Maybe I was the exception, but I'm not buying that immediate feedback and shifting effort to the actual task (as opposed to busywork) does not improve the learning process for kids.
I also call BS on the "nothing beats a book" line. I can't count the number of times I've heard it. There is only one thing that reading a book gets you that watching TV doesn't. You learn to read better. Now, I am not saying that reading well is not a good thing, but that is all reading has on TV.
Add to that the fact that consumers just don't care that much about quality. They want convinence. The MP3 boom shows that. At the same time the Media Barons are trying to convince us to buy SACDs, the people are ripping their CDs to the lower quality MP3. Why because people want convinence. This is what DRM takes away. Heck, I would go back to VHS quality video in a second if they could make it even more convenient than my ReplayTV.
"To everyone else, it's transportation, and neither thing is such a big deal."
I would be more inclined to agree with you if I saw a whole lot less SUVs on the road. 95% of which are purchased for looks, not utility.
You said:
"You can upgrade your suspension. Or you could upgrade your exaust system. Or you could replace the engine with a higher horsepower model. Or you could upgrade your stereo or interior, even, or make any number of alterations which actually improve the performance and utility of your car."
You made it clear that you considered upgrading these items would be legitimate while improving looks are not, yet now you say that for you a car is just transportation, and not an extension of your manhood.
I say that all of your examples of non-silly upgrades are just as silly as improving looks. You see, for most of these "ricers", the stock car they bought has 100% of the utility that they need. The upgrades you suggest would be silly, as they would not make their cars perform their primary job easier.
If the a car gets you from point A to point B every time, it is a good car. (excepting the few things like hauling) Anything beyond that is entertainment. When you say that your form of entertainment is better than someone elses, you are pretty much saying that your gray is better than their gray.
Personally I have a 3/4 ton truck for hauling (thats about all it is used for), a minivan for people moving, and a Suzuki Swift as my primary car. Since the Swift gets me from point A to point B every time, and does it at a much lower cost than almost any other car on the road, it is a true utility vehicle. Anything more is entertainment. Certainly putting a high horsepower engine in that Swift would be FAR more silly than painting a racing stripe down the middle. Either entertainment is silly or it isn't. I only consider it silly if you can't afford it.
Really, how many cars have you ever seen in your entire life that could not be mechanically upgraded? 0? Now, how many have you seen where money was spent on asthetics? Every single one? This is definitly a case of 'My shade of gray is better than your shade of gray'.
"Then again, decorating your low-end Honda Civic with big mufflers, racing stripes, and spinny hubcaps is silly, too, but that doesn't stop a huge multi-million-dollar industry from springing up around providing those accessories for people who want to do something silly like that."
Why is it silly to decorate inexpensive stuff, but not expensive stuff. Racing stripes and spinny hubcaps are no more or less silly on a $12k car than they are on a $120K car.
In the last five years, my wife has accidentally hit three birds. All in a normal city road environment. I have begun to tease her by calling her 'Shari BirdSlayer'. Of course, she is the only person I have ever met that successfully hit a bird, and I have a couple of friends that went through phases where they were aiming.
I have to agree. Prior to my current gig (going on 6 years now) every environment I worked on allowed changes in production. The trouble never ended. People would make changes and bring everybody down. My current job has complete and seperate DEV/TEST/PROD servers. This has saved us a great deal of trouble. There is one other developer that works with me ( in Domino ), and we have complete control to do anything we want to Dev. Test and Prod are off limits for any changes. Even with this I will sometimes install a local server to try stuff that I KNOW will screw the system.
I can accept that I am human. I can accept that I make mistakes sometimes. Anyone that thinks they don't should be kept even farther away from production systems.
Not one of the linux machines in my household required drivers to be compiled. In fact every one of them detected every device with no problem. Besides, since the machines could be coming from Dell with the OS pre-installed (just like windows), all of the drivers would already be installed.
Add to that the fact that most users don't know how to install drivers on windows either, and you have a stale mate.
The real key is that Dell could ship their systems with Synaptic, and the repositories pointed to servers at Dell. This way they could easily push new drivers out to their customers in a way that MS never will. You see, MS doesn't want to loose control of the MS update site, but they also don't want to deal with third party drivers anymore than they absolutly have to, so what you get is minimalist drivers of questionable quality in the MS driver repository. You then have to identify your hardware, go to each manufacturers site, download the specific drivers, and THEN you can update. Linux has been that much of a pain for years.
I am a firm believer human's ability to understanding the difference between pretend and real, but this would be a little like playing with an unloaded gun.
Yes it is an opinion, and I don't hate the show. I just hate how overrated it is, and how they dragged the down the name of Battlestar Galactica by using it. The original was simply better. The standard I use for cheeseball is, does it sound like the kind of idea that a stoned seventh grader would come up with when they were trying to be 'deep'. Most of BSG plays out like that.
"I also hate to be the one tell you this, but almost EVERYTHING on TV and in the theaters is formulaic and droll. When was the last time you saw an original ID on TV or in a movie? Sure, they are out there but they are very few and very far between."
My point is that BSG is right in there with the rest of the drivel. And at the low end at that. It's the idea that BSG is a great piece of art that I disagree with. It is at about the same level as Voyager.
The 'Voyager rip-off' comment was specifically concerning the Seven/Eight characters. That character did not appear in the original BSG, so when the original BSG was created is irrelevent.
Seven : Eight
Tall : Tall
Blonde : Blonde
Hot : Hot
Icy : Icy
Robot that's almost human : Human turned partial robot
"I also doubt their budget could be considered "huge". Sci-Fi isn't exactly rolling in cash. Considering all the effects shots in the show, I imagine the budget is stretched thin. Yes, those shots cost money whether or not you think they do. Hell, the SG producers wanted to add a more recurring role for the Asgard but they couldn't afford it because of the effects cost."
Here you state that the budget isn't huge, then tell me how much they are spending on the show. Which is it?
Just to be clear. I do watch BSG. I just recognize it for the lowbrow cheeseball programming that it is.
P.S.
I don't think 'droll' means what you think it means. 'Droll' means Funny. When it is used to mean something is not funny it is being used sarcastically. I knew what you meant. I am not trying to use that as a way to invalidate your comments.
Of course many of them were sent there for being debtors. Now in the US, we just file bankrupcy. Although, maybe if we had debtors prisons, fewer people would plan to go into bankrupcy.
BSG is a total cheeseball attempt at drama. Oh no...The Cylons got through our third firewall! Oh no, the Cylons look just like us! Oh no, we can't come up with our own characters, so we will rip off Voyager. I now, lets make Starbuck a woman. That should get us a few more basement dwelling viewers. Oh...Oh...Lets introduce her by having her punch out a guy that has at least a 100 pounds on her. That will show how she isn't a frail little flower.
The gushing that goes on over BSG is amazing. The show is lowbrow, and formulaic. The cinematagraphy is also formulaic. It is a common trick these days. If you want to look 'gritty' then use a sharp focus, and wave the camera around a lot. This is high school quality work with a huge budget.
It is also amazing that a show produced with today's tech, and with a large budget can produce bad guys that are so much less intimidating.
Why do people think that OnDemand will kill Netflix. Cable/Sat companies can't seem to get the price on pay-per-view down to a price that matches Netflix, and that is one stream for everybody. How does making each stream independent for each person reduce the cost to make it comparable to Netflix?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't remember the the name, but Microsoft tried to kill flash once before. It was about 6 years ago. They had a browser plug in that was very similar to flash. They ended up dropping support for it. Anyone remember the name?
Are you actually trying to say that someone has to respect the person they marry? Thinking that getting married to someone means that you respect them is increadibly nieve at best. This gentleman very clearly defines people by the color of their skin. This is the very essence of racism. Calling me a racist because I point that out is simply 'newspeak'.
If you want to reduce racism, you have to accept that black people (as well as any other racial group) can do anything that white people can do. (and vica-versa) This includes being a racist.
"A statement isn't racist just because it mentions race. It's a complicated subject, and saying "just don't talk about it" won't solve all of our problems."
You see this guy wasn't just noting that there are people with different colored skin the same as someone might note the difference in eye color or hair color. He was defining himself and "his people" by the color of his skin. I am all for calling people out on being racest, but you have to be honest about it. White and racist are not synonymous.
I will say that you sound like you are making an effort, but in the end, you are still a racist. I would never even imagine stating my race to a prospective employer. You assume that YOU are discriminated against, but discrimination goes every direction. There are very few companies that have official policies against discrimination, with the exceptions of caucasions. Apparently you are not human, because Japanese are human, and you clearly don't consider her to be one of "your" people. I would certainly consider her one of MY people. Unless you mean racists by "your people". Really, you might find life a lot easier if you considered everyone to be "Your People". I know that I don't care what color a person is, but as soon as I hear someone seperating people by their race, I do my best to just avoid them in the future. That is both personally, and professionally.
So, why is it that cartoons produced now are of so much better quality than those produced when I was a kid. Even the ones I still love are obviously inferior to modern cartoons. ---Stra W. Man
I hear you. If the DVD pricing was
$10 - new
$8 - old but still relevent
$5 - old
Not only would I not copy, I would cancel my subcription to Netflix and not even rent.
The problem with iTunes is that it isn't cheaper than buying albums. I know that it might be cheaper for people to buy music from groups that are not talented enough to actually produce a good album, but for those of us that that buy albums, we not only pay just as much as if we got it on CD, we also have to pay for the manufacturing ourselves. Add to that that you usually cannot get the CD inserts when you download. You generally get a lower quality recording. You don't actually buy the music, but instead only rent it until you upgrade your equipment. All in all, legal downloads are a really crappy deal.
I suspect the popularity of iTunes has more to do with people just not doing the very simple math, and wanting to be cool.
If fingerprints ever start being widely used, muggers will just hit you over the head and cut off your fingers. They can check to see if you have a bank account later. If you think that there are not plenty of people that would cut your fingers off for the chance of a couple of hundred dollars, you are sadly mistaken, and a danger to the rest of society.
"put up or shut up, and don't criticize an industry when you don't understand how or why it works. I know this because I work in film."
That sounds like someone trying to rationalize bad behavior. Sorry to tell you this, but in the film industry you work in, $10,000 is a drop in the bucket. DVD releases could easily wait until after the film finished its run through theaters world wide. Up until recently, it was usually at least a year before a movie made it from theater to DVD, so the waiting wouldn't have happened anyway.
I don't believe that the region encoding is to prevent people from seeing foreign films, or to make people re-buy movies they have already purchased. (although that is an ugly side effect) The primary purpose of the region encoding would seem to be that a movie that might sell for $5 in Japan, might sell for $15 in the US, and $35 in Australia. The MPAA doesn't want the thieving Australians stealing $30 from them by using free trade to purchase the movie from Japan.
No, but some inkjet ink manufacturers do....
Spell checkers give you feedback at the time of writing. Either immediatly, or when you select the spell check feature, and yes, I would say that it does improve their spelling. If we are to assume that being told you have the wrong answer, and immediatly being shown the correct answer will not improve spelling, then all of the 'traditional' teaching methods also go down the drain. As for you looking up the words on your papers that were marked wrong...Yes, you are the exception to the rule. If every student was willing to go out and do self study, the need for professional teachers would be greatly reduced, and the effectiveness of computer learning would be greatly increased. You see, when you watch TV, you also have to construct meaning from words. You are just doing it with sound instead of symbols. The biggest difference is that by the time reading even comes into play, most people have become so good at deriving meaning from sound, that they stop even thinking about it. The same thing happens with reading. Early on, practicing reading gives you very good results on improving your reading. There comes a point though, that you start to get diminishing result for your efforts. This is true of almost any skill, including the parsing of information in a book or TV program.
Your Olypic analogy is flawed though. It should read that watching the Olypics on TV is equivalent to reading about it in the newspaper. Your analogy is that exercise is a better way to get exercise than not exercising. Well, my original post already stated that I believe reading does improve your reading skill. It is all the other magical benefits that are claimed on which I called BS.
As for the reading being associated with intellegence. This is sort of true because historically only the well educated could read, and the well educated had access to more information. This meant that they had more information, but not necessarally the ability to properly understand it. None of the people that could not read would be able to use the written information, irrelevent to their capability to understand it. We live in a different world now. Learning to read is widely available in many countries. In this countries, once you get past approximatly a 6th grade education, you either have the reading skill necessary to get through the rest of your life, or you never will. So, yes, here in the US, you will be marginalized if you cannot read, of course you have to put in a lot of effort to not learn to read, and you may be marginalized anyways. Of course I would say that you are more likely to be marginalized if you cannot drive than if you cannot read.
The household dog, more than anything else shows that eugenics does work, and that we definitly cannot trust humans to perform it on our species.
I know that I went from being a terrible speller to being very good as a direct result of computers. I got my first spell checker in the 7th grade. Every teacher, as well as my parents were absolutely sure that spell checkers just make kids lazy. They were sure that I would never learn to spell if I used a spell checker. The fact was that the spell checker would immediately tell me when I misspelled a word, and would also give me the correct spelling. This was opposed to the "traditional" approach, consisting of the student turning in their writing, and a week later getting a paper back with red circles all over it. The typical student would then toss the paper in the trash, never seeing what their mistake actually was, and never finding out the correct spelling.
The funny thing is that prior to my first word processor, I don't believe I ever received a single grade higher than a C on any writing assignment. Immediately following my family getting a word processor, I started getting As. I still attribute some of that to lazy teachers who graded on how pretty your handwriting was, but a lot of it was that changing a single word in the middle of a paper didn't require an extra half of an hour to rewrite the paper.
Maybe I was the exception, but I'm not buying that immediate feedback and shifting effort to the actual task (as opposed to busywork) does not improve the learning process for kids. I also call BS on the "nothing beats a book" line. I can't count the number of times I've heard it. There is only one thing that reading a book gets you that watching TV doesn't. You learn to read better. Now, I am not saying that reading well is not a good thing, but that is all reading has on TV.
Add to that the fact that consumers just don't care that much about quality. They want convinence. The MP3 boom shows that. At the same time the Media Barons are trying to convince us to buy SACDs, the people are ripping their CDs to the lower quality MP3. Why because people want convinence. This is what DRM takes away. Heck, I would go back to VHS quality video in a second if they could make it even more convenient than my ReplayTV.
"To everyone else, it's transportation, and neither thing is such a big deal."
I would be more inclined to agree with you if I saw a whole lot less SUVs on the road. 95% of which are purchased for looks, not utility.
You said:
"You can upgrade your suspension. Or you could upgrade your exaust system. Or you could replace the engine with a higher horsepower model. Or you could upgrade your stereo or interior, even, or make any number of alterations which actually improve the performance and utility of your car."
You made it clear that you considered upgrading these items would be legitimate while improving looks are not, yet now you say that for you a car is just transportation, and not an extension of your manhood.
I say that all of your examples of non-silly upgrades are just as silly as improving looks. You see, for most of these "ricers", the stock car they bought has 100% of the utility that they need. The upgrades you suggest would be silly, as they would not make their cars perform their primary job easier.
If the a car gets you from point A to point B every time, it is a good car. (excepting the few things like hauling) Anything beyond that is entertainment. When you say that your form of entertainment is better than someone elses, you are pretty much saying that your gray is better than their gray.
Personally I have a 3/4 ton truck for hauling (thats about all it is used for), a minivan for people moving, and a Suzuki Swift as my primary car. Since the Swift gets me from point A to point B every time, and does it at a much lower cost than almost any other car on the road, it is a true utility vehicle. Anything more is entertainment. Certainly putting a high horsepower engine in that Swift would be FAR more silly than painting a racing stripe down the middle. Either entertainment is silly or it isn't. I only consider it silly if you can't afford it.
Really, how many cars have you ever seen in your entire life that could not be mechanically upgraded? 0? Now, how many have you seen where money was spent on asthetics? Every single one? This is definitly a case of 'My shade of gray is better than your shade of gray'.
"Then again, decorating your low-end Honda Civic with big mufflers, racing stripes, and spinny hubcaps is silly, too, but that doesn't stop a huge multi-million-dollar industry from springing up around providing those accessories for people who want to do something silly like that."
Why is it silly to decorate inexpensive stuff, but not expensive stuff. Racing stripes and spinny hubcaps are no more or less silly on a $12k car than they are on a $120K car.
In the last five years, my wife has accidentally hit three birds. All in a normal city road environment. I have begun to tease her by calling her 'Shari BirdSlayer'. Of course, she is the only person I have ever met that successfully hit a bird, and I have a couple of friends that went through phases where they were aiming.
I have to agree. Prior to my current gig (going on 6 years now) every environment I worked on allowed changes in production. The trouble never ended. People would make changes and bring everybody down. My current job has complete and seperate DEV/TEST/PROD servers. This has saved us a great deal of trouble. There is one other developer that works with me ( in Domino ), and we have complete control to do anything we want to Dev. Test and Prod are off limits for any changes. Even with this I will sometimes install a local server to try stuff that I KNOW will screw the system.
I can accept that I am human. I can accept that I make mistakes sometimes. Anyone that thinks they don't should be kept even farther away from production systems.
3?
Not one of the linux machines in my household required drivers to be compiled. In fact every one of them detected every device with no problem. Besides, since the machines could be coming from Dell with the OS pre-installed (just like windows), all of the drivers would already be installed.
Add to that the fact that most users don't know how to install drivers on windows either, and you have a stale mate.
The real key is that Dell could ship their systems with Synaptic, and the repositories pointed to servers at Dell. This way they could easily push new drivers out to their customers in a way that MS never will. You see, MS doesn't want to loose control of the MS update site, but they also don't want to deal with third party drivers anymore than they absolutly have to, so what you get is minimalist drivers of questionable quality in the MS driver repository. You then have to identify your hardware, go to each manufacturers site, download the specific drivers, and THEN you can update. Linux has been that much of a pain for years.
I am a firm believer human's ability to understanding the difference between pretend and real, but this would be a little like playing with an unloaded gun.
Yes it is an opinion, and I don't hate the show. I just hate how overrated it is, and how they dragged the down the name of Battlestar Galactica by using it. The original was simply better. The standard I use for cheeseball is, does it sound like the kind of idea that a stoned seventh grader would come up with when they were trying to be 'deep'. Most of BSG plays out like that.
"I also hate to be the one tell you this, but almost EVERYTHING on TV and in the theaters is formulaic and droll. When was the last time you saw an original ID on TV or in a movie? Sure, they are out there but they are very few and very far between." My point is that BSG is right in there with the rest of the drivel. And at the low end at that. It's the idea that BSG is a great piece of art that I disagree with. It is at about the same level as Voyager.
The 'Voyager rip-off' comment was specifically concerning the Seven/Eight characters. That character did not appear in the original BSG, so when the original BSG was created is irrelevent.
Seven : Eight
Tall : Tall
Blonde : Blonde
Hot : Hot
Icy : Icy
Robot that's almost human : Human turned partial robot
"I also doubt their budget could be considered "huge". Sci-Fi isn't exactly rolling in cash. Considering all the effects shots in the show, I imagine the budget is stretched thin. Yes, those shots cost money whether or not you think they do. Hell, the SG producers wanted to add a more recurring role for the Asgard but they couldn't afford it because of the effects cost."
Here you state that the budget isn't huge, then tell me how much they are spending on the show. Which is it?
Just to be clear. I do watch BSG. I just recognize it for the lowbrow cheeseball programming that it is.
P.S.
I don't think 'droll' means what you think it means. 'Droll' means Funny. When it is used to mean something is not funny it is being used sarcastically. I knew what you meant. I am not trying to use that as a way to invalidate your comments.
Of course many of them were sent there for being debtors. Now in the US, we just file bankrupcy. Although, maybe if we had debtors prisons, fewer people would plan to go into bankrupcy.
BSG is a total cheeseball attempt at drama. Oh no...The Cylons got through our third firewall! Oh no, the Cylons look just like us! Oh no, we can't come up with our own characters, so we will rip off Voyager. I now, lets make Starbuck a woman. That should get us a few more basement dwelling viewers. Oh...Oh...Lets introduce her by having her punch out a guy that has at least a 100 pounds on her. That will show how she isn't a frail little flower.
The gushing that goes on over BSG is amazing. The show is lowbrow, and formulaic. The cinematagraphy is also formulaic. It is a common trick these days. If you want to look 'gritty' then use a sharp focus, and wave the camera around a lot. This is high school quality work with a huge budget.
It is also amazing that a show produced with today's tech, and with a large budget can produce bad guys that are so much less intimidating.
"If god didn't mean for people to lie, commit adultery, and murderer, he'd just smite them too, right?"
Correct.
Why do people think that OnDemand will kill Netflix. Cable/Sat companies can't seem to get the price on pay-per-view down to a price that matches Netflix, and that is one stream for everybody. How does making each stream independent for each person reduce the cost to make it comparable to Netflix?