I hate to break this to you, but if you read some of the reasons that linux existed and attracted lots of developers at start came down to this one, single reason:
"386BSD was going nowhere at the time that linux popped up."
It's 6 month release cycle also hampered things considerably.
Coders work what they want to work on, and what motivates them is working on what's going to provide the most use of the code they use.
386BSD was not providing that, ergo Linux popularity.
Disclaimer: BSD is not a bad thing, BSD is not a bad project. Linux is no better or worse than BSD, and BSD's license is less restrictive than GPL. BSD has many improvements over Linux's TCP/IP implementation, and handles threads better. BSD is not harder to use, and relatively has the same hardware support. BSD CAN run linux programs, and BSD does run on a intel processor.
IIRC Mainsoft created the win32->solaris bridge that gave us great innovations as "IE 4 for UNIX".
Nothing against mainsoft, but IE for Solaris is the BIGGEST pile of crap that I have ever seen on a UNIX system, perhaps unless you count staroffice. (heh, the irony)
Now, I honestly think, that if you have to compare browsers on (speed / features), IE comes out on top for Windows (no exp with the mac version, but I've heard good things).
If mainsoft does a REAL, non-wrapped port, then personally I predict that this will be a BONUS to using Linux, and a better argument to get the home users to put it on their desktop.
After all, when I talk to people about using Linux on their desktop, their biggest complaint is that they use a lot of windows programs, one of the bigger choices is IE. Windows Media Player, personally, I could give a shit about.
Although, my other expectation is that they will release this version and never release again.
However, if this only tides the masses of users who are stuck with netscape as a 'stable' choice until Mozilla becomes more mature, I'll be happy.
The point is, is that inadvertantly, MS is doing us a favor. Whether they want to, know they are, or whatever.
LOL! (someone who sees the parent to this at 0 should moderate this post up)
I agree - in fact, I am taking a job in mysql/perl next week over an oracle/perl job. MySQL has it's uses, but has no domain in this benchmark, which is what all this bickering is about.
In fact, I personally think the only reason it got included was to PREVENT this discussion, which of coures, a lot of good that did.
MySQL is not in the same class as Postgres or pretty much any other RDBMS. In fact, it's not even really an RDBMS.
The problem with the mindcraft issue was the fact that it was fairly one sided, and that both applications could complete the tests but only one (NT) was truly optimized to take advantage of them.
But the fact is, is that the test used was one that has been in existence for some time and not just used for this test. The only factor was the hardware, which remained the same on all platforms.
The test itself, was with the ANSI SQL *standard*, something that has been around since 1992. No amount of tweaking mysql is going to give it full functionality.
You shouldn't have to shrink the size of the basketball court simply because someone has shorter legs...
The point here is that some mysql developer got peeved because his program didn't make the grade for the test.
The fact is, is that the test was rather fair and equal - in fact, from what I read it's a pretty standardized test.
Do you complain when the valedictorian at your college/high school does better on the SAT's than you? No, because, he probably deserved it. The SAT is a test of knowledge, then performance.
Are you really that (expletive) stupid to put your customers' information on a database that the DEVELOPERS call 'experimental'?
If transaction support is really what they say it is, the transactions should be FASTER than autocommitting everything. Autocommitting takes time to write each and every piece of data, which slows the DB down. When filling a DB, I like to commit every 1000 rows or so, and the process takes under a minute for around 30,000 under the DB's that I currently use (oracle and postgres, in that order).
well then... this argument and all these flames should not even exist.
Most of us working with DB's know that MySQL is a glorified CSV data handler with network functionality.
The point is, is those benchmarks tested RELATIONAL databases. MySQL could have at least entered teh gamut had it at least supported a standard set almost 9 years ago for RELATIONAL databases.
This is what pisses me off. The people defending MySQL need to do a little more reading and a little less writing, "I'm right because that's what I've been told!".
MySQL does not support subselects or stored procedures, so I imagine a good grunt of hte work is done in the perl code.
Translated directly to postgres or any other REAL database, this will probably be in favor of mysql.
now, if you set up the code (and the database) to utilize the power of these databases, especially utilizing subselects within the message code, you would find that postgres or oracle or any other database with these features would put a nasty taste in the mouth of the average mysql user.
I still find it funny that no one has an argument for mysql other than "it's faster".
Well, tell me WHY, and try and give me a reason other than the fact that it doesn't have transactions (which are FASTER if you use them right), or "extra features" to bog it down.
Again, mysql vs DBD::CSV would be an equal comparison.
Because, it's just going ot be some silly bickering about how his program wasn't benched because it DIDN'T MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.
You know, I can write a template parser in perl in 5 minutes - it handles one tag: INSERT. Bench it against cold fusion on a load test, and it might win. Bench it on a feature test, and who do you think will win?
But of course, that gives me a wonderful reason to complain because my program is not even up to snuff with the "ANSI CFM Standard" (humor me here), therefore it doesn't even finish the test much less pass it.
Comparing MySQL to Postgres or Oracle is like telling a 3rd grader to take a calculus exam.
Sorry for the flame, but it has to be said and I will keep saying it until people do some homework, look at the feature set, and compare it to the ANSI SQL *STANDARD*. If they've still got a reason to complain, well, I feel for their employers and especially those who may do sensetive transactions through their databases.
But perl's DBD::CSV (comma seperated values) is just about as powerful as MySQL.
Take a look at the tables - they are 2 files, they aren't even tabulated relationally in a database (the 'R' in RDBMS).
For instance - take the table files from one database, slap them in another database directory. Blammo! You can use that table there!
(NO - THIS SHOULD NOT BE A FEATURE)
Where are the stored procedures? the subselects? the objects?
WAIT! They aren't there! Why you ask? BECAUSE MySQL IS NOT RELATIONAL.
MySQL IS NOT A RELATIONAL DATABASE. It's a daemon used to interpret network-based sql queries and insert/retrieve plaintext data in files. It then formats this data and presents it to you, the user. This is what makes it so fast. It's also what makes it useless for any real world application.
Fast, whatever, but it's not a *real* database in the terms of these benchmarks. If you want a real database, you use something that's not going to crumble while doing simple operations such as locking tables or handling 100+ users in a join of 2-3 20+ column tables.
Our oracle box does this fine at work, in fact, constantly, and never exceeds a load of.75, not bad for a P300 with 128M.
My postgres tests are similar if not better personally, with large and awkward select statements, and even without indexing it performs better.
MySQL is great for your web BBS or whatever. But anyone who uses it to store sensitive client information is simply a fool. (although I'll still let them pay me exorberantly inflated prices to let me code for them)
And if I haven't pissed the horribly uninformed mysql crowd off enough, ACCESS statements are more feature rich than MySQL - and it's only really a client.
Simply put, a lot of us here at work are getting a laugh out of this. MySQL is a toy, simply put.
-Erik-
(by all means, moderate me down, i'm still right)
Re:The impossibility of Online Voting
on
Online Voting?
·
· Score: 1
I live in portland, or.
The yarn spinning is abundant here. It's sad to see so many people here live under such a single, monolithic mindset. It's like they're under some spell.... I get along with few of them.
Beaverton is the worst, IMO, because of the large population that works for a certain chip-maker that will not be mentioned here. Actually, I can think of a few of those chipmakers.
It's funny, when the MS breakup was being publicized they had a thing on channel 8 (KOIN) called a "talkback"... Well, only pro-MS people were making it in... I called in, got an answer, and said "I'd like to talk about the stuff that people don't know about, MS anti-trust that's been going on for at least 10 years".
An hour later, I was still on hold. The show had ended about 15 minutes prior. About 30 other people had gotten in, considering it was about 7am I imagine not too many people had the time or vigor to call at that time.
The closest thing they had to an con-MS stance was a guy who couldn't argue his ass out of a wet paper bag. He was quickly shortened by the news anchor. (ironically named 'Lars Larsen')
Anyways, the point is, is that Portland has a big tech population, and KOIN is a very Spokane-Based media company. Do the math.
But, more often than not nowadays these are the only methods that people use to research a candidate.
The ACLU has their own picks for candidacy, just like the NAACP, NRA, and other large groups.
These are the candidates who do at least 1 of 2 things:
1) Have similar enough views to their own 'mission statement'
2) Listen to them more often than the other candidates.
Politics is about INFLUENCE, not money. Money is just a strong influential factor. The organizations you list and many others will indefinately put their own spin on things just as much as the for-profit lobby groups, etc.
The point is, is that there is not ONE definable method for picking a candidate. You have to watch the news, read/hear what hte politicians say themselves, read criticism about them, make a decent effort to research their track record.
Now how many of you can actually say you do all this?
I'm sick of hearing people talk about how they are pissed at others not researching enough. Well, if you talk to 90% of the people out there, i'd be willing to bet they all say the same thing and all research about the same amount.
After all, the people who don't really care about the election don't bother voting, now do they? The people who vote at least know the candidate names or vote on 'parties', possibly the stupidest idea to ever grace american politics, and worldwide, in general. They hear about them on the news and other forms of media. They make their decision based on what others tell them.
Now what you are describing is a packet-transmitted form of the same thing I just described above.
Voting online will not make the difference, if people are too lazy to walk to the local school or whatever, they are too lazy to bother clicking on "republican" or "democrat". In fact, I would much rather they DON'T. And they certainly won't bother looking anywhere else for 'more information'.
I'm not saying I do this kind of research either, but I just rest assured we're going to have another shitty administration, and not bothering trying to carpet the world.
What needs to change is hte system, not the methods. We need campaign promises that are written and BINDING, so we can actually vote for people who are going to do what they say.
And the electoral college has to go. I can't remember a time when californians had more 'say' than kansas did in any other environment. What's even more hilarious is that any decent debate or philosophy class will teach you right off the bat that generalization of any sort is the road to fallacy. The electoral college is generalization of the worst kind, opinion.
I know lots of underground bands that manage to pay a LOT less than hundreds of thousands of dollars to record.... And the recordings don't sound poor at all. For $2000 you can get a days' worth of studio time at a lot of places.
Beastie Boys concert in Germany from their 'Ill Communication' Tour
A currenly undistrbuted version of 'Incubus - Live in France'
And my prize - Jimi Hendrix and BB King at the LA Forum, 1966.
Not to mention disturbing amount of classical music.
I've also used it to find B-Sides to singles that I refuse to pay $15 for.
I'm not saying napster is right or wrong, but for most of my uses, I think they're validated.
It's like MGM with Tom & Jerry, when Hanna and Barbera actually did the artwork and animation, then take a look at the later stuff when HB actually got the cartoon back.. crrrrrap!
Yes. but it's extremely easy for the thin line to be blurred.
More often than not, aggressiveness is a direct result of feeling macho, regardless of what is displayed.
It's hard to be right without sounding either pedantic or agressive, especially when the other side of the argument is aggressive to begin with. Watch CSPAN for an hour for a great example of this.:) (politicians are hilarious)
You know it's been a very viable tactic in the past to interrupt protests 'professionally' by creating a mob-like scene so that others on the edge will get riled up. This was a known tactic in Civil Rights protests by members of the various supremacy groups.
Call it how you want it, but it's not fair to arrest everyone. That has to be a conspiracy, which, IIRC, different protesting groups did not conspire with others.
If you are being peaceful and not doing anything wrong, why should you get arrested? Of course, when you're crying your ass of because you've just been gassed for no reason, perhaps YOU JUST MIGHT GET MAD.
If slashdot was generated on opinion, then, you wouldn't have had to even write this.
But, no, slashdot runs on a collective opinion of those who RUN slashdot. The opinions are gathered from a many other opinions of people who CONTRIBUTE TO STORIES POSTED on slashdot.
So please. If you don't like it, you have 4 choices:
1) Filter out Anime 2) Start CONTRIBUTING stories that you like 3) Stop reading slashdot altogether 4) Start your own site, like the kuro5hin guys did (which was a cool site, so sad to see it go down)
The internet is full of options and choices, but the ultimate choice is that of your own, to make the choice to choose. Choose wisely.
I completely agree. I came in here to moderate this but bah...:)
I think the 'geek' attraction to anime, is, like many things in our silicon world, we like excellence. We bitch at MS because of the utter crap that they can produce (but in teh same light rarely prize them on the good ones), and push for oddball technology that has no mass real-world use because it's EXCELLENT.
As I stated in the last anime topic, anime to me is more of an example of excellence in animation than 'big eyes, small mouth, lots of tits and blood'. (btw, there's a role playing game called 'big eyes, small mouth' where you design goofy anime characters:)
IRT the masculinity issue, I think it's more of an issue for geeks to 'be right' than anything. After all, geeks are book smart by nature, and tend to be deemed as 'genius' in their less tech-savvy groups. Hence, when you put 2 or 3 geeks together, things get bad.
I think a lot of us have had situations where we just don't get along with another geek simply because they're convinced their shit don't stink. I know myself, that I've also had situations where I felt that I was very condescending to someone else regarding a technical issue and didn't realize it until later.
Either way, this is a very good topic for discussion, it'd be nice ot have a compelete topic to extrapolate on this further.
IRT female geeks... Well.. how do I put this.. You don't know too many females, do you?:) All the ones that I know are... very.. very.. agressive and catty when they want to be. They just have a softer exterior than we do.:)
Heh HB has never been known for artistic or animation quality - sitcom-style plot is where they excel, not that that's a plus, either.
Most SHOWS don't animate at 30fps, true. However, with something like CGI, being so.. 'realistic' in quality, and the actual art of the group being stellar (IRT Reboot), the animation should have been MUCH better. Beastwars is a perfect example. Even the drollest scenes have very, very fluid animation even if the actual movements aren't very complex.
Older cartoons still rule the framerate region.. WB and MGM to be specific. (older disney perhaps.. but i still can't watch it on GP)
IIRC, Akira was animated ABOVE 32 fps in 90% of the scenes, of course, even the most die hard anime fans, as much as the more pretentious hate to admit it, love the movie. It is a perfect example of quality in plot and animation, which is exactly why it's become so popular, and probably did most of the work breaking the ice in american acceptance of anime.
That's another thing, I have a real, real, hard time comparing anime like Gundam/Eva/NS/Golgo to things like, well, pokemon. Anime to me says 'excellence in artistic and plot form, with emphasis to japanese style'. Not, 'japanese animation'. Most of those anime's I listed above if not, are animating real, real close to 30 in the more fast paced scenes where it's required.
For a perfect example of what's NOT and SHOULD be animated at 30, take a look at the recent attempts Marvel has made at animating their own comics (X-Men, SpiderMan). If you watch an hour of episodes, you're almost guaranteed to see 'teleporting characters' or scenes that seem like the animators intended to provide 'slow-mo' by making the framerate 6fps or so.
Oh yes. There's nothing wrong with recycled animation, i never said that. It's just smart, like reusing code. But just like reusing anything, if it doesn't work, don't bother trying. 99% of actual productions seem to blatantly ignore this rule.
Slashdot Mirror
I hate to break this to you, but if you read some of the reasons that linux existed and attracted lots of developers at start came down to this one, single reason:
"386BSD was going nowhere at the time that linux popped up."
It's 6 month release cycle also hampered things considerably.
Coders work what they want to work on, and what motivates them is working on what's going to provide the most use of the code they use.
386BSD was not providing that, ergo Linux popularity.
Disclaimer: BSD is not a bad thing, BSD is not a bad project. Linux is no better or worse than BSD, and BSD's license is less restrictive than GPL. BSD has many improvements over Linux's TCP/IP implementation, and handles threads better. BSD is not harder to use, and relatively has the same hardware support. BSD CAN run linux programs, and BSD does run on a intel processor.
Did I miss anything?
-Erik-
IIRC Mainsoft created the win32->solaris bridge that gave us great innovations as "IE 4 for UNIX".
Nothing against mainsoft, but IE for Solaris is the BIGGEST pile of crap that I have ever seen on a UNIX system, perhaps unless you count staroffice. (heh, the irony)
Now, I honestly think, that if you have to compare browsers on (speed / features), IE comes out on top for Windows (no exp with the mac version, but I've heard good things).
If mainsoft does a REAL, non-wrapped port, then personally I predict that this will be a BONUS to using Linux, and a better argument to get the home users to put it on their desktop.
After all, when I talk to people about using Linux on their desktop, their biggest complaint is that they use a lot of windows programs, one of the bigger choices is IE. Windows Media Player, personally, I could give a shit about.
Although, my other expectation is that they will release this version and never release again.
However, if this only tides the masses of users who are stuck with netscape as a 'stable' choice until Mozilla becomes more mature, I'll be happy.
The point is, is that inadvertantly, MS is doing us a favor. Whether they want to, know they are, or whatever.
Let's do the embracing and extending this time.
-Erik-
most people barely have the time to go halfway across teh world, much less take a 3 week long journey to the moon.
just food for thought.
Erik
LOL! (someone who sees the parent to this at 0 should moderate this post up)
I agree - in fact, I am taking a job in mysql/perl next week over an oracle/perl job. MySQL has it's uses, but has no domain in this benchmark, which is what all this bickering is about.
In fact, I personally think the only reason it got included was to PREVENT this discussion, which of coures, a lot of good that did.
-Erik-
Read the other argument that I have written.
MySQL is not in the same class as Postgres or pretty much any other RDBMS. In fact, it's not even really an RDBMS.
The problem with the mindcraft issue was the fact that it was fairly one sided, and that both applications could complete the tests but only one (NT) was truly optimized to take advantage of them.
But the fact is, is that the test used was one that has been in existence for some time and not just used for this test. The only factor was the hardware, which remained the same on all platforms.
The test itself, was with the ANSI SQL *standard*, something that has been around since 1992. No amount of tweaking mysql is going to give it full functionality.
You shouldn't have to shrink the size of the basketball court simply because someone has shorter legs...
-Erik-
heh, you must be having a long month or two, hehe.
-Erik-
Again, you're missing the point.
The point here is that some mysql developer got peeved because his program didn't make the grade for the test.
The fact is, is that the test was rather fair and equal - in fact, from what I read it's a pretty standardized test.
Do you complain when the valedictorian at your college/high school does better on the SAT's than you? No, because, he probably deserved it. The SAT is a test of knowledge, then performance.
Just like these tests.
-Erik-
Um...
Are you really that (expletive) stupid to put your customers' information on a database that the DEVELOPERS call 'experimental'?
If transaction support is really what they say it is, the transactions should be FASTER than autocommitting everything. Autocommitting takes time to write each and every piece of data, which slows the DB down. When filling a DB, I like to commit every 1000 rows or so, and the process takes under a minute for around 30,000 under the DB's that I currently use (oracle and postgres, in that order).
-Erik-
well then... this argument and all these flames should not even exist.
Most of us working with DB's know that MySQL is a glorified CSV data handler with network functionality.
The point is, is those benchmarks tested RELATIONAL databases. MySQL could have at least entered teh gamut had it at least supported a standard set almost 9 years ago for RELATIONAL databases.
This is what pisses me off. The people defending MySQL need to do a little more reading and a little less writing, "I'm right because that's what I've been told!".
-Erik-
The best way to learn postgres?
Buy an oracle book. Seriously. Then compare it to online docs, for the most part syntax is very similar...
Oracle has some (major) features that Postgres doesn't, but postgres is catching up rapidly.
Erik
You have other things to consider here.
MySQL does not support subselects or stored procedures, so I imagine a good grunt of hte work is done in the perl code.
Translated directly to postgres or any other REAL database, this will probably be in favor of mysql.
now, if you set up the code (and the database) to utilize the power of these databases, especially utilizing subselects within the message code, you would find that postgres or oracle or any other database with these features would put a nasty taste in the mouth of the average mysql user.
I still find it funny that no one has an argument for mysql other than "it's faster".
Well, tell me WHY, and try and give me a reason other than the fact that it doesn't have transactions (which are FASTER if you use them right), or "extra features" to bog it down.
Again, mysql vs DBD::CSV would be an equal comparison.
Erik
you know, i haven't even read this yet.
Because, it's just going ot be some silly bickering about how his program wasn't benched because it DIDN'T MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.
You know, I can write a template parser in perl in 5 minutes - it handles one tag: INSERT. Bench it against cold fusion on a load test, and it might win. Bench it on a feature test, and who do you think will win?
But of course, that gives me a wonderful reason to complain because my program is not even up to snuff with the "ANSI CFM Standard" (humor me here), therefore it doesn't even finish the test much less pass it.
Comparing MySQL to Postgres or Oracle is like telling a 3rd grader to take a calculus exam.
Sorry for the flame, but it has to be said and I will keep saying it until people do some homework, look at the feature set, and compare it to the ANSI SQL *STANDARD*. If they've still got a reason to complain, well, I feel for their employers and especially those who may do sensetive transactions through their databases.
Erik
People. I hate to break this to you...
.75, not bad for a P300 with 128M.
But perl's DBD::CSV (comma seperated values) is just about as powerful as MySQL.
Take a look at the tables - they are 2 files, they aren't even tabulated relationally in a database (the 'R' in RDBMS).
For instance - take the table files from one database, slap them in another database directory. Blammo! You can use that table there!
(NO - THIS SHOULD NOT BE A FEATURE)
Where are the stored procedures? the subselects? the objects?
WAIT! They aren't there! Why you ask? BECAUSE MySQL IS NOT RELATIONAL.
MySQL IS NOT A RELATIONAL DATABASE. It's a daemon used to interpret network-based sql queries and insert/retrieve plaintext data in files. It then formats this data and presents it to you, the user. This is what makes it so fast. It's also what makes it useless for any real world application.
Fast, whatever, but it's not a *real* database in the terms of these benchmarks. If you want a real database, you use something that's not going to crumble while doing simple operations such as locking tables or handling 100+ users in a join of 2-3 20+ column tables.
Our oracle box does this fine at work, in fact, constantly, and never exceeds a load of
My postgres tests are similar if not better personally, with large and awkward select statements, and even without indexing it performs better.
MySQL is great for your web BBS or whatever. But anyone who uses it to store sensitive client information is simply a fool. (although I'll still let them pay me exorberantly inflated prices to let me code for them)
And if I haven't pissed the horribly uninformed mysql crowd off enough, ACCESS statements are more feature rich than MySQL - and it's only really a client.
Simply put, a lot of us here at work are getting a laugh out of this. MySQL is a toy, simply put.
-Erik-
(by all means, moderate me down, i'm still right)
I live in portland, or.
The yarn spinning is abundant here. It's sad to see so many people here live under such a single, monolithic mindset. It's like they're under some spell.... I get along with few of them.
Beaverton is the worst, IMO, because of the large population that works for a certain chip-maker that will not be mentioned here. Actually, I can think of a few of those chipmakers.
It's funny, when the MS breakup was being publicized they had a thing on channel 8 (KOIN) called a "talkback"... Well, only pro-MS people were making it in... I called in, got an answer, and said "I'd like to talk about the stuff that people don't know about, MS anti-trust that's been going on for at least 10 years".
An hour later, I was still on hold. The show had ended about 15 minutes prior. About 30 other people had gotten in, considering it was about 7am I imagine not too many people had the time or vigor to call at that time.
The closest thing they had to an con-MS stance was a guy who couldn't argue his ass out of a wet paper bag. He was quickly shortened by the news anchor. (ironically named 'Lars Larsen')
Anyways, the point is, is that Portland has a big tech population, and KOIN is a very Spokane-Based media company. Do the math.
Of course, this has nothing to do with the topic.
Erik
I'm not saying I disagree with your points.
But, more often than not nowadays these are the only methods that people use to research a candidate.
The ACLU has their own picks for candidacy, just like the NAACP, NRA, and other large groups.
These are the candidates who do at least 1 of 2 things:
1) Have similar enough views to their own 'mission statement'
2) Listen to them more often than the other candidates.
Politics is about INFLUENCE, not money. Money is just a strong influential factor. The organizations you list and many others will indefinately put their own spin on things just as much as the for-profit lobby groups, etc.
The point is, is that there is not ONE definable method for picking a candidate. You have to watch the news, read/hear what hte politicians say themselves, read criticism about them, make a decent effort to research their track record.
Now how many of you can actually say you do all this?
I'm sick of hearing people talk about how they are pissed at others not researching enough. Well, if you talk to 90% of the people out there, i'd be willing to bet they all say the same thing and all research about the same amount.
After all, the people who don't really care about the election don't bother voting, now do they? The people who vote at least know the candidate names or vote on 'parties', possibly the stupidest idea to ever grace american politics, and worldwide, in general. They hear about them on the news and other forms of media. They make their decision based on what others tell them.
Now what you are describing is a packet-transmitted form of the same thing I just described above.
Voting online will not make the difference, if people are too lazy to walk to the local school or whatever, they are too lazy to bother clicking on "republican" or "democrat". In fact, I would much rather they DON'T. And they certainly won't bother looking anywhere else for 'more information'.
I'm not saying I do this kind of research either, but I just rest assured we're going to have another shitty administration, and not bothering trying to carpet the world.
What needs to change is hte system, not the methods. We need campaign promises that are written and BINDING, so we can actually vote for people who are going to do what they say.
And the electoral college has to go. I can't remember a time when californians had more 'say' than kansas did in any other environment. What's even more hilarious is that any decent debate or philosophy class will teach you right off the bat that generalization of any sort is the road to fallacy. The electoral college is generalization of the worst kind, opinion.
enough rant.
-Erik-
Um....
I know lots of underground bands that manage to pay a LOT less than hundreds of thousands of dollars to record.... And the recordings don't sound poor at all. For $2000 you can get a days' worth of studio time at a lot of places.
-Erik-
Exactly. Lessee here... I've found a:
Beastie Boys concert in Germany from their 'Ill Communication' Tour
A currenly undistrbuted version of 'Incubus - Live in France'
And my prize - Jimi Hendrix and BB King at the LA Forum, 1966.
Not to mention disturbing amount of classical music.
I've also used it to find B-Sides to singles that I refuse to pay $15 for.
I'm not saying napster is right or wrong, but for most of my uses, I think they're validated.
-Erik-
*COUGH*Roadrunner*COUGH*
:)
It's like MGM with Tom & Jerry, when Hanna and Barbera actually did the artwork and animation, then take a look at the later stuff when HB actually got the cartoon back.. crrrrrap!
'nuff said
Erik
Yes. but it's extremely easy for the thin line to be blurred.
:) (politicians are hilarious)
More often than not, aggressiveness is a direct result of feeling macho, regardless of what is displayed.
It's hard to be right without sounding either pedantic or agressive, especially when the other side of the argument is aggressive to begin with. Watch CSPAN for an hour for a great example of this.
Erik
different strokes for different folks.
I'm not going to teach my aging parents 'awk'.. are you?
Erik
You know it's been a very viable tactic in the past to interrupt protests 'professionally' by creating a mob-like scene so that others on the edge will get riled up. This was a known tactic in Civil Rights protests by members of the various supremacy groups.
Call it how you want it, but it's not fair to arrest everyone. That has to be a conspiracy, which, IIRC, different protesting groups did not conspire with others.
If you are being peaceful and not doing anything wrong, why should you get arrested? Of course, when you're crying your ass of because you've just been gassed for no reason, perhaps YOU JUST MIGHT GET MAD.
Erik
Well, sorry to be rude, but this has to be said.
If slashdot was generated on opinion, then, you wouldn't have had to even write this.
But, no, slashdot runs on a collective opinion of those who RUN slashdot. The opinions are gathered from a many other opinions of people who CONTRIBUTE TO STORIES POSTED on slashdot.
So please. If you don't like it, you have 4 choices:
1) Filter out Anime
2) Start CONTRIBUTING stories that you like
3) Stop reading slashdot altogether
4) Start your own site, like the kuro5hin guys did (which was a cool site, so sad to see it go down)
The internet is full of options and choices, but the ultimate choice is that of your own, to make the choice to choose. Choose wisely.
Erik
I completely agree. I came in here to moderate this but bah... :)
:)
:) All the ones that I know are... very.. very.. agressive and catty when they want to be. They just have a softer exterior than we do. :)
I think the 'geek' attraction to anime, is, like many things in our silicon world, we like excellence. We bitch at MS because of the utter crap that they can produce (but in teh same light rarely prize them on the good ones), and push for oddball technology that has no mass real-world use because it's EXCELLENT.
As I stated in the last anime topic, anime to me is more of an example of excellence in animation than 'big eyes, small mouth, lots of tits and blood'. (btw, there's a role playing game called 'big eyes, small mouth' where you design goofy anime characters
IRT the masculinity issue, I think it's more of an issue for geeks to 'be right' than anything. After all, geeks are book smart by nature, and tend to be deemed as 'genius' in their less tech-savvy groups. Hence, when you put 2 or 3 geeks together, things get bad.
I think a lot of us have had situations where we just don't get along with another geek simply because they're convinced their shit don't stink. I know myself, that I've also had situations where I felt that I was very condescending to someone else regarding a technical issue and didn't realize it until later.
Either way, this is a very good topic for discussion, it'd be nice ot have a compelete topic to extrapolate on this further.
IRT female geeks... Well.. how do I put this.. You don't know too many females, do you?
Erik
Heh HB has never been known for artistic or animation quality - sitcom-style plot is where they excel, not that that's a plus, either.
.. 'realistic' in quality, and the actual art of the group being stellar (IRT Reboot), the animation should have been MUCH better. Beastwars is a perfect example. Even the drollest scenes have very, very fluid animation even if the actual movements aren't very complex.
Most SHOWS don't animate at 30fps, true. However, with something like CGI, being so
Older cartoons still rule the framerate region.. WB and MGM to be specific. (older disney perhaps.. but i still can't watch it on GP)
IIRC, Akira was animated ABOVE 32 fps in 90% of the scenes, of course, even the most die hard anime fans, as much as the more pretentious hate to admit it, love the movie. It is a perfect example of quality in plot and animation, which is exactly why it's become so popular, and probably did most of the work breaking the ice in american acceptance of anime.
That's another thing, I have a real, real, hard time comparing anime like Gundam/Eva/NS/Golgo to things like, well, pokemon. Anime to me says 'excellence in artistic and plot form, with emphasis to japanese style'. Not, 'japanese animation'. Most of those anime's I listed above if not, are animating real, real close to 30 in the more fast paced scenes where it's required.
For a perfect example of what's NOT and SHOULD be animated at 30, take a look at the recent attempts Marvel has made at animating their own comics (X-Men, SpiderMan). If you watch an hour of episodes, you're almost guaranteed to see 'teleporting characters' or scenes that seem like the animators intended to provide 'slow-mo' by making the framerate 6fps or so.
Oh yes. There's nothing wrong with recycled animation, i never said that. It's just smart, like reusing code. But just like reusing anything, if it doesn't work, don't bother trying. 99% of actual productions seem to blatantly ignore this rule.
Erik
Portland, OR.