So, since you seem to be a younger dude perhaps you could explain exactly what it is that happened 1990-2000 that made the field so undesirable to women.
I am not that person but perhaps women are smarter than men? That is when pay vs work hours went upside down. It is also when the work environment went to utter crap.
They should've made it one move, for a younger audience, made by a different director, without trying to make it a prequel and "foreshadowing" everything we've already seen.
While I agree with you for the most part, it definitely IS a prequel of sorts. That ring that turns Bilbo invisible really is the One Ring made by Sauron.
Um, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are very much nerd topics. We were the only ones reading them for decades. Dungeons and Dragons uses a LOT of lore from those books.
While your complaint may be valid for other movies, it is definitely NOT valid for this one.
I agree. The Scouring of the Shire should have been present. It does feel like its own story in way, so I gave a pass to the omission... but even still, it was a VERY important part of the story.
Certainly, Dol Goldur falls, but why does Galadriel appear so weak at particular moments throughout? It feels rather convenient that she falls to the ground weakened while the men (including the aged Saruman) fight it out amongst the Nazgul. While she may cast out Sauron from Dol Goldur, her appearance here felt very highly inconsistent, cycling between frail elf maiden and "beautiful and terrible as the dawn" elf queen.
This bothered me DEEPLY. She emits a powerful "spell", clears the area around Gandalf, picks him, moves him, and then is suddenly laying on the ground helpless as the Nazgul surround her. Why was she helpless?
But it gets even worse. Is that possible? Yes, yes it is. She suddenly stands up in the middle of the Nazgul and in front of Sauron (after laying there helpless, remember) and invokes a terrible power that is so strong, that it banishes Sauron from the world (but not not entirely because the One Ring binds him)... and she falls over helpless. Again. What the? I can't even begin to describe how incredibly lame that was.
Oh, and you also let the elves take center stage again over the dwarves by showing us an awesome phalanx setup, then having the elves just leap right over that and completely invalidate the phalanx altogether.
Yes. That was absolutely terrible too. Now what? The Elves are stuck on the wrong side of the awesome phalanx? No, everything mysteriously thins out.
Also, isn't Sting, Bilbo's sword, supposed to glow blue when orcs are about? Did that happen and I just missed it, or did you guys forget that important detail in post-production?
They did get this one right: It did glow blue and they showed it. It was a bit washed out in the "daylight" so I am not surprised that you missed it but I was specifically looking for it and therefore caught the moment that it did happen.
The rest of your analysis is exactly correct. Hell, all of it was correct except missing the blue glow. I just felt the need to point out exactly how excruciatingly bad those other two points were. I mean that they were movie wreckingly bad, not just bad. Ugh.
Still, not a terrible movie. Just very unsatisfying in some aspects.
If humans could fly, we'd consider it exercise and never do it. -- origin unknown
Fuck that! If I could fly, I would be everywhere. Hercules would look like flabby sack of flesh compared to me. I would be doing loops, speed diving, flying to the tops of mountains, over volcanoes. I would have circled the planet itself a dozen times by now.
Flying would be AWESOME. Who cares if it is exercise?
In any case, unless the three letter agencies are withholding crucial information, there's not enough to go on here to point the fingers at Kim Jong-Un. I'm sure there are people who would blame him no matter what, because frankly he's an asshole of Goatse dimensions, but the evidence needs to be far more solid than this.
I fail to see why anyone cares about all of this. It is a simple criminal matter over a corporation that is well-known to have utterly pathetic security practices. Local police should be handling this matter until it is proven that interstate laws have been broken.
The only reason I personally care is so I can channel Nelson and say Ha Ha. There really is nothing exciting here, much less war worthy. Just wow.
Mario Balotelli, a black football player with a Jewish mother is suspended a game and fined 25k pounds for posting an anti-racist picture about a multicultural Super Mario.
Why are we so eager to overthrow their regime? Is democracy so sacred that we must ~force~ it on every country around the world?
It is not Democracy that must be spread. It is Freedom. Democracy is merely the method that seems best suited. If a dictatorship could ensure Freedom, then dictatorships would be spread.
What business is it of the US (and Hollywood) to decide what is the best system?
See above. If you can come up with a better system for promoting Freedom, then I am sure we can get to spreading it to places that have few Freedoms.
I once knew an earthquake was about to hit about 5 minutes before it did. Of course, I have been in several earthquakes, and only the one ever gave me a clue before it happened.
If it matters, which it doesn't, I felt a "pressure" in my head. It grew almost palpable and then the earthquake happened which felt like a logical release of the pressure. A very odd experience. It was also one of the weirdest earthquakes that I ever felt. It was a rolling rather than a shaking. It felt a bit like being on a boat in the ocean.
The "first world" problem is not about the cell phone. it is about the ONLY thing that you MIGHT have to worry about is a hospital trying to call you about your kid with a broken leg. That is the first world problem.
I think you missed the boat on this one. That is okay, your batting average is pretty high.:)
Which is also part of my smartphones as an addiction jeremiad.
Excellent. I have another word to add to my vocabulary. It is a shame I will only ever be able to use it in writing. Every time that I wax somewhat eloquent in spoken conversation, all I receive are blank stares. *sigh*
BTW, most of the people replying to you are morons if they can not understand what you are saying about how OTHER people seem to have a hard time without a cell signal. You were perfectly clear to me.
I fail to see the problem here. Yes, it would suck to wake up in the drunk tank with a bullet wound to the chest. I would say that the bullet wound was well-earned. Try being more responsible next time? The world is NOT a safe place.
Given a reasonable power source other than a star, they'd be better off living in interstellar space where no one is likely bother them.
Actually, a nebula would be the best place for such a "species" to congregate. There is plenty of raw material there and it does not take much work to gather it; unlike, say, an asteroid field or something where there are very large and hard chunks of discrete matter.
Also, asteroids only form in gravity wells. A robotic species would surely prefer to "live" at the tops of, or outside of, gravity wells and swoop down into them only for things that are valuable.
But instead what you get is an INTERFERENCE pattern, which can ONLY happen if the particles are going through BOTH HOLES.
To me, this is one of the most famous physics experiments of all time... but I have never been able to find out how far apart those holes are and at what distance the holes are apart that the single photon stops traveling through both.
It seems to me if the slits (holes?) have to be closer than the uncertainty of the position of the photon then we are dealing with something other than what we call "physical reality". Call it a sort of building block for "physical reality".
Yes, they have. The Constitution has been amended dozens of times since it was written
We were specifically discussing:
The problem is that most Americans are perfectly happy with the police acting this way.
I was saying that it was against the letter and the spirit of the laws that all other laws in America are founded upon. Of course, none of the "dozens" (27 total) of amendments actually reverse or otherwise negate the 4th so your refutation of
but THEY HAVE NOT BEEN USED
falls amazingly flat.
and countless Supreme Court cases have further changed laws.
Changed is a charged word in this context. In all actuality, all that the judicial branch can do is strike down or remove. They can not add. At most, they can "clarify", but that does not create new law. That is reserved for Congress, aka the legislative branch.
Completely incorrect. If case law and legislation (at all levels of government) have resulted in a police state, then a police state is indeed compatible with American law, by very definition.
No. No it is not compatible. The thing about the laws in America is that some laws are "higher" or "stronger" or more relevant than other laws. The highest, strongest laws are the ones that were written as a basis for the country (America in this case) to even exist. Congress can pass whatever laws it wants and they become "real" laws upon passing. The Supreme Court is there to decide if any of these lesser laws are compatible with the greater laws. If not, if Congress really wants that law to be real, then it has to pass a law that explicitly nullifies the greater law.
In this instance, we are talking about the 4th Amendment. No law, no Executive Order, no regulation, etc can violate the 4th Amendment. If indeed America wants to pass a law that is incompatible with the 4th, it has to actually nullify the 4th with another constitutional Amendment.
And if you have some kind of problem with a court effectively legislating and deciding law, then you have a problem with English Common Law, which this country was explicitly founded upon.
Completely incorrect. If case law and legislation (at all levels of government) have resulted in a police state, then a police state is indeed compatible with American law, by very definition.
It's sad how poorly educated in basic Civics most Americans are these days.
Indeed. It is very sad how poorly educated in basic Civics most Americans are these days. Even Congress and the President seems to not have a good understanding despite pledging to uphold such laws. Your understanding is also deeply deficient. Perhaps you should educate yourself.
Okay my friend, you just picked a nasty fight; however, I first have to say this:
You are correct, they are still technically American citizens.
Now, on to the fight: America is explicitly NOT a democracy. Your attempt to frame my desires to the other extreme, an authoritarian government, is a common Fox news tactic. You should be ashamed.
America is a democratic Republic. It was formed that way EXPLICITLY to prevent mob rule. The Constitution and Bill of rights spell out what America is supposed to be. If there is a true need for the Republic to change the rules it is built upon, then there are mechanisms in place to do that... but THEY HAVE NOT BEEN USED.
Why? We can argue about that forever. Regardless, the basic rules from which all other rules rest upon, have not been changed. That means a police state is incompatible with American law; both in the letter and spirit of the law.
Slashdot Mirror
Such features were likely removed at the request of the NSA or other shadowy government agency.
So, since you seem to be a younger dude perhaps you could explain exactly what it is that happened 1990-2000 that made the field so undesirable to women.
I am not that person but perhaps women are smarter than men? That is when pay vs work hours went upside down. It is also when the work environment went to utter crap.
They should've made it one move, for a younger audience, made by a different director, without trying to make it a prequel and "foreshadowing" everything we've already seen.
While I agree with you for the most part, it definitely IS a prequel of sorts. That ring that turns Bilbo invisible really is the One Ring made by Sauron.
Um, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are very much nerd topics. We were the only ones reading them for decades. Dungeons and Dragons uses a LOT of lore from those books.
While your complaint may be valid for other movies, it is definitely NOT valid for this one.
I agree. The Scouring of the Shire should have been present. It does feel like its own story in way, so I gave a pass to the omission... but even still, it was a VERY important part of the story.
Certainly, Dol Goldur falls, but why does Galadriel appear so weak at particular moments throughout? It feels rather convenient that she falls to the ground weakened while the men (including the aged Saruman) fight it out amongst the Nazgul. While she may cast out Sauron from Dol Goldur, her appearance here felt very highly inconsistent, cycling between frail elf maiden and "beautiful and terrible as the dawn" elf queen.
This bothered me DEEPLY. She emits a powerful "spell", clears the area around Gandalf, picks him, moves him, and then is suddenly laying on the ground helpless as the Nazgul surround her. Why was she helpless?
But it gets even worse. Is that possible? Yes, yes it is. She suddenly stands up in the middle of the Nazgul and in front of Sauron (after laying there helpless, remember) and invokes a terrible power that is so strong, that it banishes Sauron from the world (but not not entirely because the One Ring binds him)... and she falls over helpless. Again. What the? I can't even begin to describe how incredibly lame that was.
Oh, and you also let the elves take center stage again over the dwarves by showing us an awesome phalanx setup, then having the elves just leap right over that and completely invalidate the phalanx altogether.
Yes. That was absolutely terrible too. Now what? The Elves are stuck on the wrong side of the awesome phalanx? No, everything mysteriously thins out.
Also, isn't Sting, Bilbo's sword, supposed to glow blue when orcs are about? Did that happen and I just missed it, or did you guys forget that important detail in post-production?
They did get this one right: It did glow blue and they showed it. It was a bit washed out in the "daylight" so I am not surprised that you missed it but I was specifically looking for it and therefore caught the moment that it did happen.
The rest of your analysis is exactly correct. Hell, all of it was correct except missing the blue glow. I just felt the need to point out exactly how excruciatingly bad those other two points were. I mean that they were movie wreckingly bad, not just bad. Ugh.
Still, not a terrible movie. Just very unsatisfying in some aspects.
If humans could fly, we'd consider it exercise and never do it.
-- origin unknown
Fuck that! If I could fly, I would be everywhere. Hercules would look like flabby sack of flesh compared to me. I would be doing loops, speed diving, flying to the tops of mountains, over volcanoes. I would have circled the planet itself a dozen times by now.
Flying would be AWESOME. Who cares if it is exercise?
In any case, unless the three letter agencies are withholding crucial information, there's not enough to go on here to point the fingers at Kim Jong-Un. I'm sure there are people who would blame him no matter what, because frankly he's an asshole of Goatse dimensions, but the evidence needs to be far more solid than this.
I fail to see why anyone cares about all of this. It is a simple criminal matter over a corporation that is well-known to have utterly pathetic security practices. Local police should be handling this matter until it is proven that interstate laws have been broken.
The only reason I personally care is so I can channel Nelson and say Ha Ha. There really is nothing exciting here, much less war worthy. Just wow.
I got my .sig from you. I am wondering where you got it from
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Mario Balotelli, a black football player with a Jewish mother is suspended a game and fined 25k pounds for posting an anti-racist picture about a multicultural Super Mario.
Twas a niggardly reaction indeed. :(
Not that I care if this gets modded badly, but just in case: http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Why are we so eager to overthrow their regime? Is democracy so sacred that we must ~force~ it on every country around the world?
It is not Democracy that must be spread. It is Freedom. Democracy is merely the method that seems best suited. If a dictatorship could ensure Freedom, then dictatorships would be spread.
What business is it of the US (and Hollywood) to decide what is the best system?
See above. If you can come up with a better system for promoting Freedom, then I am sure we can get to spreading it to places that have few Freedoms.
Up to 10% of those could be gainfully employed keeping the rest in order. By which I mean beating the shit out of them, mostly.
+1 Prophetic :/
I once knew an earthquake was about to hit about 5 minutes before it did. Of course, I have been in several earthquakes, and only the one ever gave me a clue before it happened.
If it matters, which it doesn't, I felt a "pressure" in my head. It grew almost palpable and then the earthquake happened which felt like a logical release of the pressure. A very odd experience. It was also one of the weirdest earthquakes that I ever felt. It was a rolling rather than a shaking. It felt a bit like being on a boat in the ocean.
Actually, the tea was just as valuable... once it was thrown overboard. Before that act, it was just worth some money.
Just sayin'
The "first world" problem is not about the cell phone. it is about the ONLY thing that you MIGHT have to worry about is a hospital trying to call you about your kid with a broken leg. That is the first world problem.
I think you missed the boat on this one. That is okay, your batting average is pretty high. :)
Which is also part of my smartphones as an addiction jeremiad.
Excellent. I have another word to add to my vocabulary. It is a shame I will only ever be able to use it in writing. Every time that I wax somewhat eloquent in spoken conversation, all I receive are blank stares. *sigh*
BTW, most of the people replying to you are morons if they can not understand what you are saying about how OTHER people seem to have a hard time without a cell signal. You were perfectly clear to me.
It is great news that where you live, everything is working correctly. This whole article is about places where everything is NOT working correctly.
I think you are missing this:
http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
No. Lizard Squad is itself down.
http://www.news.com.au/technol...
Apparently, they were taken down by hackers who were upset at Lizard Squad being a bunch of little pricks.
I fail to see the problem here. Yes, it would suck to wake up in the drunk tank with a bullet wound to the chest. I would say that the bullet wound was well-earned. Try being more responsible next time? The world is NOT a safe place.
Given a reasonable power source other than a star, they'd be better off living in interstellar space where no one is likely bother them.
Actually, a nebula would be the best place for such a "species" to congregate. There is plenty of raw material there and it does not take much work to gather it; unlike, say, an asteroid field or something where there are very large and hard chunks of discrete matter.
Also, asteroids only form in gravity wells. A robotic species would surely prefer to "live" at the tops of, or outside of, gravity wells and swoop down into them only for things that are valuable.
But instead what you get is an INTERFERENCE pattern, which can ONLY happen if the particles are going through BOTH HOLES.
To me, this is one of the most famous physics experiments of all time... but I have never been able to find out how far apart those holes are and at what distance the holes are apart that the single photon stops traveling through both.
It seems to me if the slits (holes?) have to be closer than the uncertainty of the position of the photon then we are dealing with something other than what we call "physical reality". Call it a sort of building block for "physical reality".
Hm?
Yes, they have. The Constitution has been amended dozens of times since it was written
We were specifically discussing:
The problem is that most Americans are perfectly happy with the police acting this way.
I was saying that it was against the letter and the spirit of the laws that all other laws in America are founded upon. Of course, none of the "dozens" (27 total) of amendments actually reverse or otherwise negate the 4th so your refutation of
but THEY HAVE NOT BEEN USED
falls amazingly flat.
and countless Supreme Court cases have further changed laws.
Changed is a charged word in this context. In all actuality, all that the judicial branch can do is strike down or remove. They can not add. At most, they can "clarify", but that does not create new law. That is reserved for Congress, aka the legislative branch.
Completely incorrect. If case law and legislation (at all levels of government) have resulted in a police state, then a police state is indeed compatible with American law, by very definition.
No. No it is not compatible. The thing about the laws in America is that some laws are "higher" or "stronger" or more relevant than other laws. The highest, strongest laws are the ones that were written as a basis for the country (America in this case) to even exist. Congress can pass whatever laws it wants and they become "real" laws upon passing. The Supreme Court is there to decide if any of these lesser laws are compatible with the greater laws. If not, if Congress really wants that law to be real, then it has to pass a law that explicitly nullifies the greater law.
In this instance, we are talking about the 4th Amendment. No law, no Executive Order, no regulation, etc can violate the 4th Amendment. If indeed America wants to pass a law that is incompatible with the 4th, it has to actually nullify the 4th with another constitutional Amendment.
And if you have some kind of problem with a court effectively legislating and deciding law, then you have a problem with English Common Law, which this country was explicitly founded upon.
Completely incorrect. If case law and legislation (at all levels of government) have resulted in a police state, then a police state is indeed compatible with American law, by very definition.
It's sad how poorly educated in basic Civics most Americans are these days.
Indeed. It is very sad how poorly educated in basic Civics most Americans are these days. Even Congress and the President seems to not have a good understanding despite pledging to uphold such laws. Your understanding is also deeply deficient. Perhaps you should educate yourself.
Okay my friend, you just picked a nasty fight; however, I first have to say this:
You are correct, they are still technically American citizens.
Now, on to the fight: America is explicitly NOT a democracy. Your attempt to frame my desires to the other extreme, an authoritarian government, is a common Fox news tactic. You should be ashamed.
America is a democratic Republic. It was formed that way EXPLICITLY to prevent mob rule. The Constitution and Bill of rights spell out what America is supposed to be. If there is a true need for the Republic to change the rules it is built upon, then there are mechanisms in place to do that... but THEY HAVE NOT BEEN USED.
Why? We can argue about that forever. Regardless, the basic rules from which all other rules rest upon, have not been changed. That means a police state is incompatible with American law; both in the letter and spirit of the law.
First, let me say thank you for publishing this information.
Second, the reason nobody else shares information is: Information is power. Power shared is power lost.
I forget who did that quote originally. Some claim it is from the Art of War.
Regardless, any power "lost" is surely gained back in spades with good will. You guys rock. :)