Sega's Dreamcast media isn't really Double-Density, nor is it truly a copy protection.
The Dreamcast uses what's called a GD-ROM. The GD-ROM holds about a Gigabyte of data. The storage itself isn't copy protection, as it's simply a way to squeeze more data onto a disk.
The layout of a DC disc is broken up into two tracks. The first track consists solely of a four second audio snip - any kind, even silence. The second track is simply a CD/XA data track using a standard ISO9660 file system with the first 16 sectors of the track used as a bootstrap.
So basically, if you had a Gigabyte CD, you could make Dreamcast discs. GDROM discs are perfectly readable in standard CDROM drives; you need no special hardware to read them.
I have an Acer Extensa 501T. The specs are awfully similar to yours. It's a P266MMX, 64MB RAM, 4GB Hard Drive, 800x600 TFT, v90 Lucent Winmodem, 2 Cardbus slots, USB.
I run Slackware 7.1 on it, and it runs wonderfully. The only issue I've ever had with Linux on this thing was trying to get the Yamaha OPL3-based audio working. I had a problem where the computer would lock up at random intervals while playing audio. Turns out, this chipset has a bug somewhere in the PCI bus, and I found a kernel patch for it by accident.
Audio now works beautifully.
I have windows on this machine as well, but the absolute only reason I ever boot windows is to use my Skymap GPS software.
I've got APM enabled, and I have a nice Afterstep module swallowed into Wharf that gives me power stats. It's wonderful. (Plus, there are drivers available for the modem! I never use it, though.)
Um, The Scorpion King's army *was* defeated. Remember? After being beat, they walked through the desert "dying one by one" until the Scorpion King was the only one left standing. That's when he made the deal with Anubis. (And started gnawing on the scorpion.) He asked to spare his life and return with a more powerful army to crush his enemies.
This was all narrated at the beginning of the movie.
Jon, I think it's time you actually stepped back from reality for 2 hours, and watch movies for entertainment value.
I went to go see this movie last night, and I absolutely enjoyed it. While it certainly wasn't as good as the first, it does a damn good job of living up to, and surpassing sequel expectations. I will agree it was a bit heavy on the effects, but it was still a really good movie.
The black-and-white Old Hollywood versions of this story are 10 times creepier.
That's nice. The first "Mummy" and "Mummy Returns" weren't meant to be horror movies in the sense that "Frankenstein" is a horror movie, or the black and white "Mummy" is a horror movie. It's meant to be an action adventure movie with a bit of light-hearted comedy thrown in here and there.
If you are, say, nine years old, this is a fun way to spend 125 minutes -- although Hollywood execs would do well to ponder the reality that Baldur's Gate II and Everquest are far more imaginative and skillfully done.
Guess what? I'm 22, and I had a fun time. Plus, comparing a movie to computer games in the sense of which is more entertaining isn't right. They're two completely different mediums with opposing levels of interactivity. Each serves its purpose on the entertainment scale in a different way.
Adventurer Rick O'Connel (Brendan Fraser) survived the The Mummy and returns to the desert with his horny, fearless anthropologist wife Evelyn/Nefertiti (Rachel Weisz). A new twist on the Indiana Jones-style lone adventurer loner is that they also have a precocious kid, who gets snatched, abused and tortured repeatedly while his parents are groping one another. In the U.S., these people would get turned in, arrested, and end up on Dateline sobbing to some reporter.
Excessive tenderness, yes. Horny? Come on. Did you even watch the movie? You're over-analyzing the minor parts of the movie, and trying to criticize it for what it's not. (Other than kidnapping, I don't recall a single scene where Alex was tortured or abused. Stop making stuff up.)
Rick O'Connel has a wise-ass response to everything, even the vast forces of the underworld rising up to destroy the planet, but he is not fit to hold Indiana Jones' whip.
It's called HUMOR. That IS something people like to put in movies these days.
Here's a case where computer animation becomes the be-all and end-all for lazy filmmakers. In the Star Wars films, George Lucas makes lavish use of computer- generated characters and scenes, but they never overwhelm the intriguing characters at the center of the saga. He uses animation to imagine worlds, not replace story-telling and acting. Good use of animation, it turns out, requires discipline, and the people who made this movie didn't have any.
As I said earlier, yes, this film was heavy on the effects. However, other posters have already pointed out the flaw in this argument with 'Phantom Menace'.
There really is no plot one could safely describe, other than adventurer/explorers-dig-up-ancient-stuff-better-l eft-alone-and-mess-with-it, unleashing apocalyptic forces they can neither understand nor control.
Um, that IS a plot. Adding to the fact that the adventurer/explorers now have to find a way to undo what they have done, and save a few people in the process? Hello?
Generally, the armies of the Underworld are unleashed to destroy the earth (yet again), although it isn't clear why they ever went away.
Because they were defeated the first time around, genius! This is even *explained* in the narration at the beginning of the movie!
Out of nowhere in the middle of this movie, two Egyptian warrior-babes, a re-incarnated Nefertiti and Anck-Su Namum (Patricia Velasquez) launch into a series of utterly-out-of-place kick boxing, knife-wielding duels.
Again, you say "out of nowhere", but these scenes are explained REPEATEDLY throughout the story. Both women have been reincarnated from the past. One of the fights is a flashback, the other is in the current setting. Wake up, Jon.
death is illusory, to say the least; characters die and return to life so often it's impossible to keep track.
Are you trying to keep track of every soldier from both armies? There aren't that many main characters, dude.
Your review sounds like you missed the first half hour of the movie. It also takes on the tone that you went into the movie expecting to not be impressed, and had such a closed mind that even seeing the movie wouldn't change your mind.
Both "Mummy" and "Mummy Returns" didn't take themselves seriously. Why are you?
Phwew! At least this is Canada! Nothing like this could ever affect us down here in the land of the free, home of -- Oh wait. Yes, it could.
I'm sorry, but does anyone else notice that timothy has been complaining about everything he can at every opportunity? Especially Microsoft, but everything in general.
HELLO. Movie Ratings aren't a bad thing! Why are ratings on video games a bad thing? Responsible parents will like a system like this because their kids will obviously want to play games, and parents usually have no clue as to their content.
Have you looked at the video game rating system we have here in the states? It's pretty nice. It comes with a Letter rating, as well as a summery of items contained in the game that contributed to that rating. I, as a 21 year old gamer, even find this system useful for myself. It takes less than an inch of package space, and doesn't affect game play whatsoever.
SO WHY THE HELL ARE YOU COMPLAINING? I mean, Christ! It's not like they're storming into your house, pointing a semi-automatic weapon at your head, and READING the ratings to you. It's a fucking tiny little label on the packaging!
Get a Grip! Seriously. Complaining about stuff doesn't make you a "Cool Kid", it just makes you irritating. Especially when it's over trivial shit like this.
If it was a large-scale violation of basic rights, I can see complaining. If it was a move by the industry to stifle the consumers, or force their hand, then I can see bitching. But complaining about a fucking rating system? Jesus Christ, you need a hobby.
What you're not realizing is that people have the right to parody.
Fair Use specifically covers the fact that if something comes out, anyone who wishes to do a parody or satire of it is perfectly within the law to do it. The same goes for criticism or comment.
"The Phantom Menace" is undoubtedly a trademarked phrase, yet you see it in movie reviews. The name "Luke Skywalker" is a trademarked name, yet it appears in countless articles. Why? Because it's legal to do so.
And while you say that this demo will be used in seeking future employment, you're probably right. Except, the authors of the parody are NOT using the trademarked characters to obtain their employment - the employer is judging based on creativity and/or technical skill. These merits would be the same even if this wasn't a parody.
Tell me where this supposed 'Enterprise' would fit into Trek History?
The first Enterprise, NCC-1701 was commanded by Christopher Pike, Robert April, then James Kirk.
The second Enterprise, NCC-1701-A was commanded by James Kirk.
The Third, NCC-1701-B was commanded by Captain John Harriman.
NCC-1701-C was commanded by Captain Rachel Garrett.
NCC-1701-D and NCC-1701-E were commanded by Captain Jean-Luc Picard.
None of the official Star Trek documentation lists anything of a ship called "Enterprise" prior to NCC-1701, and after the Barbados Patrol Craft commisioned in 1981. They're trying to come off as saying that this new series is Pre-TOS, but it doesn't fit.
Then, there's the crew. The doctor is supposedly an Exotic Alien. Prior to TOS, people from Earth had limited contact with extra-sol life forms. "The Doctor has filled Sickbay with all sorts of bizarre medical instruments, alien plants and spores, and stasis chambers with small, living creatures." No doctor would create a sickbay like this. Even Dr. McCoy's sickbay was a clean, sterile environment.
Then, we have names. The author of the hoax couldn't come up with any creative names, so they stole the names from various Star Trek sources:
Sub-Commander T'Pau (Sub Commander? This isn't a Romulan Ship...)
Admiral Forrest (DeForest Kelley, or "Leonard McCoy")
Admiral Leonard (Leonard Nimoy, or "Spock")
Commander Williams (William Shatner, or "James Kirk")
Tos (Well known acronym for 'The Original Series')
Plus, the sheet goes on to say that shooting begins in May - before casting is even complete?! For a series that debuts at the end of the year? Not likely.
When asked about the rumors, a Microsoft spokesperson issued a firm denial and reiterated that "the Xbox will only include the Intel CPU and two Nvidia chips to handle graphics and sound capabilities, and it will have three times the power of any game console available at launch."
Don't you love how they tossed that little marketing tidbit in there?
The Robot (Edgar) falls over in the hall, making a loud clang. It's obvious it needs more fuel. It rolls into the nearest office, and straight up to a concerned lab tech who obviously heard the noise.
Tech: What on Earth was that, Edgar?
Edgar: Sugar.
Tech: I've never seen Sugar do that.
Edgar: Give me........Sugar.
The tech hands the Robot a bag of Domino Sugar.
Edgar: In Cubes.
The tech opens a drawer, and gives Edgar a cube of sugar.
Edgar: More.
The tech tilts the bag, giving the robot several cubes of sugar.
Edgar: More.
The tech tilts the bag farther, feeding a few more sugar cubes into the robot.
Edgar: Nnggggttttthhhhh.
The tech pours the entire contents of the sugar cube bag into the robot. The robot exits the office, probably off to capture the galaxy.
No one surviving a shipwreck appreciates that all the life jackets were there and in good order. They noticed when they weren't there when the Titanic sunk.
Um......pardon me, but what the FUCK are you talking about? The Titanic was equipped with more than enough life jackets. Several hundred extra than were needed.
It's was LIFEBOATS that were short.
PLEASE don't make analogies to stuff when you don't know the facts. Damn.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Not only that, He didn't write it.
on
The Floppy Awards
·
· Score: 2
It wasn't Jon that created the code, anyway. He was a member of MoRE (Masters of Reverse Engineering), and one of the other members was the one who actually wrote it.
Typical media story twisting made him out to be the author. Why? Because he was the one who got all the publicity. HE got questioned. HE got brought down to the police station. HE got his equipment seized. So, he must have been the one who did it....right?
Bzzzt. That only shows the ignorance of the modern media. The other members of MoRE are keeping low, and anonymous. Smart.
LinuxWorld: OK. Because I've seen conflicting media reports on that, and other things. Like, some say that you are 15, others say you are 16.
Jon Johansen: I'm 16 now, I was 15 when it happened... and the encryption code wasn't in fact written by me, but written by the German member. There seems to be a bit of confusion about that part.
Sheesh. Innocent until proven guilty? Not on this planet. Accurate media coverage? Wake me when it happens.
For those of you who don't want to go through the trouble of building an arcade cabinet, but still want one - I highly recommend Video Game auctions. You can get some cool stuff pretty cheap.
I went to one earlier this year, and they had *lots* of stuff. I bought myself a Mortal Kombat II arcade cabinet in excellent shape for $120, and it works fine. The only thing I needed to do to it to make it perfect was replace one of the joystick microswitches. The game works great, and it's currently in my apartment's living room.
You know, it might be prudent for you to completely understand the technology before posting something like this.
Funny thing is, it looks like somebody took a Volkswagen Passat toy and mounted it on a motor shaft. If you pause the video about 1/8 of the way through the movie, you can see the support holding the "hologram" up.
Again, you need to understand how the technology works. The real Passat toy *is* being held up by the motor shaft. However, the real car is INSIDE the machine, and the mirrors are projecting it's image to where the people are watching. You seem to think this is a computer generated image. This isn't Star Trek. It's a real object being projected a few feet away. Do you expect the real Car toy to be suspended in midair? Something has to hold it up.
Also, look at the car about 3/5 of the way through the video when then spokesman is supposed to be waving his hands through the car. He is actually casting a shadow on the car, which again leads one to believe there's something funny going on here.
Take a closer look. Yes, he is casting a shadow on the car. The lights above are also reflecting off the car. The car itself casts a shadow. Why? Because the *real* car is in full view of the lights! If you look at his shadow when it passes over the car, it doesn't line up. His fingers appear in the middle of where his palm should be, etc.
Kind of hard to believe that Wired would be duped by something like this.
Wired wasn't "duped" by "this". They were at Comdex. They saw the machine in person. They didn't watch a video and write an entire article on it. *CLUE*
Plus, 95 just sucks. No Windows 98 user would go back to 95 just for increased stability
Bullshit.
I'm running Windows 95 on all of my Windows boxen, except for my laptop which runs 98 (because I need the USB support. I'm full aware there's USB support under 95, but I couldn't get it to work.)
I own 95, 98, NT4, and 2000 Pro. Why do I run 95? It's twice as fast as 98, less bugs, and better stability. Anything that *I* would need runs just fine under 95. (Pretty much anything designed for 98 will run BETTER on 95.)
One day, I decided to upgrade my primary box to 98, but I told myself "The first crash I get, I'm going back to Windows 95."
98 crashed during the installation.
Microsoft is trying desperately to get me to upgrade. I was told that there's an update to Windows Media player available. So when I clicked "Upgrade", I got a window that said "Sorry, the new Windows Media Player was not made to run on Windows 95, and no new media player will be made for it." (Even though the new media player will probably run perfectly fine under 95, Microsoft would rather you upgrade. Screw them. The current version of media player works just fine.)
Sure, we'll be getting rid of a piece of space junk NOW, but what happens later on?
We'll be harassed by a huge energy cloud, controlled by a mechanical intelligence called M'ger (pronounced Meager), it'll kidnap Sinead O'Conner, and cause all sorts of problems for us while it searches for it's "Creator". Think of the future ramifications!
One thing I noticed about many of the comments, is referring to them as "3DFX".
When they got out of the Chip-Only business and started making video cards, they changed their name from "3DFX" to "3dfx" (No Joke.) Now that they're going BACK to the chip-only business, are they going to change back to "3DFX" and get a spiffy NEW logo? They're changing their market, so I can almost bet they'll change their logo again. I guess we'll see.
HOLLYWOOD (Variety) - Lucasfilm has inked an exclusive deal with Netcaster AtomFilms.com, which will give "Star Wars" geeks an official Internet home for their unofficial spoofs and documentaries.
And if LucasFilm doesn't like the UNOFFICIAL homes, they can go to hell. Parody is specifically outlined in Fair Use.
So all you Star Wars fans out there who have a great idea for a parody, put it out there. To hell with LucasFilm and their lawyers. George Lucas isn't motivated by anything but money. Take an excerpt from the article:
The two companies will bow the Star Wars Fan Film Network at the end of the month on AtomFilms' site, which will not only showcase the projects from unknowns but split any royalty payments based on the advertising and sponsorship revenues generated from the selected films.
The only reason LucasFilm is buddying up with them, is because it pops a little cash into their pocket. They're profiting from works they didn't create.
AtomFilms is accepting submissions, and a team of Lucasfilm judges will determine which shorts are placed online.
If a submission is rejected OR accepted, put it up elsewhere! Don't give LucasFilm money they don't deserve! I'm willing to bet the creators of the parodies and/or documentaries won't see a dime of that ad revenue. Sure, their work is online, but you don't need AtomFilms/LucasFilm for that.
Oh please. Anyone who has ever forwarded a spam E-Mail to abuse@psi.net or abuse@uu.net knows this. You usually get a first reply stating:
Your e-mail has been received by [insert isp]'s abuse investigations. You have been assigned ticket number #SpammersAreCoolXorAndRot13. DO NOT REPLY TO THIS E-MAIL. It's automated. So shut up.
Then, almost like clockwork, a follow up letter arrives:
This is a follow-up letter from [insert isp]'s abuse team. Ticket number #SpammersAreCoolXorAndRot13 has been dealt with according to our AUP, and action has been taken against the individual.
This means, the "individual" gets a gentle slap on the wrist (if that), and they go about their business. PSI, UUNet, and all the big ISPs don't give a rat's ass about spammers. That's why a *very* good percentage of spam you get has 38.x.x.x or 63.x.x.x in the headers. 38 being PSI, and 63 being UUNet. Try it sometime. It'll suprise you.
As for this article, it comes as no suprise to me. UUNet and PSINet have been known to forward your abuse@ complaints to the spammers themselves, and are both well-known spam harbors.
DIE SPAMMERS, DIE. (Oh, and please take a few Spam-Friendly ISPs down with you. Okay?)
Slashdot Mirror
The Dreamcast uses what's called a GD-ROM. The GD-ROM holds about a Gigabyte of data. The storage itself isn't copy protection, as it's simply a way to squeeze more data onto a disk.
The layout of a DC disc is broken up into two tracks. The first track consists solely of a four second audio snip - any kind, even silence. The second track is simply a CD/XA data track using a standard ISO9660 file system with the first 16 sectors of the track used as a bootstrap.
So basically, if you had a Gigabyte CD, you could make Dreamcast discs. GDROM discs are perfectly readable in standard CDROM drives; you need no special hardware to read them.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
I run Slackware 7.1 on it, and it runs wonderfully. The only issue I've ever had with Linux on this thing was trying to get the Yamaha OPL3-based audio working. I had a problem where the computer would lock up at random intervals while playing audio. Turns out, this chipset has a bug somewhere in the PCI bus, and I found a kernel patch for it by accident.
Audio now works beautifully.
I have windows on this machine as well, but the absolute only reason I ever boot windows is to use my Skymap GPS software.
I've got APM enabled, and I have a nice Afterstep module swallowed into Wharf that gives me power stats. It's wonderful. (Plus, there are drivers available for the modem! I never use it, though.)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
You kids have it so easy.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
At no point did anything suddenly disappear without explanation.
Scorpion King leads his army in battle.
Scorpion King and his army is defeated.
Scorpion King's army wanders the desert and slowly dies.
Scorpion King makes pact with Anubis to spare his life in exchange for his soul, and to prevail over his enemies.
Anubis provides the Scorpion King with a powerful army.
Scorpion King goes on to annihilate his enemies.
Mission completed, Anubis reclaims the Scorpion King's army and soul, per the arrangement.
What's not to understand? It was all explained quite clearly.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
This was all narrated at the beginning of the movie.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
I went to go see this movie last night, and I absolutely enjoyed it. While it certainly wasn't as good as the first, it does a damn good job of living up to, and surpassing sequel expectations. I will agree it was a bit heavy on the effects, but it was still a really good movie.
The black-and-white Old Hollywood versions of this story are 10 times creepier.
That's nice. The first "Mummy" and "Mummy Returns" weren't meant to be horror movies in the sense that "Frankenstein" is a horror movie, or the black and white "Mummy" is a horror movie. It's meant to be an action adventure movie with a bit of light-hearted comedy thrown in here and there.
If you are, say, nine years old, this is a fun way to spend 125 minutes -- although Hollywood execs would do well to ponder the reality that Baldur's Gate II and Everquest are far more imaginative and skillfully done.
Guess what? I'm 22, and I had a fun time. Plus, comparing a movie to computer games in the sense of which is more entertaining isn't right. They're two completely different mediums with opposing levels of interactivity. Each serves its purpose on the entertainment scale in a different way.
Adventurer Rick O'Connel (Brendan Fraser) survived the The Mummy and returns to the desert with his horny, fearless anthropologist wife Evelyn/Nefertiti (Rachel Weisz). A new twist on the Indiana Jones-style lone adventurer loner is that they also have a precocious kid, who gets snatched, abused and tortured repeatedly while his parents are groping one another. In the U.S., these people would get turned in, arrested, and end up on Dateline sobbing to some reporter.
Excessive tenderness, yes. Horny? Come on. Did you even watch the movie? You're over-analyzing the minor parts of the movie, and trying to criticize it for what it's not. (Other than kidnapping, I don't recall a single scene where Alex was tortured or abused. Stop making stuff up.)
Rick O'Connel has a wise-ass response to everything, even the vast forces of the underworld rising up to destroy the planet, but he is not fit to hold Indiana Jones' whip.
It's called HUMOR. That IS something people like to put in movies these days.
Here's a case where computer animation becomes the be-all and end-all for lazy filmmakers. In the Star Wars films, George Lucas makes lavish use of computer- generated characters and scenes, but they never overwhelm the intriguing characters at the center of the saga. He uses animation to imagine worlds, not replace story-telling and acting. Good use of animation, it turns out, requires discipline, and the people who made this movie didn't have any.
As I said earlier, yes, this film was heavy on the effects. However, other posters have already pointed out the flaw in this argument with 'Phantom Menace'.
There really is no plot one could safely describe, other than adventurer/explorers-dig-up-ancient-stuff-better-
Um, that IS a plot. Adding to the fact that the adventurer/explorers now have to find a way to undo what they have done, and save a few people in the process? Hello?
Generally, the armies of the Underworld are unleashed to destroy the earth (yet again), although it isn't clear why they ever went away.
Because they were defeated the first time around, genius! This is even *explained* in the narration at the beginning of the movie!
Out of nowhere in the middle of this movie, two Egyptian warrior-babes, a re-incarnated Nefertiti and Anck-Su Namum (Patricia Velasquez) launch into a series of utterly-out-of-place kick boxing, knife-wielding duels.
Again, you say "out of nowhere", but these scenes are explained REPEATEDLY throughout the story. Both women have been reincarnated from the past. One of the fights is a flashback, the other is in the current setting. Wake up, Jon.
death is illusory, to say the least; characters die and return to life so often it's impossible to keep track.
Are you trying to keep track of every soldier from both armies? There aren't that many main characters, dude.
Your review sounds like you missed the first half hour of the movie. It also takes on the tone that you went into the movie expecting to not be impressed, and had such a closed mind that even seeing the movie wouldn't change your mind.
Both "Mummy" and "Mummy Returns" didn't take themselves seriously. Why are you?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
(Note: Aqua may be a word meaning water, but it's still a trademark of Apple Computer Corp. Hell, so is "Apple" for that matter.)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
I'm sorry, but does anyone else notice that timothy has been complaining about everything he can at every opportunity? Especially Microsoft, but everything in general.
HELLO. Movie Ratings aren't a bad thing! Why are ratings on video games a bad thing? Responsible parents will like a system like this because their kids will obviously want to play games, and parents usually have no clue as to their content.
Have you looked at the video game rating system we have here in the states? It's pretty nice. It comes with a Letter rating, as well as a summery of items contained in the game that contributed to that rating. I, as a 21 year old gamer, even find this system useful for myself. It takes less than an inch of package space, and doesn't affect game play whatsoever.
SO WHY THE HELL ARE YOU COMPLAINING? I mean, Christ! It's not like they're storming into your house, pointing a semi-automatic weapon at your head, and READING the ratings to you. It's a fucking tiny little label on the packaging!
Get a Grip! Seriously. Complaining about stuff doesn't make you a "Cool Kid", it just makes you irritating. Especially when it's over trivial shit like this.
If it was a large-scale violation of basic rights, I can see complaining. If it was a move by the industry to stifle the consumers, or force their hand, then I can see bitching. But complaining about a fucking rating system? Jesus Christ, you need a hobby.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Fair Use specifically covers the fact that if something comes out, anyone who wishes to do a parody or satire of it is perfectly within the law to do it. The same goes for criticism or comment.
"The Phantom Menace" is undoubtedly a trademarked phrase, yet you see it in movie reviews. The name "Luke Skywalker" is a trademarked name, yet it appears in countless articles. Why? Because it's legal to do so.
And while you say that this demo will be used in seeking future employment, you're probably right. Except, the authors of the parody are NOT using the trademarked characters to obtain their employment - the employer is judging based on creativity and/or technical skill. These merits would be the same even if this wasn't a parody.
They have every right to show off their skills.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Sony included a version of BASIC to evade that tax; They didn't port Linux.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Tell me where this supposed 'Enterprise' would fit into Trek History?
The first Enterprise, NCC-1701 was commanded by Christopher Pike, Robert April, then James Kirk.
The second Enterprise, NCC-1701-A was commanded by James Kirk.
The Third, NCC-1701-B was commanded by Captain John Harriman.
NCC-1701-C was commanded by Captain Rachel Garrett.
NCC-1701-D and NCC-1701-E were commanded by Captain Jean-Luc Picard.
None of the official Star Trek documentation lists anything of a ship called "Enterprise" prior to NCC-1701, and after the Barbados Patrol Craft commisioned in 1981. They're trying to come off as saying that this new series is Pre-TOS, but it doesn't fit.
Then, there's the crew. The doctor is supposedly an Exotic Alien. Prior to TOS, people from Earth had limited contact with extra-sol life forms. "The Doctor has filled Sickbay with all sorts of bizarre medical instruments, alien plants and spores, and stasis chambers with small, living creatures." No doctor would create a sickbay like this. Even Dr. McCoy's sickbay was a clean, sterile environment.
Then, we have names. The author of the hoax couldn't come up with any creative names, so they stole the names from various Star Trek sources:
Sub-Commander T'Pau (Sub Commander? This isn't a Romulan Ship...)
Admiral Forrest (DeForest Kelley, or "Leonard McCoy")
Admiral Leonard (Leonard Nimoy, or "Spock")
Commander Williams (William Shatner, or "James Kirk")
Tos (Well known acronym for 'The Original Series')
Plus, the sheet goes on to say that shooting begins in May - before casting is even complete?! For a series that debuts at the end of the year? Not likely.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Don't you love how they tossed that little marketing tidbit in there?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Tech: What on Earth was that, Edgar?
Edgar: Sugar.
Tech: I've never seen Sugar do that.
Edgar: Give me........Sugar.
The tech hands the Robot a bag of Domino Sugar.
Edgar: In Cubes.
The tech opens a drawer, and gives Edgar a cube of sugar.
Edgar: More.
The tech tilts the bag, giving the robot several cubes of sugar.
Edgar: More.
The tech tilts the bag farther, feeding a few more sugar cubes into the robot.
Edgar: Nnggggttttthhhhh.
The tech pours the entire contents of the sugar cube bag into the robot. The robot exits the office, probably off to capture the galaxy.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Um......pardon me, but what the FUCK are you talking about? The Titanic was equipped with more than enough life jackets. Several hundred extra than were needed.
It's was LIFEBOATS that were short.
PLEASE don't make analogies to stuff when you don't know the facts. Damn.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Typical media story twisting made him out to be the author. Why? Because he was the one who got all the publicity. HE got questioned. HE got brought down to the police station. HE got his equipment seized. So, he must have been the one who did it....right?
Bzzzt. That only shows the ignorance of the modern media. The other members of MoRE are keeping low, and anonymous. Smart.
LinuxWorld: OK. Because I've seen conflicting media reports on that, and other things. Like, some say that you are 15, others say you are 16.
Jon Johansen: I'm 16 now, I was 15 when it happened
Sheesh. Innocent until proven guilty? Not on this planet. Accurate media coverage? Wake me when it happens.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
I went to one earlier this year, and they had *lots* of stuff. I bought myself a Mortal Kombat II arcade cabinet in excellent shape for $120, and it works fine. The only thing I needed to do to it to make it perfect was replace one of the joystick microswitches. The game works great, and it's currently in my apartment's living room.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Funny thing is, it looks like somebody took a Volkswagen Passat toy and mounted it on a motor shaft. If you pause the video about 1/8 of the way through the movie, you can see the support holding the "hologram" up.
Again, you need to understand how the technology works. The real Passat toy *is* being held up by the motor shaft. However, the real car is INSIDE the machine, and the mirrors are projecting it's image to where the people are watching. You seem to think this is a computer generated image. This isn't Star Trek. It's a real object being projected a few feet away. Do you expect the real Car toy to be suspended in midair? Something has to hold it up.
Also, look at the car about 3/5 of the way through the video when then spokesman is supposed to be waving his hands through the car. He is actually casting a shadow on the car, which again leads one to believe there's something funny going on here.
Take a closer look. Yes, he is casting a shadow on the car. The lights above are also reflecting off the car. The car itself casts a shadow. Why? Because the *real* car is in full view of the lights! If you look at his shadow when it passes over the car, it doesn't line up. His fingers appear in the middle of where his palm should be, etc.
Kind of hard to believe that Wired would be duped by something like this.
Wired wasn't "duped" by "this". They were at Comdex. They saw the machine in person. They didn't watch a video and write an entire article on it. *CLUE*
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Bullshit.
I'm running Windows 95 on all of my Windows boxen, except for my laptop which runs 98 (because I need the USB support. I'm full aware there's USB support under 95, but I couldn't get it to work.)
I own 95, 98, NT4, and 2000 Pro. Why do I run 95? It's twice as fast as 98, less bugs, and better stability. Anything that *I* would need runs just fine under 95. (Pretty much anything designed for 98 will run BETTER on 95.)
One day, I decided to upgrade my primary box to 98, but I told myself "The first crash I get, I'm going back to Windows 95."
98 crashed during the installation.
Microsoft is trying desperately to get me to upgrade. I was told that there's an update to Windows Media player available. So when I clicked "Upgrade", I got a window that said "Sorry, the new Windows Media Player was not made to run on Windows 95, and no new media player will be made for it." (Even though the new media player will probably run perfectly fine under 95, Microsoft would rather you upgrade. Screw them. The current version of media player works just fine.)
95 sucks, but it sucks a LOT less than 98.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Sure, we'll be getting rid of a piece of space junk NOW, but what happens later on?
We'll be harassed by a huge energy cloud, controlled by a mechanical intelligence called M'ger (pronounced Meager), it'll kidnap Sinead O'Conner, and cause all sorts of problems for us while it searches for it's "Creator". Think of the future ramifications!
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
When they got out of the Chip-Only business and started making video cards, they changed their name from "3DFX" to "3dfx" (No Joke.) Now that they're going BACK to the chip-only business, are they going to change back to "3DFX" and get a spiffy NEW logo? They're changing their market, so I can almost bet they'll change their logo again. I guess we'll see.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Have you not seen Jurassic Park? Apparently you didn't get the oh-so subtle reference.
Grab a clue before you post crap like this.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
I *KNOW* THIS!
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
And if LucasFilm doesn't like the UNOFFICIAL homes, they can go to hell. Parody is specifically outlined in Fair Use.
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V114/N 12/ briefs1.12w.html
So all you Star Wars fans out there who have a great idea for a parody, put it out there. To hell with LucasFilm and their lawyers. George Lucas isn't motivated by anything but money. Take an excerpt from the article:
The two companies will bow the Star Wars Fan Film Network at the end of the month on AtomFilms' site, which will not only showcase the projects from unknowns but split any royalty payments based on the advertising and sponsorship revenues generated from the selected films.
The only reason LucasFilm is buddying up with them, is because it pops a little cash into their pocket. They're profiting from works they didn't create.
AtomFilms is accepting submissions, and a team of Lucasfilm judges will determine which shorts are placed online.
If a submission is rejected OR accepted, put it up elsewhere! Don't give LucasFilm money they don't deserve! I'm willing to bet the creators of the parodies and/or documentaries won't see a dime of that ad revenue. Sure, their work is online, but you don't need AtomFilms/LucasFilm for that.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Your e-mail has been received by [insert isp]'s abuse investigations. You have been assigned ticket number #SpammersAreCoolXorAndRot13. DO NOT REPLY TO THIS E-MAIL. It's automated. So shut up.
Then, almost like clockwork, a follow up letter arrives:
This is a follow-up letter from [insert isp]'s abuse team. Ticket number #SpammersAreCoolXorAndRot13 has been dealt with according to our AUP, and action has been taken against the individual.
This means, the "individual" gets a gentle slap on the wrist (if that), and they go about their business. PSI, UUNet, and all the big ISPs don't give a rat's ass about spammers. That's why a *very* good percentage of spam you get has 38.x.x.x or 63.x.x.x in the headers. 38 being PSI, and 63 being UUNet. Try it sometime. It'll suprise you.
As for this article, it comes as no suprise to me. UUNet and PSINet have been known to forward your abuse@ complaints to the spammers themselves, and are both well-known spam harbors.
DIE SPAMMERS, DIE. (Oh, and please take a few Spam-Friendly ISPs down with you. Okay?)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?