I think you'll find they both first aired in the '70s. Admittedly at opposite ends but that just means U.F.O. is in more need of a reboot. Besides I needed a segway from Blake's 7 otherwise I would have had to post way down the thread where I probably wouldn't have gotten any responses.
If you can watch a show without cringing then it doesn't need a reboot. The only thing I come close to cringing at in B5 is the appallingly small crowds in the crowd scenes, and I did that at the time as well. I'd put B5 in the same category as the X-files, as in 'stands the test of time.' (Note: I do cringe at Scully's suits and the fact that the only time you see her wearing sensible shoes is in glimpses during scenes when she is running or about to run.)
I would love to see this with a Mike Hammer style voice over. Adams' comedy is based on taking tangents on the current events. To do that well you need a narrative tool. It just so happens that narrating in that way is traditionally how detective stories were told on screen. It's too perfect! Personally I actually liked Dirk Gently better than Hitch Hikers, I realise this makes me weird. Possibly I am alone in the universe on this point but whatever it would make a damn fine movie or even series.
I agree. I thought the BBC series was quite good and it survives quite well without needing too much of a reboot. I'd maybe start with Before the Tripods Came though.
I watched the first 10 episodes of the first Season on YouTube recently. The storyline is still good it is at times more cartoon than amine though, if you know what I mean. I think Robotech survives the ravages of age a bit better.
Last and First Men, interesting choice, but how would you tell the story on screen without a main protagonist to follow? You'd have to be creative, maybe use the style of a History Channel style documentary? I haven't read Star Maker yet but by all accounts its the only book like Last and First Men ever written so maybe you'd probably have to tell it in much the same way. Creatively, artistically these seem like really worthy choices, but I do wonder if any studio would ever consider risking telling a story like that.
That's disappointing. Just when I thought my hard earned BASIC programming skills were going to allow me to write unauthorised programs for the iPhone. Oh well.
The Beauty industry say that regardless of functionality, they will soon develop fingerprint smoothing hand cream; to go with pore-less look foundation. Soon you will be able to say goodbye to unsightly fingerprints.
Creationists say they are not surprised and that God gave us fingerprints because he wanted right wing governments to be able to keep track of unbelievers better. They note that no angel has ever been known to have finger-prints.
Palm readers everywhere say that this truth had already been revealed to them through years of study. Sceptics countered that it is easy to say that after the study has been released.
How about connecting it up in a big loop and making an antenna. I've got no idea what you might pick up but hook up a recording device and work it into your next techno track.
You are attempting to be funny but you speak the truth. Try couching it in this terminology:
If you are in science at postgraduate level chances are it isn't for the money it is because you really love it. It is part of who you are. Now, what affect do you think it has on one's self esteem if half the population (in particular those your sexual orientation dictates you are likely to become romantically involved with) don't understand your passion, or even are socially conditioned not to? Of course that is going to suck.
Note that it will also suck for the females who stick with it because opportunities for female-female bonding are also reduced. If your peers don't value what you do that sucks too.
I'm going to be equally unslashdot-like and accept your apology.
I can understand the points you were trying to make. Let me say that I am not a layer. In my capacity working for the university, some of my superiors were concerned predominantly with litigation in the case of an incident. I was made painfully aware that if the standards were not met then the university would be legally responsible. It was understood that having documentation that showed compliance with the standards would be a defence. Personally I was much more concerned with making sure the documentation was usable and that the labs were actually safe. Fortunately correct training was taking place, and the labs, largely safe; it was just that safety documentation was non-existent, so my job wasn't too difficult.
I think you are disagreeing with something subtly different to what I actually said. In any case, my experience wasn't that the University was ignoring safety, but rather they wanted to increase paperwork and implement more procedural guidelines in line with industry standards. The problem was that for individual researchers this just wasn't practical. The solution wasn't to ignore safety standards, rather it was to make sure that the minimum Australian Standards were met; but be novel in working out how to meet the standards cheaply and in a time efficient way for the researchers.
Comparing university labs with industry is not always appropriate. University labs (at least the ones frequented by post graduates) more frequently are involved in cutting edge research (and doing it with less money). When you are doing something for the first time safety procedures, obviously, can't always be as rigorously defined.
I spent 6 months (part time) writing safety documentation for a university physics/chemistry lab after I finished my PhD. The university was making a new safety push, and they wanted procedures that were equivalent to industry. That just wasn't possible. For the most part post graduate students are working on independent projects â" they don't have a whole team of people to perfect a procedure. If I'd given them what they wanted nobody would have finished a PhD inside 5 years (the (Australian) university demands 3). Instead general rather than specific rules had to be laid down, and the students and academics who use the labs have to think through the consequences of their experiments.
Really? Is Flatland about us? Sure, there's all that stuff about Victorian culture, but anyone who reads it today gets much more out of the concept of dimensions, which isn't about us.
I always read it as in deducing the 0th law and following it through that's what shut-down the robot. Basically that doing what was right for humanity had the ultimate consequence for the robot personally.
I think Asomov's whole point (at least initially, I haven't read the later books) was that robots would be safe (good for us) with the right programming. Fearing them was irrational. For this reason I find the move I, Robot to be an abomination.
Slashdot Mirror
Mod +1 insightful
I think you'll find they both first aired in the '70s. Admittedly at opposite ends but that just means U.F.O. is in more need of a reboot. Besides I needed a segway from Blake's 7 otherwise I would have had to post way down the thread where I probably wouldn't have gotten any responses.
If you can watch a show without cringing then it doesn't need a reboot. The only thing I come close to cringing at in B5 is the appallingly small crowds in the crowd scenes, and I did that at the time as well. I'd put B5 in the same category as the X-files, as in 'stands the test of time.' (Note: I do cringe at Scully's suits and the fact that the only time you see her wearing sensible shoes is in glimpses during scenes when she is running or about to run.)
I would love to see this with a Mike Hammer style voice over. Adams' comedy is based on taking tangents on the current events. To do that well you need a narrative tool. It just so happens that narrating in that way is traditionally how detective stories were told on screen. It's too perfect! Personally I actually liked Dirk Gently better than Hitch Hikers, I realise this makes me weird. Possibly I am alone in the universe on this point but whatever it would make a damn fine movie or even series.
I agree. I thought the BBC series was quite good and it survives quite well without needing too much of a reboot. I'd maybe start with Before the Tripods Came though.
I watched the first 10 episodes of the first Season on YouTube recently. The storyline is still good it is at times more cartoon than amine though, if you know what I mean. I think Robotech survives the ravages of age a bit better.
Last and First Men, interesting choice, but how would you tell the story on screen without a main protagonist to follow? You'd have to be creative, maybe use the style of a History Channel style documentary? I haven't read Star Maker yet but by all accounts its the only book like Last and First Men ever written so maybe you'd probably have to tell it in much the same way. Creatively, artistically these seem like really worthy choices, but I do wonder if any studio would ever consider risking telling a story like that.
Blake's 7 would be interesting, another British show from that era that might be worth another go around is U.F.O.
And by that you mean 110% +/- 10% (95% confidence interval) right?
Yep, I've know a few who I'm sure would like to be able to sweep their boyfriends off their feet quite literally.
That's disappointing. Just when I thought my hard earned BASIC programming skills were going to allow me to write unauthorised programs for the iPhone. Oh well.
In Related News
The Beauty industry say that regardless of functionality, they will soon develop fingerprint smoothing hand cream; to go with pore-less look foundation. Soon you will be able to say goodbye to unsightly fingerprints.
Creationists say they are not surprised and that God gave us fingerprints because he wanted right wing governments to be able to keep track of unbelievers better. They note that no angel has ever been known to have finger-prints.
Palm readers everywhere say that this truth had already been revealed to them through years of study. Sceptics countered that it is easy to say that after the study has been released.
How about connecting it up in a big loop and making an antenna. I've got no idea what you might pick up but hook up a recording device and work it into your next techno track.
You are attempting to be funny but you speak the truth. Try couching it in this terminology:
If you are in science at postgraduate level chances are it isn't for the money it is because you really love it. It is part of who you are. Now, what affect do you think it has on one's self esteem if half the population (in particular those your sexual orientation dictates you are likely to become romantically involved with) don't understand your passion, or even are socially conditioned not to? Of course that is going to suck.
Note that it will also suck for the females who stick with it because opportunities for female-female bonding are also reduced. If your peers don't value what you do that sucks too.
So much for my one-upmanship. /. won't accept Morse code!
I have a 5.25" Floppy in storage with a copy of DOS1.1 on it.
It takes time to rip something. A DVD can be grabbed as an afterthought. Too bad they didn't grab a book as an afterthought instead.
Bipolar? You just named another imaginary one.
You've got it wrong, it's monopolars that aren't real.
Speaking of great shareware games, can anyone tell me where to get a copy of Carl Ericson's 'Race'?
I loved that game but now can't find it and the 3.5" floppy I had it on died before I got around to buying a USB floppy drive.
I'm going to be equally unslashdot-like and accept your apology.
I can understand the points you were trying to make. Let me say that I am not a layer. In my capacity working for the university, some of my superiors were concerned predominantly with litigation in the case of an incident. I was made painfully aware that if the standards were not met then the university would be legally responsible. It was understood that having documentation that showed compliance with the standards would be a defence. Personally I was much more concerned with making sure the documentation was usable and that the labs were actually safe. Fortunately correct training was taking place, and the labs, largely safe; it was just that safety documentation was non-existent, so my job wasn't too difficult.
I think you are disagreeing with something subtly different to what I actually said. In any case, my experience wasn't that the University was ignoring safety, but rather they wanted to increase paperwork and implement more procedural guidelines in line with industry standards. The problem was that for individual researchers this just wasn't practical. The solution wasn't to ignore safety standards, rather it was to make sure that the minimum Australian Standards were met; but be novel in working out how to meet the standards cheaply and in a time efficient way for the researchers.
Comparing university labs with industry is not always appropriate. University labs (at least the ones frequented by post graduates) more frequently are involved in cutting edge research (and doing it with less money). When you are doing something for the first time safety procedures, obviously, can't always be as rigorously defined.
I spent 6 months (part time) writing safety documentation for a university physics/chemistry lab after I finished my PhD. The university was making a new safety push, and they wanted procedures that were equivalent to industry. That just wasn't possible. For the most part post graduate students are working on independent projects â" they don't have a whole team of people to perfect a procedure. If I'd given them what they wanted nobody would have finished a PhD inside 5 years (the (Australian) university demands 3). Instead general rather than specific rules had to be laid down, and the students and academics who use the labs have to think through the consequences of their experiments.
Really? Is Flatland about us? Sure, there's all that stuff about Victorian culture, but anyone who reads it today gets much more out of the concept of dimensions, which isn't about us.
I always read it as in deducing the 0th law and following it through that's what shut-down the robot. Basically that doing what was right for humanity had the ultimate consequence for the robot personally.
I think Asomov's whole point (at least initially, I haven't read the later books) was that robots would be safe (good for us) with the right programming. Fearing them was irrational. For this reason I find the move I, Robot to be an abomination.
I thought he was Cyberdyne Systems' Model 101.