As badly as it was handled in RotJ, the essential idea was that the Emperor was overconfident in believing that as long as the shield generator was safe, the Imperial fleet could be picked off. Not a bad strategy, except for the whole Teddy Ruxpin assault. Now if he'd had fifty of his finest legions guarding that stupid building, the Empire would have would have wiped out the Rebellion.
It's been thirty years since I read the novelization, but there was an element introduced where the Emperor"s Force abilities allowed him to essentially control his forces, and when he died, they were thrown into chaos. A bit of a rip-off of the fall of Sauron, but at least it explains why this massive fleet went to shit.
I'm just glad Snoke is gone. If they tied in with a clone of Palpatine or something like that, it would have made more sense. This is why the whole "there are only two Sith" thing was just so fucking stupid, and really does hamstring things. Snoke might have made more sense if the Sith were a Dark Side Jedi order.
Look, you slap Star Wars on it and even the majority of big fans will go, bitching the whole way. What Disney bought from Lucas was a license to print money.
I thought it was okay but the clumsily constructed. It wasn't the worst of the franchise, pick the prequels for that, but it was merely tolerable. But it made a shit ton of money, so obviously a lot of people liked it.
Precisely speaking, Star Wars isn't SciFi, it's fantasy with SciFi elements. More importantly, it's a business, and making movies about minor characters is part of the reason Disney laid out the big bucks. I agree that it would be cool to have a Star Wars film that went beyond the known characters, and to a large extent Rogue One did that (except for Tarkin who played a significant role). But it's not likely to happen. There's too much at stake from a financial perspective for Disney to ever take such a chance. Even Rogue One was recut because if didn't fit within Disney's parameters.
I've read a number of pieces on the rumors about the collapse in papers like the Washington Post and the Guardian. The journalists are being cautious because North Korea is a very hard country to get solid evidence of anything out of, but those papers did report it, and certainly no merely as "hints".
I think it's doubtful he will even run in 2020, and even if he does, it's unlikely he'll be able to reproduce the conditions that lead to those narrow victories in a few key states.
What do numbers have to do with it? Much of China's vast army is relatively poorly armed. Taking on China in a land war would be very hard but not impossible for the US, particularly if the aims were relatively limited. China can threaten the US with nukes, but then again the US arsenal certainly outweighs China's. The US Navy and Airforce outgun China considerably, so numbers of soldiers doesn't seem an appropriate metric here.
The claim was that we need to find water on Mars to make it viable. The reality is that Mars has a lot of war, and a lot of it is fairly close to the surface, so it would be no more "mining" than a backhoe digging a trench. Pick your landing site correctly, and the water problem is solved. Frankly, water is the least of the problems for a manned mission to Mars. Getting there and back, surviving in a hostile environment with sufficient radiation shielding, maintaining a viable settlement for whatever the term of the mission (which surely is going to be at least four years round trip), that's the challenge. But water, if the right site is selected, that problem is pretty much solved.
This... so much this. It isn't security if you're only thinking about risk in one dimension. Yeah great, you get a segregated network, you isolate your critical network resources, but, um, you allow anonymous users on your network to access your file store?
My operating theory is to assume that everything can fail, so you secure your network, but assume someone somehow is going to get through anyways, so you'd better use ipsec to encrypt the traffic in case someone manages to hook something on to an open RJ45. But, for chrissakes, also imagine internal threats, such as maybe you don't want the kid in the mail room gaining access to the company's financial records.
This really is more a story about total incompetence. Why do I think this casino had a share "S:" and it's just wide open.
The problem here, as always, is creating a sort of artificial divide between a corporate bureaucracy and governmental bureaucracy. I've done a lot of work with government employees, and while there are issues, it never seems that much different than working with corporate bureaucracy. It's more about the general behavior of large organizations, than anything specific to public versus private organizations.
The villagers quaked, dropped their tools and ran for the safety of the caves in the hills, for that most feared of creatures, that most fearsome and angry of bearded protean gods, Richard Stallman, was stirring.
Limited liability doesn't mean unlimited liability, and courts most certainly can peal away at subsidiaries to get to the actual entity (person or corporation) who controls those subsidiaries. There's the whole concept of legal control of a company, and just because a corporation sets up a bunch of subsidiary companies, particularly where that corporation controls a majority stake, or as it sounds like in this case, holds all the ownership, the courts are almost certain to dispose of any notion that these subsidiaries are sufficiently independent that the holding company somehow cannot be pursued. This is hardly the first time someone has tried a shell game, and I have no idea why their attorneys would even imagine the court would long entertain such an argument. The judge will just request all corporate charters, look at who owns the shares and, if as I suspect, they're all held by the holding company or officers of the holding company, the argument will collapse.
Why did Mark David Chapman leave a full time job in Hawaii, fly all the way to New York and shoot John Lennon in the chest? You're trying to attribute rational thoughts to people who have become fundamentally irrational.
But none of the people really showed anything but superficial emotion. Not Heywood Floyd, not any of the people at the moon base. The only real emotions were by the proto-humans at the beginning. I can't believe that was anything but intentional acting direction that Kubrick was giving to Dullea. The emotion-bearing dialogue was saved strictly for HAL.
Cinematography is a dying art, sadly. Even a poor film can be saved by good visuals, and when good cinematography is matched with good direction, acting and scripts, well then you have magic.
It's hardly the only one of Kubrick's films that leaves people scratching their heads. There's probably more debate about whether there was anyone other than Jack in the Overlook Hotel, for instance, than about what 2001 is about. Really, it's not that hard a movie to interpret, it's just that it doesn't have a conventional plot, or rather it does, but the plot is in some ways incidental to the point of the movie.
Your entitled to your opinion. I thought the closing sequence was magnificent, the Star Child being the completion of the circle that the alien civilization had started with the Australopithecines at the beginning of the film.
Slashdot Mirror
As badly as it was handled in RotJ, the essential idea was that the Emperor was overconfident in believing that as long as the shield generator was safe, the Imperial fleet could be picked off. Not a bad strategy, except for the whole Teddy Ruxpin assault. Now if he'd had fifty of his finest legions guarding that stupid building, the Empire would have would have wiped out the Rebellion.
It's been thirty years since I read the novelization, but there was an element introduced where the Emperor"s Force abilities allowed him to essentially control his forces, and when he died, they were thrown into chaos. A bit of a rip-off of the fall of Sauron, but at least it explains why this massive fleet went to shit.
Jesus you're a stupid prat.
I'm just glad Snoke is gone. If they tied in with a clone of Palpatine or something like that, it would have made more sense. This is why the whole "there are only two Sith" thing was just so fucking stupid, and really does hamstring things. Snoke might have made more sense if the Sith were a Dark Side Jedi order.
Look, you slap Star Wars on it and even the majority of big fans will go, bitching the whole way. What Disney bought from Lucas was a license to print money.
I thought it was okay but the clumsily constructed. It wasn't the worst of the franchise, pick the prequels for that, but it was merely tolerable. But it made a shit ton of money, so obviously a lot of people liked it.
Precisely speaking, Star Wars isn't SciFi, it's fantasy with SciFi elements. More importantly, it's a business, and making movies about minor characters is part of the reason Disney laid out the big bucks. I agree that it would be cool to have a Star Wars film that went beyond the known characters, and to a large extent Rogue One did that (except for Tarkin who played a significant role). But it's not likely to happen. There's too much at stake from a financial perspective for Disney to ever take such a chance. Even Rogue One was recut because if didn't fit within Disney's parameters.
I've read a number of pieces on the rumors about the collapse in papers like the Washington Post and the Guardian. The journalists are being cautious because North Korea is a very hard country to get solid evidence of anything out of, but those papers did report it, and certainly no merely as "hints".
I think it's doubtful he will even run in 2020, and even if he does, it's unlikely he'll be able to reproduce the conditions that lead to those narrow victories in a few key states.
What do numbers have to do with it? Much of China's vast army is relatively poorly armed. Taking on China in a land war would be very hard but not impossible for the US, particularly if the aims were relatively limited. China can threaten the US with nukes, but then again the US arsenal certainly outweighs China's. The US Navy and Airforce outgun China considerably, so numbers of soldiers doesn't seem an appropriate metric here.
Newspapers have been doing this almost since the invention of advertiser-supported media. Why are you taking umbrage now?
The claim was that we need to find water on Mars to make it viable. The reality is that Mars has a lot of war, and a lot of it is fairly close to the surface, so it would be no more "mining" than a backhoe digging a trench. Pick your landing site correctly, and the water problem is solved. Frankly, water is the least of the problems for a manned mission to Mars. Getting there and back, surviving in a hostile environment with sufficient radiation shielding, maintaining a viable settlement for whatever the term of the mission (which surely is going to be at least four years round trip), that's the challenge. But water, if the right site is selected, that problem is pretty much solved.
You are aware I trust that there is water all over Mars
Look, you're wrong. Century dates start at the 1. I know your precious ego can't tolerate being wrong, but that's your problem.
This... so much this. It isn't security if you're only thinking about risk in one dimension. Yeah great, you get a segregated network, you isolate your critical network resources, but, um, you allow anonymous users on your network to access your file store?
My operating theory is to assume that everything can fail, so you secure your network, but assume someone somehow is going to get through anyways, so you'd better use ipsec to encrypt the traffic in case someone manages to hook something on to an open RJ45. But, for chrissakes, also imagine internal threats, such as maybe you don't want the kid in the mail room gaining access to the company's financial records.
This really is more a story about total incompetence. Why do I think this casino had a share "S:" and it's just wide open.
The problem here, as always, is creating a sort of artificial divide between a corporate bureaucracy and governmental bureaucracy. I've done a lot of work with government employees, and while there are issues, it never seems that much different than working with corporate bureaucracy. It's more about the general behavior of large organizations, than anything specific to public versus private organizations.
The villagers quaked, dropped their tools and ran for the safety of the caves in the hills, for that most feared of creatures, that most fearsome and angry of bearded protean gods, Richard Stallman, was stirring.
Some people will find new ways to evade existing laws, and thus existing laws will have to be amended or new laws passed - Actual Real Logic
Limited liability doesn't mean unlimited liability, and courts most certainly can peal away at subsidiaries to get to the actual entity (person or corporation) who controls those subsidiaries. There's the whole concept of legal control of a company, and just because a corporation sets up a bunch of subsidiary companies, particularly where that corporation controls a majority stake, or as it sounds like in this case, holds all the ownership, the courts are almost certain to dispose of any notion that these subsidiaries are sufficiently independent that the holding company somehow cannot be pursued. This is hardly the first time someone has tried a shell game, and I have no idea why their attorneys would even imagine the court would long entertain such an argument. The judge will just request all corporate charters, look at who owns the shares and, if as I suspect, they're all held by the holding company or officers of the holding company, the argument will collapse.
Why did Mark David Chapman leave a full time job in Hawaii, fly all the way to New York and shoot John Lennon in the chest? You're trying to attribute rational thoughts to people who have become fundamentally irrational.
Oh fuck that. There's no tinfoil hat for this poster. He's just a pathetic moron.
But none of the people really showed anything but superficial emotion. Not Heywood Floyd, not any of the people at the moon base. The only real emotions were by the proto-humans at the beginning. I can't believe that was anything but intentional acting direction that Kubrick was giving to Dullea. The emotion-bearing dialogue was saved strictly for HAL.
I'd put it in the top 5. It really is one of the great achievements of the cinema.
Cinematography is a dying art, sadly. Even a poor film can be saved by good visuals, and when good cinematography is matched with good direction, acting and scripts, well then you have magic.
It's hardly the only one of Kubrick's films that leaves people scratching their heads. There's probably more debate about whether there was anyone other than Jack in the Overlook Hotel, for instance, than about what 2001 is about. Really, it's not that hard a movie to interpret, it's just that it doesn't have a conventional plot, or rather it does, but the plot is in some ways incidental to the point of the movie.
Your entitled to your opinion. I thought the closing sequence was magnificent, the Star Child being the completion of the circle that the alien civilization had started with the Australopithecines at the beginning of the film.