Unfortunatly, the brainiacs at the Edwards Irvine Spectrum 21 Megaplex in Irvine, California decided that this month and next would be a good time to transform the theater with the digital projector into a "stadium" theater. That means no SW:AOTC in digital there.
Well, Christians don't try to subvert the legal process to their own ends, at least not in an organized way. LRon's bunch, on the other hand, view lawsuits as a club to beat their critics with.
They just move the preists around that commit crimes and have multi-million dollar lobbying groups to affect change.
Cults are just religions with fewer members. In the US, it's not really the government's job to deal with religions unless they're a threat to something - they've ignored the big religions for this long, why not ignore Scientology? How is what they do different than what Christianity and Islam do?
(Yes, this is probably flamebait. No, I don't care.)
I don't know if you've noticed, but many places in the world regularly flood, and have for many thousands of years. The most likely explaination is minor, not major, flooding.
Yes, but if said "great" flood is supposed to be linked to the Noah's Ark story, it would follow that it was a global issue. Regardless, it's still good information.
Perhaps if he's looking for such evidence FOR a flood he should also check out the mountains of evidence AGAINST a global flood. While this document deals largely with the Noah's Ark myth, it has a good deal of information on the geological and logistical problems associated.
"Thinking outside the box" could allude to deception. It could (and usually does) also allude to something that's different. That's all. Good or bad, it's different.
Sure, this happens in capitalism. But it's not necessary to or specificly limited to Capitalism. It happens with greed and "we're adhering to the letter of the law" style practices. This can happen in any economic system.
People lie, cheat, and steal. It's a fact of life. But it's silly to blame an economic system because some people exploit others in order to benefit through said economic system.
Why would a site that is so anti-MPAA give a hairy orcs ass what the MPAA thinks of a movie?
First, the site isn't anti-MPAA. Many of it's users are. The site is a news and discussion forum.
Second, not all Slashdot readers are Anti-MPAA. Some don't give your hairy orc's ass about the issue. Some, like me, realize the issues and have come to an internal compromise. Some users haven't bought a movie ticket or DVD in years. You have to realize that there are many thousands of posters, and not all have the same opinions about issues.
Sure, industry awards are a circle jerk. So? Don't watch. Go to your local independant movie house and Fight The Power.
Just remember,/. is a community, but few communities hold a single viewpont on any given issue.
The Gothic Imagination (Gothic literature through the ages)
TV Culture and Society
Science Fiction in Multicultural America
Also the class I taught in Winter 2000:
Kresge 80: Star Trek and Popular Culture.
Beyond the interesting classes, students are also given the opportunity to create their own study programs (with help and support of the faculty), and choose equally challanging exit requirements to fill in for a thesis or seminar. I chose to teach a class. UCSC is a great place to go if you realize real life doesn't mean sticking exclusivly to classics and hard sciences.
I was going to just mod you down as troll. Then I read your sig. While I still think this is a troll, I'll bite:
In all likelyhood, they're the equivalent of the underwater soap-carving courses that engineering students take to "satisfy" the arts requirement component of their curriculum.
I'm assuming you haven't taken this class, and you likely don't know the class' content other than seeing "The Simpsons" in the title. After 4 years at a university, I can tell you that you never know what a class is going to be like until you take it.
In the story, who's speaking up about the course? A biology major -- a geek who is apparently too dim to recognize that a broad education is valuable, and has chosen to take a flakey course to satisfy a requisite with minimum effort.
Again, you have no idea if the course is "flakey", or the intentions of the student. And isn't taking a philosophy class broadening his education?
Why on earth are the universities catering to this sort of limited, lazy thinking?
If you think all education that incorperates aspects of popular culture (especially intelligent, witty aspects) are "limited" and "lazy", I hope you enjoy living in your ivory tower, cut off from the rest of the world.
The job of the university should be to create a graduation class of people who are going to lead the advancement of the arts and sciences. To do so, these people are going to require a broad education, one that has challenged them on all fronts and forced them to think creatively and thoughtfully. They need to be people who are eternally curious, doggedly determined, and, above all, brilliant.
Actually, my point in going to college was to learn new things. I got a broad education, and learned a lot. I think I'm a better person for having gone to college, though I don't think I was necessarly meant to "lead the advancement of the arts and sciences". Regardless, a class on The Simpsons and Philosophy hardly brings down the system.
Serving up Simpsons swill as some sort of philosophy substitute is not doing anyone a favour.
It's not meant as a substitute; the university education is varied when you look deeply at a specific major course of study and the classes involved. Just because the simpsons is newer than some of your classical philosophers doesn't mean it doesn't belong as part of a wider course. I doubt this class is replacing one on something more "important".
Perhaps the standards have dropped too low. Maybe you don't have to be particularly smart to enter university any more: you just have to have money.
Anymore? You never needed to be particularly smart at many schools (including some ivy league schools). Money could, and still does, buy your way in. Don't fool yourself into thinking this is something new.
Perhaps there's too much emphasis in the job market on post-secondary degrees.
True.
And the past three decade's emphasis on sciences as the be-all and end-all goal of education is certainly at fault: we need more technically-trained people (ie. college-level job training) than we need science/structure-trained people.
Now you're just making things up. The liberal arts education has gotten more flack in the last 30 years than anything else on the university level. A science education is still largely seen as a "true" education.
"The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D'oh! of Homer," indeed. Next up: "An Overview of Political Philosophies: The Travels of Xena, Warrior Princess."
When I was in college, I created and taught a class on "Star Trek and Popular Culuture" as my exit requirement. You know what? The educational foundation of the school didn't crumble. There's room for the inclusion of pop culture in a university education.
...the sole reason I own them is so that I can watch those movies whenever I want. The extras mean nothing to me. You should not be shocked by this.
I'm not shocked, really, but surprised. You've been able to watch a movie whenever you want for the last 20 years with VHS. That's nothing new. While I understand that some people don't care about features, it really is one of the main reasons DVD is popular.
However, ST: The Motion Picture was released about 3 weeks ago.
I'm dumb, and forgot to mention this in my original post. All the films came a couple years ago, without a big deal release or anything special. Interestingly enough, the new version of ST:TMP hasn't been available at many standard locations like Target, K-mart or Walmart (at least around here in Souther California).
There I was thinking that one bought them in order to be able to watch the film at will, with surround sound and a high-resolution picture. Silly me.
I hope you're trolling. The appeal of the DVD is not only in the quality of the film, but in the scene access and ability to pack on extras that couldn't be easily integrated with a VHS copy, such as director/actor commentary, multiple angles (for you porn fans out there) and language selection.
BTW the first movie is out on DVD now and they did a pretty good job with the re-release.
All of the films are out on DVD (and have been for a while), they're just not worth buying because they contain no bonus features to speak of. Strange, considering Trek is a franchise that specifically caters to a crowd/fanbase that would love to see behind the scenes, technical, and "making of" documentaries.
"Atheist" is no more a position of faith than saying "I don't believe in 1000 foot tall purple gorrilas" is a statement of faith. Based on available evidence and the self-controdictions of most Gods (I'm using a Christian definition here), being an atheist is accepting the evidence for what it's worth.
Since all sorts of data collection happens anyway (grocery store cards, credit cards, direct and indirect marketing, profiles, etc.) I'd much rather have targeted advertising than not. While we do need to be very careful about what kind of information is shared, I really don't care that my grocery store knows I buy vegetarian foods, and I'd rather see ads for Morningstar Farms or Boca than for Foster Farms or Tyson.
Ah...I wasn't aware. Very interesting. All the Keno games I've seen in Vegas use balls for their main game, I'm not sure about the side games, though I'm sure most do, even if it's behind the scenes. What I find facinating is that no one in Las Vegas has ever matched 12 of 12 or better (keno is a pick as many as you want from 80, and 20 are picked, for those unfamilar with the game). The odds do suck, but how many billions of keno games have been played in the last 50 years?
Regarding my above post, numbers divisible by three add up to three, six, nine, or another number divisible by three, not just three. Sorry for the quick post =) The Good Reverend I'm different, just like everybody else.
Slashdot Mirror
Let me know if you ever become disillusioned with the whole franchise. I'll be happy to take that poster off your hands.
Unfortunatly, the brainiacs at the Edwards Irvine Spectrum 21 Megaplex in Irvine, California decided that this month and next would be a good time to transform the theater with the digital projector into a "stadium" theater. That means no SW:AOTC in digital there.
Kinda depends on your definition of "Reverend".
Well, Christians don't try to subvert the legal process to their own ends, at least not in an organized way. LRon's bunch, on the other hand, view lawsuits as a club to beat their critics with.
They just move the preists around that commit crimes and have multi-million dollar lobbying groups to affect change.
Welcome to the world of religion. They're rarely easy to present in an orderly, intelligent manner because they're more than likely collected myths.
Cults are just religions with fewer members. In the US, it's not really the government's job to deal with religions unless they're a threat to something - they've ignored the big religions for this long, why not ignore Scientology? How is what they do different than what Christianity and Islam do?
(Yes, this is probably flamebait. No, I don't care.)
I don't know if you've noticed, but many places in the world regularly flood, and have for many thousands of years. The most likely explaination is minor, not major, flooding.
Yes, but if said "great" flood is supposed to be linked to the Noah's Ark story, it would follow that it was a global issue. Regardless, it's still good information.
That doesn't mean there was a global flood, that just means there were lots of little floods.
Perhaps if he's looking for such evidence FOR a flood he should also check out the mountains of evidence AGAINST a global flood. While this document deals largely with the Noah's Ark myth, it has a good deal of information on the geological and logistical problems associated.
I think you're a troll. I'll bite anyway.
"Thinking outside the box" could allude to deception. It could (and usually does) also allude to something that's different. That's all. Good or bad, it's different.
Sure, this happens in capitalism. But it's not necessary to or specificly limited to Capitalism. It happens with greed and "we're adhering to the letter of the law" style practices. This can happen in any economic system.
People lie, cheat, and steal. It's a fact of life. But it's silly to blame an economic system because some people exploit others in order to benefit through said economic system.
Why would a site that is so anti-MPAA give a hairy orcs ass what the MPAA thinks of a movie?
/. is a community, but few communities hold a single viewpont on any given issue.
First, the site isn't anti-MPAA. Many of it's users are. The site is a news and discussion forum.
Second, not all Slashdot readers are Anti-MPAA. Some don't give your hairy orc's ass about the issue. Some, like me, realize the issues and have come to an internal compromise. Some users haven't bought a movie ticket or DVD in years. You have to realize that there are many thousands of posters, and not all have the same opinions about issues.
Sure, industry awards are a circle jerk. So? Don't watch. Go to your local independant movie house and Fight The Power.
Just remember,
Does that mean that it is actually _illegal_ to eat crayons, glue, boogers, pieces of carpet, lead paint chips and dirt?
Eh, no, because those things are not sold as food. By "legally consume", the article is implying that it can be legally sold as food.
I wonder how much of that profit represents 1-click licensing fees.
Jaded? Party of one? Your table's ready...
There have also been:
The Films of John Carpenter (A literature class)
The Gothic Imagination (Gothic literature through the ages)
TV Culture and Society
Science Fiction in Multicultural America
Also the class I taught in Winter 2000:
Kresge 80: Star Trek and Popular Culture.
Beyond the interesting classes, students are also given the opportunity to create their own study programs (with help and support of the faculty), and choose equally challanging exit requirements to fill in for a thesis or seminar. I chose to teach a class. UCSC is a great place to go if you realize real life doesn't mean sticking exclusivly to classics and hard sciences.
I was going to just mod you down as troll. Then I read your sig. While I still think this is a troll, I'll bite:
In all likelyhood, they're the equivalent of the underwater soap-carving courses that engineering students take to "satisfy" the arts requirement component of their curriculum.
I'm assuming you haven't taken this class, and you likely don't know the class' content other than seeing "The Simpsons" in the title. After 4 years at a university, I can tell you that you never know what a class is going to be like until you take it.
In the story, who's speaking up about the course? A biology major -- a geek who is apparently too dim to recognize that a broad education is valuable, and has chosen to take a flakey course to satisfy a requisite with minimum effort.
Again, you have no idea if the course is "flakey", or the intentions of the student. And isn't taking a philosophy class broadening his education?
Why on earth are the universities catering to this sort of limited, lazy thinking?
If you think all education that incorperates aspects of popular culture (especially intelligent, witty aspects) are "limited" and "lazy", I hope you enjoy living in your ivory tower, cut off from the rest of the world.
The job of the university should be to create a graduation class of people who are going to lead the advancement of the arts and sciences. To do so, these people are going to require a broad education, one that has challenged them on all fronts and forced them to think creatively and thoughtfully. They need to be people who are eternally curious, doggedly determined, and, above all, brilliant.
Actually, my point in going to college was to learn new things. I got a broad education, and learned a lot. I think I'm a better person for having gone to college, though I don't think I was necessarly meant to "lead the advancement of the arts and sciences". Regardless, a class on The Simpsons and Philosophy hardly brings down the system.
Serving up Simpsons swill as some sort of philosophy substitute is not doing anyone a favour.
It's not meant as a substitute; the university education is varied when you look deeply at a specific major course of study and the classes involved. Just because the simpsons is newer than some of your classical philosophers doesn't mean it doesn't belong as part of a wider course. I doubt this class is replacing one on something more "important".
Perhaps the standards have dropped too low. Maybe you don't have to be particularly smart to enter university any more: you just have to have money.
Anymore? You never needed to be particularly smart at many schools (including some ivy league schools). Money could, and still does, buy your way in. Don't fool yourself into thinking this is something new.
Perhaps there's too much emphasis in the job market on post-secondary degrees.
True.
And the past three decade's emphasis on sciences as the be-all and end-all goal of education is certainly at fault: we need more technically-trained people (ie. college-level job training) than we need science/structure-trained people.
Now you're just making things up. The liberal arts education has gotten more flack in the last 30 years than anything else on the university level. A science education is still largely seen as a "true" education.
"The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D'oh! of Homer," indeed. Next up: "An Overview of Political Philosophies: The Travels of Xena, Warrior Princess."
When I was in college, I created and taught a class on "Star Trek and Popular Culuture" as my exit requirement. You know what? The educational foundation of the school didn't crumble. There's room for the inclusion of pop culture in a university education.
...the sole reason I own them is so that I can watch those movies whenever I want. The extras mean nothing to me. You should not be shocked by this.
I'm not shocked, really, but surprised. You've been able to watch a movie whenever you want for the last 20 years with VHS. That's nothing new. While I understand that some people don't care about features, it really is one of the main reasons DVD is popular.
However, ST: The Motion Picture was released about 3 weeks ago.
I'm dumb, and forgot to mention this in my original post. All the films came a couple years ago, without a big deal release or anything special. Interestingly enough, the new version of ST:TMP hasn't been available at many standard locations like Target, K-mart or Walmart (at least around here in Souther California).
There I was thinking that one bought them in order to be able to watch the film at will, with surround sound and a high-resolution picture. Silly me.
I hope you're trolling. The appeal of the DVD is not only in the quality of the film, but in the scene access and ability to pack on extras that couldn't be easily integrated with a VHS copy, such as director/actor commentary, multiple angles (for you porn fans out there) and language selection.
BTW the first movie is out on DVD now and they did a pretty good job with the re-release.
All of the films are out on DVD (and have been for a while), they're just not worth buying because they contain no bonus features to speak of. Strange, considering Trek is a franchise that specifically caters to a crowd/fanbase that would love to see behind the scenes, technical, and "making of" documentaries.
"Atheist" is no more a position of faith than saying "I don't believe in 1000 foot tall purple gorrilas" is a statement of faith. Based on available evidence and the self-controdictions of most Gods (I'm using a Christian definition here), being an atheist is accepting the evidence for what it's worth.
Here come the flames...
Without a doubt, the joke is British and Americans won't get it.
Since all sorts of data collection happens anyway (grocery store cards, credit cards, direct and indirect marketing, profiles, etc.) I'd much rather have targeted advertising than not. While we do need to be very careful about what kind of information is shared, I really don't care that my grocery store knows I buy vegetarian foods, and I'd rather see ads for Morningstar Farms or Boca than for Foster Farms or Tyson.
The Good Reverend
I'm different, just like everybody else.
Ah...I wasn't aware. Very interesting. All the Keno games I've seen in Vegas use balls for their main game, I'm not sure about the side games, though I'm sure most do, even if it's behind the scenes. What I find facinating is that no one in Las Vegas has ever matched 12 of 12 or better (keno is a pick as many as you want from 80, and 20 are picked, for those unfamilar with the game). The odds do suck, but how many billions of keno games have been played in the last 50 years?
The Good Reverend
I'm different, just like everybody else.
Regarding my above post, numbers divisible by three add up to three, six, nine, or another number divisible by three, not just three. Sorry for the quick post =)
The Good Reverend
I'm different, just like everybody else.