You could write a clone that isn't a 100% copy of the original and rename it as to avoid any trademark issues. That is pretty much what the other clones in the KDE software compilation do.
When you sync your phone, iPod, iPad, etc. the binary is cached on your hard drive. In theory you can copy that binary and redistribute it. It just isn't readily apparent to people.
And while Apple eventually kicked out VLC over the whole GPL debate, they have kept in apps like Wesnoth, which is also under a GPL license.
You can argue that what is selling the Kinect is a massive marketing campaign, and software like Dance Central. And again, Dance Central is a rip-off of Groove, which also came out in 2003.
So ripping off an 7 year old product but doing more to market it is the most innovative product of the year?
I find your signature to be very relevant to your post.
Young Earth Creationists are a minority of crack-pots who believe we must reject scientific evidence because it might contradict the Bible. The odd thing is that they have a simpleton's reading comprehension of the Bible. If in Genesis it says one day this occured, and another day this occured, then those days must be concurrent in a week! It is impossible that it took hundreds of millions of years. Note, the same camps also read Revelations and see that the Church isn't mentioned, so the only logical conclusion is that all Christians disappear and "poof" in a Rapture, despite the fact that a Rapture is not once mentioned in the Bible.
87% of the world claims a religion according to Gallup in conducting a world-wide poll. Only 8% of the world's population said there was no God at all.
You're liking 5,999,857,283 out to all be crackpots just because a small minority is.
Apparently you are correct, that we mock what we don't understand.
My take on ID has always been the pairing of an initial Creator with evolution. Reading over the Wikipedia page on ID, I read that the purpose of ID is merely to propose that there was an intentional Creator.
ID is a theory if you subscribe to the notion that the testing of a cosmological constant as proof.
Someone actually just suggested recently that the cosmological constant is not really zero, and that the new value isn't optimal for the creation of new galaxies, and thusly disproves ID. That may be, but to suggest that, you are in turn suggesting there are valid tests for ID.
You're saying it can never be tested for. That is hard to say.
The concept that all mass in the universe simply poofed into existance doesn't exactly pass Occam's Razor either.
You're suggesting that God doesn't exist because we haven't seen him.
Then clearly the Higgs Boson, Dark Matter and Dark Energy are akin to the FSM.
And to be clear, I'm not suggesting anyone has to believe in God. I'm saying that most of these theories are untestable and unproven, and all are unlikely in their own way. To suggest one is absolute fact and the other is absolute fiction without proof is wrong, regardless of which way you go.
God is a postulate. He can't really be tested for or proven. And postulates have their place in scientific theories.
Everyone has the right to individually decide if they believe in a Creator or not. But flatly denying that it is even a possiblity is as much as an unfounded leath of faith as flatly denying he must exist.
The proper scientific approach is to suggest it could be valid as a theory, but can't be tested at this time. Suggesting otherwise is zealoty all the same.
So, I need to let go of the device with one of my hands to use the front touchscreen, obscuring the screen despite the fact that I have dual-analog joysticks and a rear touchpad.
And we're still talking about a 5" screen, so plenty of people will be touching the wrong command.
Put roms on flash storage, and run all your emulators on that. It is a Linux-handheld device largely designed to run emulators for tons of classic systems.
Spy Kids and Once Upon a Time in Mexico Rodriguez?
He is a very efficient filmmaker. He shoots very quickly. He has a very good grasp of cinematography. I don't think he has a very good idea of what makes a good film. In trying to follow up El Mariachi, he made it progressively worse with each new take.
Watch one of the director's cuts of T2 and note how James Cameron was fighting for surreal dream sequences that would have destroyed the pacing of thankfully the amazing action film the studio delivered. Cameron also took two horror franchises and turned them both into action franchises. I'm not sure he understands the differences. He also this week ripped Hollywood for how unoriginal their scripts are, despite the fact that his writing is uninspired and derivative.
Tarantino is all style and no substance. There is always at least one scene in each film he drags out way too long. He is also a plagiarist and a self-professed auteur. He believes in taking credit for the work of others.
Tony and Ridley Scott have turned in a few great films, but they blend together because they can't seem to escape the same style of filmmaking. They are one-trick ponies.
Gilliam is very up and down, probably because he takes so many risks.
Several of Lars von Trier's films have been universally panned as terrible movies. You're going to have a hard time convincing me you're one of the five best directors working today when you constantly put out bombs.
I've never seen a Chan Woo Park film. I can't really comment.
I won't rip Scorcese, Eastwood or Fincher. They're amazing, but second-tier directors in my book. Aronofsky made my top 5.
Nolan's LOWEST rated movie on Rotten Tomatoes (an aggregate of all reviews) is The Prestige at 75%. The "twist" end turned some people off, but again it was masterfully directed. For my money, it was the single best movie that year.
That was supposedly a favor to the recently deceased Kubrick, where Spielberg finished Kubrick's project, as Kubrick wanted it done.
Some of Spielberg's later films don't have great endings, but those are all script flaws. Spielberg's track record also isn't perfect overall, but his resume is still pretty hard to ignore.
And his overall skills as a director are just top-notch.
Pretty much any movie on the planet has plot holes. The question is whether or not the holes are so glaring they overshadow the rest of the film.
The Death Star didn't really need 30 minutes to navigate around a planet when they could have just blown it up, and then blown up the moon base immediately after.
Ultimately I don't have a problem with leaking fakes, so long as you're not intentionally trying to distribute viruses or anything like that.
Apparently Batman: Arkham Asylum had a leaked version that was basically a demo. There was a level you couldn't get past because of an intentionally crippled feature. When people were screaming and complaining about a "bug" in the product they purchased on the support forums, they were informed that "bug" was only present in an intentionally leaked version on torrent sites. They knew people were going to pirate their game, and they tried to get in front of it and turn it into a scenario where the pirated copy did act as a demo, perhaps convincing people to pay for the real thing.
But the bigger issue is that game studios, music companies and Hollywood still haven't seen the bigger picture.
It is to your benefit to pirate rather than deal with DRM nightmares. And corporate America is more focused on punishing their customers than trying to attract new ones.
I apologize if I wasn't clear. When I said, "If that wasn't one of the five best directing perforances this year..." I was referring to the fact that it didn't get nominated for Best Director.
I haven't seen Black Swan or The King's Speech yet. Let's assume most of the movies nominated were worth all the buzz. That doesn't change the fact that Inception is a masterfully crafted movie.
The beginning of the movie is chaotic with no explanation, and Nolan very slowly unravels his tale while interspersing action sequences without making them feel obligatory. He also edits between multiple layers cleanly. He tells a complex story without overt exposition. This is far harder than most people realize. He gets great performances from a number of actors, and pushes the visual barrier as well.
In the age of CGI and mammoth budgets, finding a way to show people something on film they've never seen is becoming harder and harder.
If that wasn't one of the five best directing perforances this year, then I don't know what to say.
For my money, Nolan is one of the best directors working today (along with Aranofsky, Boyle, Soderberg, and Spielberg) and this may have been his finest movie to date, and his most impressive directing work specifically.
And before someone goes screaming about the brilliance of the Cohen Brothers, or Clint Eastwood, or Polanski or anything like that, those guys can put together a fine drama. But their overall directorial acumen does pale compared to someone like Nolan.
Sitting around and giving answers to minor questions isn't entertaining. Half of my friends complained there was too much plot and not enough action, and the other half complained it was mindless action with not enough plot. Trying to strike a good balance is always tricky.
They didn't explain how the pager was reached. We're assuming the computer powering the grid had ZERO connection to any other computer, phone line or data line. Yet this is the most important project in Flynn's life. You're saying he didn't replicate data or do backups somehwere? There was probably one connection to the outside world that they weren't aware of most of the time. And it took them ages to find that connection, or figure out how to do anything with it. We're talking about an ancient computer on a custom OS interacting with the rest of the world. This is a minute detail. Does this destroy the viewing experience of the movie?
Why was the son pointed out? Because they're planning sequels.
What was the Big Lebowski talk? What specifically are you talking about? Are you asking why Flynn was a bit of a hippy, then you missed the overall message of the movie.
The first movie was akin to Star Wars, rebels fighting against this evil empire of sorts. That wasn't the case here. This was Flynn struggling to come to terms with his own creation, and why the pursuit of perfection isn't always a good idea. Obsession with the big picture means losing sight of everything else.
Flynn was afraid to do anything initially, and really he was right. He could accept that he and his son was trapped, or he could risk releasing an army on the real world. In the big picture, not taking that risk is the way to go. But it makes for a boring movie, so we have the brash son to push the story along.
The fact that it was a special lightcycle is the reason that people identified Flynn Jr.
As for consulting any computer scientists, the movie is consistent with its own universe. Programs in the grid have personalities, despite being programs. They represent the people who programmed them. Tron is a representative of Alan for instance. This isn't realistic, but reality is boring.
Who says the drunken hobo wasn't a zombie process? He lost his parent thread (job) and is unemployed, siphoning away resources while sitting there and doing nothing.
Who says the nightclub wasn't a repreesntation of Flynn's playlist?
If Flynn can fix anything immediately, then he is God. He is never in danger and there is no dramatic tension. They establish when he fixes Qora, that it is difficult for him to do so, and that it takes time.
Learn how to spell Lebowski and weak, then come back with your next round of pointless criticisms that have little to nothing to do with whether or not the film was entertaining or meaningful.
And here are 187 OpenOffice bugs and feature requests that received at least 25 votes.
Some of these are already addressed in LibreOffice, but I think it would be a nice starting point in a community fork to address the things the community obviously wanted, but Sun didn't prioritize.
Slashdot Mirror
Publicly saying you're concerned and don't have confidence in your company is a sure-fire way to drive your stock price through the roof.
You could write a clone that isn't a 100% copy of the original and rename it as to avoid any trademark issues. That is pretty much what the other clones in the KDE software compilation do.
I agree. The issue is whether or not they're responding in a timely manner to the request.
When you sync your phone, iPod, iPad, etc. the binary is cached on your hard drive. In theory you can copy that binary and redistribute it. It just isn't readily apparent to people.
And while Apple eventually kicked out VLC over the whole GPL debate, they have kept in apps like Wesnoth, which is also under a GPL license.
You can play games with just a camera? Good thing their competition hadn't already invented that way back in 2003.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EyeToy
You can argue that what is selling the Kinect is a massive marketing campaign, and software like Dance Central. And again, Dance Central is a rip-off of Groove, which also came out in 2003.
So ripping off an 7 year old product but doing more to market it is the most innovative product of the year?
There are Facebook and iPhone versions of Oregon Trail.
And within KDE and Gnome you have clones/remakes of other classic games like Pac-Man and Tetris.
Honestly, I'm a little surprised the KDE-Edu project doesn't include remakes of Oregon Trail, Lemonade Stand and Carmen Sandiego.
I find your signature to be very relevant to your post.
Young Earth Creationists are a minority of crack-pots who believe we must reject scientific evidence because it might contradict the Bible. The odd thing is that they have a simpleton's reading comprehension of the Bible. If in Genesis it says one day this occured, and another day this occured, then those days must be concurrent in a week! It is impossible that it took hundreds of millions of years. Note, the same camps also read Revelations and see that the Church isn't mentioned, so the only logical conclusion is that all Christians disappear and "poof" in a Rapture, despite the fact that a Rapture is not once mentioned in the Bible.
87% of the world claims a religion according to Gallup in conducting a world-wide poll. Only 8% of the world's population said there was no God at all.
You're liking 5,999,857,283 out to all be crackpots just because a small minority is.
Apparently you are correct, that we mock what we don't understand.
My take on ID has always been the pairing of an initial Creator with evolution. Reading over the Wikipedia page on ID, I read that the purpose of ID is merely to propose that there was an intentional Creator.
ID is a theory if you subscribe to the notion that the testing of a cosmological constant as proof.
Someone actually just suggested recently that the cosmological constant is not really zero, and that the new value isn't optimal for the creation of new galaxies, and thusly disproves ID. That may be, but to suggest that, you are in turn suggesting there are valid tests for ID.
You're saying it can never be tested for. That is hard to say.
The concept that all mass in the universe simply poofed into existance doesn't exactly pass Occam's Razor either.
You're suggesting that God doesn't exist because we haven't seen him.
Then clearly the Higgs Boson, Dark Matter and Dark Energy are akin to the FSM.
And to be clear, I'm not suggesting anyone has to believe in God. I'm saying that most of these theories are untestable and unproven, and all are unlikely in their own way. To suggest one is absolute fact and the other is absolute fiction without proof is wrong, regardless of which way you go.
God is a postulate. He can't really be tested for or proven. And postulates have their place in scientific theories.
Everyone has the right to individually decide if they believe in a Creator or not. But flatly denying that it is even a possiblity is as much as an unfounded leath of faith as flatly denying he must exist.
The proper scientific approach is to suggest it could be valid as a theory, but can't be tested at this time. Suggesting otherwise is zealoty all the same.
So, I need to let go of the device with one of my hands to use the front touchscreen, obscuring the screen despite the fact that I have dual-analog joysticks and a rear touchpad.
And we're still talking about a 5" screen, so plenty of people will be touching the wrong command.
This seems extraneous to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GP2X_Caanoo
Put roms on flash storage, and run all your emulators on that. It is a Linux-handheld device largely designed to run emulators for tons of classic systems.
Ben Heck makes his own custom portable Atari 2600 systems all the time.
http://benheck.com/
Why does this need to make calls when they're also releasing a Playstation phone?
I thought Sony was making comments about HD gaming, and comparable to the PS3. Why the odd resolution?
And if you're using the buttons/analog controls in conjuction with the rear touchpad, what is the purpose of the screen being multi-touch as well?
For someone so arrogant in assuming the rest of the world can't comprehend a movie, you didn't comprehend my post.
Spy Kids and Once Upon a Time in Mexico Rodriguez?
He is a very efficient filmmaker. He shoots very quickly. He has a very good grasp of cinematography. I don't think he has a very good idea of what makes a good film. In trying to follow up El Mariachi, he made it progressively worse with each new take.
Watch one of the director's cuts of T2 and note how James Cameron was fighting for surreal dream sequences that would have destroyed the pacing of thankfully the amazing action film the studio delivered. Cameron also took two horror franchises and turned them both into action franchises. I'm not sure he understands the differences. He also this week ripped Hollywood for how unoriginal their scripts are, despite the fact that his writing is uninspired and derivative.
Tarantino is all style and no substance. There is always at least one scene in each film he drags out way too long. He is also a plagiarist and a self-professed auteur. He believes in taking credit for the work of others.
Tony and Ridley Scott have turned in a few great films, but they blend together because they can't seem to escape the same style of filmmaking. They are one-trick ponies.
Gilliam is very up and down, probably because he takes so many risks.
Several of Lars von Trier's films have been universally panned as terrible movies. You're going to have a hard time convincing me you're one of the five best directors working today when you constantly put out bombs.
I've never seen a Chan Woo Park film. I can't really comment.
I won't rip Scorcese, Eastwood or Fincher. They're amazing, but second-tier directors in my book. Aronofsky made my top 5.
Nolan's LOWEST rated movie on Rotten Tomatoes (an aggregate of all reviews) is The Prestige at 75%. The "twist" end turned some people off, but again it was masterfully directed. For my money, it was the single best movie that year.
Wow. Anyone who must have liked it must have been so stupid as to not comprehend the movie?
That isn't an elitist statement. Your opinion is such irrefutable fact that others who feel differently must be intellectually challenged.
That was supposedly a favor to the recently deceased Kubrick, where Spielberg finished Kubrick's project, as Kubrick wanted it done.
Some of Spielberg's later films don't have great endings, but those are all script flaws. Spielberg's track record also isn't perfect overall, but his resume is still pretty hard to ignore.
And his overall skills as a director are just top-notch.
Pretty much any movie on the planet has plot holes. The question is whether or not the holes are so glaring they overshadow the rest of the film.
The Death Star didn't really need 30 minutes to navigate around a planet when they could have just blown it up, and then blown up the moon base immediately after.
Does that make Star Wars a terrible film?
Ultimately I don't have a problem with leaking fakes, so long as you're not intentionally trying to distribute viruses or anything like that.
Apparently Batman: Arkham Asylum had a leaked version that was basically a demo. There was a level you couldn't get past because of an intentionally crippled feature. When people were screaming and complaining about a "bug" in the product they purchased on the support forums, they were informed that "bug" was only present in an intentionally leaked version on torrent sites. They knew people were going to pirate their game, and they tried to get in front of it and turn it into a scenario where the pirated copy did act as a demo, perhaps convincing people to pay for the real thing.
But the bigger issue is that game studios, music companies and Hollywood still haven't seen the bigger picture.
It is to your benefit to pirate rather than deal with DRM nightmares. And corporate America is more focused on punishing their customers than trying to attract new ones.
I apologize if I wasn't clear. When I said, "If that wasn't one of the five best directing perforances this year..." I was referring to the fact that it didn't get nominated for Best Director.
I haven't seen Black Swan or The King's Speech yet. Let's assume most of the movies nominated were worth all the buzz. That doesn't change the fact that Inception is a masterfully crafted movie.
The beginning of the movie is chaotic with no explanation, and Nolan very slowly unravels his tale while interspersing action sequences without making them feel obligatory. He also edits between multiple layers cleanly. He tells a complex story without overt exposition. This is far harder than most people realize. He gets great performances from a number of actors, and pushes the visual barrier as well.
In the age of CGI and mammoth budgets, finding a way to show people something on film they've never seen is becoming harder and harder.
If that wasn't one of the five best directing perforances this year, then I don't know what to say.
For my money, Nolan is one of the best directors working today (along with Aranofsky, Boyle, Soderberg, and Spielberg) and this may have been his finest movie to date, and his most impressive directing work specifically.
And before someone goes screaming about the brilliance of the Cohen Brothers, or Clint Eastwood, or Polanski or anything like that, those guys can put together a fine drama. But their overall directorial acumen does pale compared to someone like Nolan.
Sitting around and giving answers to minor questions isn't entertaining. Half of my friends complained there was too much plot and not enough action, and the other half complained it was mindless action with not enough plot. Trying to strike a good balance is always tricky.
They didn't explain how the pager was reached. We're assuming the computer powering the grid had ZERO connection to any other computer, phone line or data line. Yet this is the most important project in Flynn's life. You're saying he didn't replicate data or do backups somehwere? There was probably one connection to the outside world that they weren't aware of most of the time. And it took them ages to find that connection, or figure out how to do anything with it. We're talking about an ancient computer on a custom OS interacting with the rest of the world. This is a minute detail. Does this destroy the viewing experience of the movie?
Why was the son pointed out? Because they're planning sequels.
What was the Big Lebowski talk? What specifically are you talking about? Are you asking why Flynn was a bit of a hippy, then you missed the overall message of the movie.
The first movie was akin to Star Wars, rebels fighting against this evil empire of sorts. That wasn't the case here. This was Flynn struggling to come to terms with his own creation, and why the pursuit of perfection isn't always a good idea. Obsession with the big picture means losing sight of everything else.
Flynn was afraid to do anything initially, and really he was right. He could accept that he and his son was trapped, or he could risk releasing an army on the real world. In the big picture, not taking that risk is the way to go. But it makes for a boring movie, so we have the brash son to push the story along.
The fact that it was a special lightcycle is the reason that people identified Flynn Jr.
As for consulting any computer scientists, the movie is consistent with its own universe. Programs in the grid have personalities, despite being programs. They represent the people who programmed them. Tron is a representative of Alan for instance. This isn't realistic, but reality is boring.
Who says the drunken hobo wasn't a zombie process? He lost his parent thread (job) and is unemployed, siphoning away resources while sitting there and doing nothing.
Who says the nightclub wasn't a repreesntation of Flynn's playlist?
If Flynn can fix anything immediately, then he is God. He is never in danger and there is no dramatic tension. They establish when he fixes Qora, that it is difficult for him to do so, and that it takes time.
Learn how to spell Lebowski and weak, then come back with your next round of pointless criticisms that have little to nothing to do with whether or not the film was entertaining or meaningful.
And here are 187 OpenOffice bugs and feature requests that received at least 25 votes.
Some of these are already addressed in LibreOffice, but I think it would be a nice starting point in a community fork to address the things the community obviously wanted, but Sun didn't prioritize.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/buglist.cgi?resort=1&Submit%20query=Submit%20query;issue_type=DEFECT;issue_type=ENHANCEMENT;issue_type=FEATURE;issue_type=PATCH;issue_status=UNCONFIRMED;issue_status=NEW;issue_status=STARTED;issue_status=REOPENED;issue_status=RESOLVED;email1=;emailtype1=exact;emailassigned_to1=1;email2=;emailtype2=exact;emailreporter2=1;issueidtype=include;issue_id=;changedin=;votes=25;chfieldfrom=;chfieldto=;chfieldvalue=;short_desc=;short_desc_type=allwords;long_desc=;long_desc_type=allwords;issue_file_loc=;issue_file_loc_type=fulltext;status_whiteboard=;status_whiteboard_type=fulltext;keywords=;keywords_type=anytokens;field0-0-0=noop;type0-0-0=noop;value0-0-0=&order=issues.votes%20desc%2C%20issues.priority%2C%20issues.issue_type