Yeah... I find the whole premise implausible. People who make grammatical errors can't find groups in WoW? Riiight... that's going to work out. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if a couple of guilds had that policy somewhere, but there's just no way that this is an epidemic. From my experience, it seems like people from other countries are more likely to be pushed away by cultural differences ("acting weird," from a sheltered North American perspective) rather than poor english skills. If you know enough english to follow basic instructions, most people aren't even going to notice if you can't spell.
What? If your car's automatic braking feature doesn't work while driving around inside a metal building, then it's not worth having? How often are you driving around behind other cars inside metal buildings?
I mean, their explanation seems a bit implausible. But if it were 100% true, and the only situation where the feature didn't work was "inside metal buildings," that's a pretty easy situation to watch out for. Because, even if you do somehow drive around behind other cars inside metal buildings on a regular basis, I can't imagine that you do so without knowing you're in a metal building. Right?
Just as a point of interest, "usage level" doesn't really matter when it comes to optical media degrading. The dyes just go bad over time... it doesn't matter how much they've been spinning around, or how frequently they've had a laser reflect off of them. It's not like a VHS tape where excessive use can cause a loss of quality.
And they complain about dupes, and links that "aren't news" and/or "don't matter," and so on... people complain a lot about just about any story posted on Slashdot.
One thing that I think would help keep the story discussions on-topic is either A) like Taco said, posting more things about Slashdot, so people can complain about it there, on-topic, or B) actually have a forum linked from the front page entirely for bitching about Slashdot. You could even state that, as a matter of policy, complaining about Slashdot outside of that forum is considered a no-no. If this forum were promoted heavily enough, people violating the guideline would generally be flamed/modded into oblivion. Also, as it stands now, if someone wants to say something about the way Slashdot works, there's really no appropriate place for it.
Well... probably not "Bloodrayne II." In all of your examples, the naming of the newer, better movie was designed to imply that the previous movie(s) had never existed. So if they do decide to make another, non-Uwe Bloodrayne movie, they'll probably just call it "Bloodrayne" and hope that people don't remember the previous installment.
"Spelt" is also a correct spelling. I'm pretty sure it's being used correctly too, unlike "guest" in TFA.
Anyway, you suggested a spell checker, which clearly wouldn't help with "guest." A spell checker may even be to blame for that particular typo... sometimes a more obvious typing error can be corrected to a totally wrong word by an overzealous spell checker. What's needed is proof-reading, not reliance on a brainless tool.
I thought it was funny because they presumably meant "gem," a precious stone (or, metaphorically, anything of value), rather than "Jem," the lead singer from The Holograms.
Wait. What? Isn't that what I said? I mean, I didn't mention that it was Gabe that said it (I couldn't remember, and I'm a huge slacker), and I didn't mention that he learned about it by email (it just didn't seem relevant), but... what are you getting at, exactly?
In the news post associated with that comic, there is a complaint about how, in this game, you face an unwinnable scenario. Then there's a brief correction posted at the end, that just pretty much says "Oh, I guess there's an alternate ending where Kong doesn't die."
I read that, and was thinking, "What? He doesn't die? What does happen? Does he, in fact, just climb back down?" I'm sure I wasn't the only one who was still wondering about this.;)
So yeah. Personally, I welcomed this Slashdot post. It's entirely possible, though, that Slashdot wasn't the ideal location for it.
..but the one things that's indisputable is that the entire community broke out into a firestorm over the killing of two characters, Wash and to a lesser extent Book.
That's a fantastically broad generalization, and is easily disputable. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of fans (all the ones I know, for example), who were ok with the deaths of Book and Wash, and who failed entirely to break out into a "firestorm."
Killing Wash in a way that many felt was pointless was a slap in the fact to a lot of fans...
You're kidding, right? I can't believe people still think they can claim something is a "slap in the face to fans" (of anything) and be taken seriously. It's so cliched and overdramatic.
Man, it's his story. If, in his story, Wash dies... it's not because Joss Whedon hates you. I promise. It's just the way he thought things should go. I can think of a few different possible reasons for this... I don't know what his actual reasons were, but I'm sure he had some. Anyway, you liked his story up until this point. I guess if you didn't like the final chapter, that's up to you, but taking it as a personal insult is a little bit on the crazy side.
See, I didn't mind the product placement in "I, Robot." I thought it was funny. I mean... not very funny, but about on par with the rest of the movie. "Haha... vintage 2004 converse shoes. In case we forgot it was the future." It's like the Zima ad in Babylon 5... it's just funny to suggest that at some point in the distant future, people will still care about Converse shoes from 2004, or Zima.
For annoying product placement, I think the winner is still "You've Got Mail." It was quite a while ago, but it was like what would happen if Meg Ryan only did TV commercials, rather than movies, and then they stuck them all together in a Meg Ryan commercial marathon.
The allegory is only obvious if you know about it in advance, or are particularly steeped in Christian doctrine. Seriously... if a non-Christian isn't told that it's a Christian allegory, they can enjoy the movie (or the books) without even noticing. I know a lot of Christians don't even make the connection from the books without being told.
I don't know if that's a good thing. I think it probably is... it's a good story that stands alone, but holds a deeper meaning for some.
I agree with you on the mountain scene. Also, a couple of the darker scenes were poorly lit... not just that they were a little too dark (they were), but also the lighting looked a bit unnatural.
I thought the beavers were really well done, though. They realized anthropomorphic beavers better than my imagination could... I was really impressed. Some of the beaver scenes were better than others, I guess, so maybe the better ones stuck in my mind more, while you focused more on the worse ones. As for the final battle... I was immersed enough by that point that it wouldn't have bothered me if that annoying stick of gum from the Extra commercials had been involved in the fight.
So... just to clarify... "Web 2.0" is a new-ish buzzword, referring to an arbitrary stage in the natural evolution of web technology? And... you can tell which version of the web your page belongs to, primarily by measuring its level of dynamicness?*
*I don't know if it's a word, but if not... give it time.
But... if that's what happens, then why didn't the author say that? The way it's described in the article, you think the investors invest their several million dollars, get back less than that, but then they're all happy because they pay less in taxes. So much less, that it somehow works out to magical profits, where lower box office sales equals EVEN MORE MONEY. Is the top tax bracket in Germany 200% or so?
If one were to summarize the strategy as described in that article, using a numbered list, it would actually have a "3. ?????" step before the "4. Profit!"
Your explantion seems plausible (at least, when you look at it as an oversight in German tax laws that they are now trying to correct). It does seem to match up with my vague understanding of Hollywood accounting practices. It would be nice if the author had been a little more clear, though. If you've got a big conspiracy theory, and you're posting it on the internet, people are more likely to be convinced if you can articulate it clearly.
Regarding accuracy: They're using Gyration gyroscopes, which are pretty awesome. So unless they plug them in wrong or something, or screw up the position sensing mechanism, the Revolution controller should be significantly more accurate than an analog stick, while not being quite as precise as a mouse (because you're not braced against a desk, not because of the technology).
As for wireless conflicts... is that really a likely issue? Wireless technology seems to be pretty good these days. It seems everyone has at least a couple of wireless devices, and, in my experience anyway, conflicts seem to be pretty rare.
But see, the trouble is if they have some idea that we're too stupid to think of, which was the original hypothesis. You can't say, "that's not possible," because of course you can't think of a way to do it -- the hypothetical idea is by definition too advanced for you to comprehend.
Maybe they could send a signal like the one in Threshold or the... uh... meme virus in Global Frequency. It seems implausible that super-advanced aliens would base their attack on a buzzword from a couple of years ago, but who knows?
Anyway, yeah. The idea that SETI could be a security risk is kind of cool, in my opinion. However, I have to admit that if an alien race is advanced enough to hurt us through SETI, adding security isn't going to help much. Even shutting down the program entirely isn't going to protect us from these guys.
But... if we sort by non-adjusted dollars, that gives more weight to more recent movies, right? So, what you're saying is, people used to like films with some artistic merit, but they don't any more?
They also use extremely high-quality plastic, something you don't find in many toys these days. Actually, you don't find Lego-quality plastic in just about anything these days, even expensive consumer electronics.
See, the crazy thing is, people have more than one facet of their personality. To get along, you don't have to like every single one of those facets. If you break up with someone because they do one thing you don't like, you'll either end up very lonely, or you'll end up with someone who doesn't do anything you don't like because they're constantly scared of pissing you off.
Hint: the gamer who ignores you sometimes is a better option. Maybe not the best, for you, but it's not as simple as you make it out to be.
Heh...yeah. I'll be watching a show, and thinking, "Wow, they can do that?" or "Wow, is that how that works?"
Then they'll start talking about their computer. "I'll just boot prompt the slash rom and reformat the accessor bridge, and then we should be able to hack into their hard drive."
That's about when I start to feel like an idiot for being impressed by the first part.
Also, if you are a real gamer, graphics shouldn't matter.
See, now... graphics are one of the main things I play PC games for. In my experience, PC games are where you get the best experience if you're looking for a game that rehashes an old idea, but does it prettier, with better sound, and maybe a tiny new gimmick or two. Now, that's good. I like PC games for that.
However, if you're talking about quality gaming where graphics don't matter, it seems to me that you should actually be talking about Nintendo. The DS has a bunch of quirky games that rely on the touch screen or the 2-screen setup. These games feature types of gameplay never before seen, and as a gamer, I think that's pretty cool. Similarly, the Revolution's wacky controller will open the door for all sorts of really fantastic stuff. It remains to be seen if that potential will be utilized, but the potential is clearly there.
Gameplay hasn't evolved much in the past 10 years? Well, if you restrict yourself to the PC, I'd say you're right.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah... I find the whole premise implausible. People who make grammatical errors can't find groups in WoW? Riiight... that's going to work out. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if a couple of guilds had that policy somewhere, but there's just no way that this is an epidemic. From my experience, it seems like people from other countries are more likely to be pushed away by cultural differences ("acting weird," from a sheltered North American perspective) rather than poor english skills. If you know enough english to follow basic instructions, most people aren't even going to notice if you can't spell.
What? If your car's automatic braking feature doesn't work while driving around inside a metal building, then it's not worth having? How often are you driving around behind other cars inside metal buildings?
I mean, their explanation seems a bit implausible. But if it were 100% true, and the only situation where the feature didn't work was "inside metal buildings," that's a pretty easy situation to watch out for. Because, even if you do somehow drive around behind other cars inside metal buildings on a regular basis, I can't imagine that you do so without knowing you're in a metal building. Right?
Just as a point of interest, "usage level" doesn't really matter when it comes to optical media degrading. The dyes just go bad over time... it doesn't matter how much they've been spinning around, or how frequently they've had a laser reflect off of them. It's not like a VHS tape where excessive use can cause a loss of quality.
And they complain about dupes, and links that "aren't news" and/or "don't matter," and so on... people complain a lot about just about any story posted on Slashdot.
One thing that I think would help keep the story discussions on-topic is either A) like Taco said, posting more things about Slashdot, so people can complain about it there, on-topic, or B) actually have a forum linked from the front page entirely for bitching about Slashdot. You could even state that, as a matter of policy, complaining about Slashdot outside of that forum is considered a no-no. If this forum were promoted heavily enough, people violating the guideline would generally be flamed/modded into oblivion. Also, as it stands now, if someone wants to say something about the way Slashdot works, there's really no appropriate place for it.
Well... probably not "Bloodrayne II." In all of your examples, the naming of the newer, better movie was designed to imply that the previous movie(s) had never existed. So if they do decide to make another, non-Uwe Bloodrayne movie, they'll probably just call it "Bloodrayne" and hope that people don't remember the previous installment.
"Spelt" is also a correct spelling. I'm pretty sure it's being used correctly too, unlike "guest" in TFA.
Anyway, you suggested a spell checker, which clearly wouldn't help with "guest." A spell checker may even be to blame for that particular typo... sometimes a more obvious typing error can be corrected to a totally wrong word by an overzealous spell checker. What's needed is proof-reading, not reliance on a brainless tool.
I thought it was funny because they presumably meant "gem," a precious stone (or, metaphorically, anything of value), rather than "Jem," the lead singer from The Holograms.
Wait. What? Isn't that what I said? I mean, I didn't mention that it was Gabe that said it (I couldn't remember, and I'm a huge slacker), and I didn't mention that he learned about it by email (it just didn't seem relevant), but... what are you getting at, exactly?
I have a feeling this got posted because of a recent Penny Arcade. http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/12/05
;)
In the news post associated with that comic, there is a complaint about how, in this game, you face an unwinnable scenario. Then there's a brief correction posted at the end, that just pretty much says "Oh, I guess there's an alternate ending where Kong doesn't die."
I read that, and was thinking, "What? He doesn't die? What does happen? Does he, in fact, just climb back down?" I'm sure I wasn't the only one who was still wondering about this.
So yeah. Personally, I welcomed this Slashdot post. It's entirely possible, though, that Slashdot wasn't the ideal location for it.
It works out to 80 points for $1, which I suspect offers some sort of insight into the mathematical error involved here.
That's a fantastically broad generalization, and is easily disputable. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of fans (all the ones I know, for example), who were ok with the deaths of Book and Wash, and who failed entirely to break out into a "firestorm."
You're kidding, right? I can't believe people still think they can claim something is a "slap in the face to fans" (of anything) and be taken seriously. It's so cliched and overdramatic.
Man, it's his story. If, in his story, Wash dies... it's not because Joss Whedon hates you. I promise. It's just the way he thought things should go. I can think of a few different possible reasons for this... I don't know what his actual reasons were, but I'm sure he had some. Anyway, you liked his story up until this point. I guess if you didn't like the final chapter, that's up to you, but taking it as a personal insult is a little bit on the crazy side.
You'd think they could at least get some money from the people who make bread and sandwich meats, then... right?
See, I didn't mind the product placement in "I, Robot." I thought it was funny. I mean... not very funny, but about on par with the rest of the movie. "Haha... vintage 2004 converse shoes. In case we forgot it was the future." It's like the Zima ad in Babylon 5... it's just funny to suggest that at some point in the distant future, people will still care about Converse shoes from 2004, or Zima.
For annoying product placement, I think the winner is still "You've Got Mail." It was quite a while ago, but it was like what would happen if Meg Ryan only did TV commercials, rather than movies, and then they stuck them all together in a Meg Ryan commercial marathon.
The allegory is only obvious if you know about it in advance, or are particularly steeped in Christian doctrine. Seriously... if a non-Christian isn't told that it's a Christian allegory, they can enjoy the movie (or the books) without even noticing. I know a lot of Christians don't even make the connection from the books without being told.
I don't know if that's a good thing. I think it probably is... it's a good story that stands alone, but holds a deeper meaning for some.
I agree with you on the mountain scene. Also, a couple of the darker scenes were poorly lit... not just that they were a little too dark (they were), but also the lighting looked a bit unnatural.
I thought the beavers were really well done, though. They realized anthropomorphic beavers better than my imagination could... I was really impressed. Some of the beaver scenes were better than others, I guess, so maybe the better ones stuck in my mind more, while you focused more on the worse ones. As for the final battle... I was immersed enough by that point that it wouldn't have bothered me if that annoying stick of gum from the Extra commercials had been involved in the fight.
So... just to clarify... "Web 2.0" is a new-ish buzzword, referring to an arbitrary stage in the natural evolution of web technology? And... you can tell which version of the web your page belongs to, primarily by measuring its level of dynamicness?*
*I don't know if it's a word, but if not... give it time.
But... if that's what happens, then why didn't the author say that? The way it's described in the article, you think the investors invest their several million dollars, get back less than that, but then they're all happy because they pay less in taxes. So much less, that it somehow works out to magical profits, where lower box office sales equals EVEN MORE MONEY. Is the top tax bracket in Germany 200% or so?
If one were to summarize the strategy as described in that article, using a numbered list, it would actually have a "3. ?????" step before the "4. Profit!"
Your explantion seems plausible (at least, when you look at it as an oversight in German tax laws that they are now trying to correct). It does seem to match up with my vague understanding of Hollywood accounting practices. It would be nice if the author had been a little more clear, though. If you've got a big conspiracy theory, and you're posting it on the internet, people are more likely to be convinced if you can articulate it clearly.
Regarding accuracy: They're using Gyration gyroscopes, which are pretty awesome. So unless they plug them in wrong or something, or screw up the position sensing mechanism, the Revolution controller should be significantly more accurate than an analog stick, while not being quite as precise as a mouse (because you're not braced against a desk, not because of the technology).
As for wireless conflicts... is that really a likely issue? Wireless technology seems to be pretty good these days. It seems everyone has at least a couple of wireless devices, and, in my experience anyway, conflicts seem to be pretty rare.
Actually, this isn't a WMD, it's a missile defense system, which stops missiles from killing people.
The missiles, being launched by evil people, probably run Windows. That's because Linux is free, and as we all know, these people hate freedom.
But see, the trouble is if they have some idea that we're too stupid to think of, which was the original hypothesis. You can't say, "that's not possible," because of course you can't think of a way to do it -- the hypothetical idea is by definition too advanced for you to comprehend.
Maybe they could send a signal like the one in Threshold or the... uh... meme virus in Global Frequency. It seems implausible that super-advanced aliens would base their attack on a buzzword from a couple of years ago, but who knows?
Anyway, yeah. The idea that SETI could be a security risk is kind of cool, in my opinion. However, I have to admit that if an alien race is advanced enough to hurt us through SETI, adding security isn't going to help much. Even shutting down the program entirely isn't going to protect us from these guys.
But... if we sort by non-adjusted dollars, that gives more weight to more recent movies, right? So, what you're saying is, people used to like films with some artistic merit, but they don't any more?
They also use extremely high-quality plastic, something you don't find in many toys these days. Actually, you don't find Lego-quality plastic in just about anything these days, even expensive consumer electronics.
See, the crazy thing is, people have more than one facet of their personality. To get along, you don't have to like every single one of those facets. If you break up with someone because they do one thing you don't like, you'll either end up very lonely, or you'll end up with someone who doesn't do anything you don't like because they're constantly scared of pissing you off.
Hint: the gamer who ignores you sometimes is a better option. Maybe not the best, for you, but it's not as simple as you make it out to be.
Heh...yeah. I'll be watching a show, and thinking, "Wow, they can do that?" or "Wow, is that how that works?"
Then they'll start talking about their computer. "I'll just boot prompt the slash rom and reformat the accessor bridge, and then we should be able to hack into their hard drive."
That's about when I start to feel like an idiot for being impressed by the first part.
See, now... graphics are one of the main things I play PC games for. In my experience, PC games are where you get the best experience if you're looking for a game that rehashes an old idea, but does it prettier, with better sound, and maybe a tiny new gimmick or two. Now, that's good. I like PC games for that.
However, if you're talking about quality gaming where graphics don't matter, it seems to me that you should actually be talking about Nintendo. The DS has a bunch of quirky games that rely on the touch screen or the 2-screen setup. These games feature types of gameplay never before seen, and as a gamer, I think that's pretty cool. Similarly, the Revolution's wacky controller will open the door for all sorts of really fantastic stuff. It remains to be seen if that potential will be utilized, but the potential is clearly there.
Gameplay hasn't evolved much in the past 10 years? Well, if you restrict yourself to the PC, I'd say you're right.