Yeah, we do know how it's going to end, which is kind of annoying, but we only know that the Colonies survive, and that Adama and any other characters make it. 90 percent of the ships and characters in the show are still at risk of death at any time.
I disagree. I don't think there has been much in the way of "idiot plots" up until "Lay Down Your Burdens", and I feel that
1) There was no reason for Tyrol not to trust Cavil (he's an ordained priest after all)
2) The only person who didn't trust Baltar was Roslin. Adama didn't like him, but had no reason to think that Baltar would actually give a bomb to a Cylon. I mean, he was the frakking Vice-President, and the chief scientist. It's not unreasonable that people trusted him with a nuke, even if he was a little different...
Well, they clearly can't do a sequel, because the series isn't over yet. And in a fleet of 45 thousand people (ignoring "Lay Down Your Burdens II for a minute) there aren't really enough interesting things going on to have a a co-existing series. I mean, unless the fleet splinters for good along Pegasus/Galactica lines or something (in which case, it'd be two pretty much identical series).
Therefore, a prequel is really your only shot. And considering BSG started with the near total destruction of an entire civilization that looked pretty darn cool in its own right...
I just really hope that this doesn't hurt the quality of BSG by spreading writing/producing talent as well as budgets too thin. I mean, I think Stargate might be suffering from that right now, having two complete series to do.
I also think that having a prequel could hurt a bit, because I feel like a strength of BSG is its unpredictability. I mean, it changes so much (season finale anyone?) that I feel that knowing the ending (Cylons created, rebel, we fight to a draw, Galactica survives to the present day, none of the Colonies get totally destroyed, etc) kind of hurts it.
Actually, I've heard a people say that Slashdot looks like it's from 1998. Which of course, it is. But I think the idea is to give it more of a Web 2.0 feel or something. That said, I think it looks fine as is.
Doesn't all of this involve redoing the filesystem and moving the Windows partition into a file on the rootkit OS's partition? And wouldn't that basically take hours of heavy disk work? That seems harder to pull off on a lot of computers, either because they're being used, or being checked on from the network for tasks overnight?
More distributions is better. I think that if every distro does one thing right, with a thousand distros, we're in great shape. Linus's Law of "With enough eyes, every bug is shallow" also works on features. If one distro does a feature really well, then everyone else can adopt it. That's the beauty of the GPL, LGPL, and BSD licenses, anyone else in OSS can copy it or re-do it. Therefore, adding another distro or two is good.
Confusion is not really an issue, because anyone looking at Linux will be getting a friend who has a favorite distro, or will have a computer vendor with only one or two choices, which will likely be a choice between Freespire and Linspire or Fedora and Red Hat
Firewire 800? Illuminated Keyboard? Motion Sensor? iSight? Movie Editing Software? Music Editing Software? X11 compatibility w/o dual-boot? Mac OS X?
Toss all those on there, and then come talk to me about price.
Re:Sounds like the manufacturers fault
on
Viiv Falls Flat
·
· Score: 1
Not to be a fanboy, but it seems like this is why Apple does as well as it does with its ideas. Since everything from vision to product blueprints to software implementation is done under one roof, there is no chance of mis-communication about the purpose of the product.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. You just demonstrated the fallacy of appeal to authority.
The fact is that it's not the authority itself, but the evidence, data, and conclusions which that authority brings to the table, that makes what an authority has to say important.
No, I agree with you that that's how it should be, but that's not how it is with the US government. I wish they would have to back their statements up, but they have set everything up so it looks like they're talking fact and anyone who challenges them is a pedophile/communist/terrorist/pirate (depending on the issue), which is regrettable, but that's how it seems to be going right now. I hope it changes.
Yeah, but to refute that, you'd have to do some kind of study. I mean, the fact is that if you're going to jump and say someone in authority is wrong, you need some sort of proof, even if they're equally empty handed (which isn't exactly fair, but that's how it is). Considering you can't confess to seeing child porn in the past or presently, you certainly can't draw a comparison. Neither can I (because I'm not a pedophile), and neither can anyone else, except a pedophile, who certainly can't be trusted to be non-biased.
Great thing to claim, something that no one can easily refute.
You and I can get Firefox or real player on the web, but there are a lot of people out there who can't, simply because using the computer for more than Word and CNN.com and e-mail. And anything that has more than 3 steps is going to be hard for them to do on their own. My parents are thrilled they've figured out how to IM me, and they've owned a computer for 10 years.
considering you failed to return user, it's pretty useless. You'll get a mood of "fjklasdfjjfklasjdfl" or the initialized value ("dead"?) if you don't get an error.
Dapper is pretty much out the door. the last few flights have been pretty good, and the release was delayed precisely for this: If Edgy Eft has stability/desktop/whatever issues, Dapper will be supported for long enough and good for long enough that people uncomfortable with this change of direction can wait a round or two.
Word Readers have to be sought out and installed, and most of them (the non-MS ones) are capable of making mistakes in the more complex stuff.
Lastly, what about when Office2007 comes out, and the formats change? It'll take months or years for people to reverse-engineer the new formats.
The other thing that bugs me is that it's mostly basic text that people are sending in Word form. I mean, it's like a list of twenty names and times, and they make a Word file that could just as easily be a.txt or a.rtf
MS's selling points are the Win32 API and all the programs that go with them, which is an awful lot of stuff. If only Windows does WMA or IE web sites, that's a good reason to buy Windows
Apple sells simplicity and a complete package in both hardware and software. The only thing an Apple computer doesn't have that a consumer might need is a spreadsheet program
Linux has the huge "it's free, and ideological" selling points. You can also customize it.
So MS selling WMP or IE for any other platform is a bad idea, because it weakens their selling point, that is vendor-lock-in.
The first rule of the EULA is "We do not talk about the EULA"
The second rule of the EULA is "WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT THE EULA"
The third rule of the EULA is "You may not read the EULA"
The fourth and final rule of the EULA is "No matter what, everyone signs"
Well, having not looked at the deletion discussion, I feel like having a website isn't cause alone for an article. If they haven't gotten press attention, or been cited elsewhere, they likely will have a hard time unless they're a huge website. but I bet the slashdot coverage helps their case in terms of surviving deletion
Well, SCO isn't about winning. It's about a big con. The SCO board and lawyers got cash circuituitously from Microsoft to attack Linux, and that's what they're doing. They also want to bolster their stock price to sell for a profit.
Slashdot Mirror
This could be a first: casting an actor with a severe acne problem. Seriously, have you seen Olmos's face?
Those are BATTLE SCARS, you insensitive clod.
I feel that if they didn't have Adama in there, every fan in the world would be like "Where's Adama?"
Yeah, sorry about that, forgot a spoiler warning.
Yeah, we do know how it's going to end, which is kind of annoying, but we only know that the Colonies survive, and that Adama and any other characters make it. 90 percent of the ships and characters in the show are still at risk of death at any time.
I disagree. I don't think there has been much in the way of "idiot plots" up until "Lay Down Your Burdens", and I feel that
1) There was no reason for Tyrol not to trust Cavil (he's an ordained priest after all)
2) The only person who didn't trust Baltar was Roslin. Adama didn't like him, but had no reason to think that Baltar would actually give a bomb to a Cylon. I mean, he was the frakking Vice-President, and the chief scientist. It's not unreasonable that people trusted him with a nuke, even if he was a little different...
There are only twelve types of BG spinoffs.
But there are many copies...
Well, they clearly can't do a sequel, because the series isn't over yet. And in a fleet of 45 thousand people (ignoring "Lay Down Your Burdens II for a minute) there aren't really enough interesting things going on to have a a co-existing series. I mean, unless the fleet splinters for good along Pegasus/Galactica lines or something (in which case, it'd be two pretty much identical series).
Therefore, a prequel is really your only shot. And considering BSG started with the near total destruction of an entire civilization that looked pretty darn cool in its own right...
I just really hope that this doesn't hurt the quality of BSG by spreading writing/producing talent as well as budgets too thin. I mean, I think Stargate might be suffering from that right now, having two complete series to do.
I also think that having a prequel could hurt a bit, because I feel like a strength of BSG is its unpredictability. I mean, it changes so much (season finale anyone?) that I feel that knowing the ending (Cylons created, rebel, we fight to a draw, Galactica survives to the present day, none of the Colonies get totally destroyed, etc) kind of hurts it.
Actually, I've heard a people say that Slashdot looks like it's from 1998. Which of course, it is. But I think the idea is to give it more of a Web 2.0 feel or something. That said, I think it looks fine as is.
Doesn't all of this involve redoing the filesystem and moving the Windows partition into a file on the rootkit OS's partition? And wouldn't that basically take hours of heavy disk work? That seems harder to pull off on a lot of computers, either because they're being used, or being checked on from the network for tasks overnight?
More distributions is better. I think that if every distro does one thing right, with a thousand distros, we're in great shape. Linus's Law of "With enough eyes, every bug is shallow" also works on features. If one distro does a feature really well, then everyone else can adopt it. That's the beauty of the GPL, LGPL, and BSD licenses, anyone else in OSS can copy it or re-do it. Therefore, adding another distro or two is good.
Confusion is not really an issue, because anyone looking at Linux will be getting a friend who has a favorite distro, or will have a computer vendor with only one or two choices, which will likely be a choice between Freespire and Linspire or Fedora and Red Hat
Firewire 800?
Illuminated Keyboard?
Motion Sensor?
iSight?
Movie Editing Software?
Music Editing Software?
X11 compatibility w/o dual-boot?
Mac OS X?
Toss all those on there, and then come talk to me about price.
Not to be a fanboy, but it seems like this is why Apple does as well as it does with its ideas. Since everything from vision to product blueprints to software implementation is done under one roof, there is no chance of mis-communication about the purpose of the product.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. You just demonstrated the fallacy of appeal to authority.
The fact is that it's not the authority itself, but the evidence, data, and conclusions which that authority brings to the table, that makes what an authority has to say important.
No, I agree with you that that's how it should be, but that's not how it is with the US government. I wish they would have to back their statements up, but they have set everything up so it looks like they're talking fact and anyone who challenges them is a pedophile/communist/terrorist/pirate (depending on the issue), which is regrettable, but that's how it seems to be going right now. I hope it changes.
Yeah, but to refute that, you'd have to do some kind of study. I mean, the fact is that if you're going to jump and say someone in authority is wrong, you need some sort of proof, even if they're equally empty handed (which isn't exactly fair, but that's how it is). Considering you can't confess to seeing child porn in the past or presently, you certainly can't draw a comparison. Neither can I (because I'm not a pedophile), and neither can anyone else, except a pedophile, who certainly can't be trusted to be non-biased.
Great thing to claim, something that no one can easily refute.
Apple's in 4th place. You just linked an article from 2002. Welcome to 2006.
You and I can get Firefox or real player on the web, but there are a lot of people out there who can't, simply because using the computer for more than Word and CNN.com and e-mail. And anything that has more than 3 steps is going to be hard for them to do on their own. My parents are thrilled they've figured out how to IM me, and they've owned a computer for 10 years.
considering you failed to return user, it's pretty useless. You'll get a mood of "fjklasdfjjfklasjdfl" or the initialized value ("dead"?) if you don't get an error.
Dapper is pretty much out the door. the last few flights have been pretty good, and the release was delayed precisely for this: If Edgy Eft has stability/desktop/whatever issues, Dapper will be supported for long enough and good for long enough that people uncomfortable with this change of direction can wait a round or two.
Word Readers have to be sought out and installed, and most of them (the non-MS ones) are capable of making mistakes in the more complex stuff.
.txt or a .rtf
Lastly, what about when Office2007 comes out, and the formats change? It'll take months or years for people to reverse-engineer the new formats.
The other thing that bugs me is that it's mostly basic text that people are sending in Word form. I mean, it's like a list of twenty names and times, and they make a Word file that could just as easily be a
Why should they send a Word file to you and basically imply "Spend $300 on Word, and waste 300 MB of space on it."
It's called selling points
MS's selling points are the Win32 API and all the programs that go with them, which is an awful lot of stuff. If only Windows does WMA or IE web sites, that's a good reason to buy Windows
Apple sells simplicity and a complete package in both hardware and software. The only thing an Apple computer doesn't have that a consumer might need is a spreadsheet program
Linux has the huge "it's free, and ideological" selling points. You can also customize it.
So MS selling WMP or IE for any other platform is a bad idea, because it weakens their selling point, that is vendor-lock-in.
The first rule of the EULA is "We do not talk about the EULA"
The second rule of the EULA is "WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT THE EULA"
The third rule of the EULA is "You may not read the EULA"
The fourth and final rule of the EULA is "No matter what, everyone signs"
Well, having not looked at the deletion discussion, I feel like having a website isn't cause alone for an article. If they haven't gotten press attention, or been cited elsewhere, they likely will have a hard time unless they're a huge website. but I bet the slashdot coverage helps their case in terms of surviving deletion
Well, SCO isn't about winning. It's about a big con. The SCO board and lawyers got cash circuituitously from Microsoft to attack Linux, and that's what they're doing. They also want to bolster their stock price to sell for a profit.