Personally I don't care which of those two are on top. I'd much rather go with a Lenovo or Toshiba than an HP or Dell, any day of the week. Just because they're on top in terms of sales does not mean they're on top in terms of quality.
Did you actually watch the webisodes? The new content is about 30 seconds per webisode, the rest is titles and a commercial made from clips of the upcoming series. They ran the same 2 clip commercials over and over, across the 10 webisodes. So this whole fuss is over 5min of original made-for-the-web content.
First, 30 seconds per webisode is an exaggeration. It was probably more like 1.5-2 minutes per. And while that is still short, the actual "meat" of the webisodes are all original content, and content which is integral to understanding what's going on relationships-wise when Season 3 starts. I actually watched the start of Season 3 before watching the webisodes, and it made so much more sense after seeing that little bit of content.
There are other obvious problems with this new season's shows. Apparently they got tired of spending so much money on computer graphics, so almost all of the new shows are set in a muddy field, with some tents and some junk. It's turned into a freaking soap opera about mommies and babies. Fuck that shit, I want to see some nuclear explosions in space!
Then BSG was clearly not meant for you. Stop watching.
Seems to me as much creative energy went into creating those webisodes as did the full TV episodes (albeit 3 minutes at a time). It's not like the webisodes are just clips of scenes from other episodes all strung together into a 30 second commercial... they are all unique content, things you can't get from just watching TV episodes.
I wonder if the actors got paid for the time they spent shooting those "promotions." Or makeup, costume, cameramen, the list goes on.
FTA: "NBC Universal, the studio behind "Battlestar," refused to pay residuals or credit the writers of these "Webisodes," claiming they're promotional materials. So "Battlestar" executive producer Ron Moore said he wouldn't deliver any more of them, including the 10 that were already in the can."
10 refers to the Webisodes, not to the episodes of Season 3 running on SciFi itself.
What does this have anything to do with what I said? Maybe those folks at Power Computing left Dell because they didn't like what Dell was doing and wanted Power Computing to do things differently. Otherwise, why wouldn't they have stayed at Dell in the first place? When I said Mac users like what Apple has to offer, I wasn't referring to the case that the computer came in.
I am not an Apple zealot. Far from it. But I believe that what draws Mac users to be Mac users would die a horrible death if Dell got their hands on the rights to make Apple hardware. Yes, Dell does a lot of business. But they are not known for reproducible quality. They are known for low end customization (giving people what they think they want while skimping where it really matters). And I don't think that's what Mac users want Apple hardware to be.
Are you trying to say that Apple can make computers, and they can make mp3 players, but they can't make it so their own computers can be used to manufacture their own mp3 players instead of buying someone else's computers to do so? And that the reason for that is because the big bad Windoze-boys made up some sort of rule that says "No Macs Allowed"? No wonder I got modded troll! The Mac fanboys are out tonight!
Not only that, since the problem was "traced to a particular Windows machine in the manufacturing lines of a contract manufacturer that builds the iPods for Apple," I would think that if they're going to talk so high-and-mighty against Windows that they would be smart enough not to use Windows as part of their manufacturing process.
Seems like just another bad attempt at deflection.
If the blatant rip off the Time Machine wasn't enough to make me completely lose any respect for this article, the reference to the ironing out of the races and the development of a "uniform race of coffee-coloured people" just put the last nail in that coffin.
Skin tone is not the result of blending in the sense that the article leads us to believe. This site explains it quite nicely. Dark skinned people can produce children with much lighter skin than either of the parents, just as light skinned people can produce children with much darker skin than either of the parents, because the genes for one skin tone can be masked in one person, but then get passed on and expressed in their child. No matter how much inter-racial breeding happens, humans will not all eventually converge on one "coffee-colored" skintone. And if the article can't even bother getting that right, what does that really say for the rest of it?
So what you're saying is that the spike seen in the study in the Pacific Northwest was not in fact caused by increased TV watching, but by the rise of Microsoft and the jobs that came with it!
Seriously, it is possible that TV and autism are correlated but that one did not cause the other. Perhaps the rise in TV watching happened around the same time as a rise in the diagnosis rates of autism. Or that people who are autistic tend to be plopped in front of a TV more often because of their condition. Though I haven't RTFStudy, so I can't say what kinds of controls they had in place or confounding factors they considered.
I had the same thing happen to me just the other day. Some days you win, some you lose. I'm just impressed your comment managed to get modded up rather than down. Be happy for small victories.
And for the record, I don't know exactly when you submitted the story, but I submitted mine early Friday morning, and it only just got published today. Stories yesterday sat for hours before being accepted/rejected. They must have had a large number of submissions. So it's possible we submitted our stories around the same time.
I guess it's not cool to make fun of AOL. Or police investigations.
I'm actually not surprised by the modding. I was hoping people would take my comment humorously, as it was intended, but I guess some people took offense on behalf of Reiser.
They forgot to mention the most important piece of evidence in their arsenal: They reviewed the AOL search records that were released and identified record #456365 as likely to belong to Reiser, and noted many suspicious searches such as "I hate Nina Reiser" and "how to kill Nina Reiser without getting caught".
The most offensive part of this evidence of course is that Hans Reiser uses AOL Search....
I hope that they lock DVDs down so tight that no one can even play them on their regular players. Then, when the next blockbuster movie sell a grand total of four DVDs, maybe the movie and television studios will finally realize how much money this is costing them.
I don't know about you, but reading about this stuff makes me more and more warry of buying any new media. So they don't even need to lock DVDs down tight to feel the hurt. Just the *idea* that they *might* lock them down, or that media is being locked down right now and people can't always tell which ones are locked down and which ones aren't, should have an effect on their "bottom line." If only a fraction of them get this level of protection, but the consumer has to put extra effort into their consuming to make sure they don't get media with that protection, it's going to become (or already has become!) too much trouble to buy anything at all.
You conveniently neglected to consider his use of the term "unlawful" in his definition of murder. The death penalty is lawful in that it it state-sanctioned killing of someone as punishment for a crime they committed. Therefore it is lawful and by his definition not murder.
Exactly! I would mod up if I had points. He's using the term "rat hole" to describe online distribution as untested territory. He doesn't think it's bad, and doesn't eliminate the possibility of using it at a later date, he just doesn't want to jump in too early and get burned.
Star Trek has several shows with different characters.
Which is why I specifically said "the Star Trek Franchise." I have no illusions that any one Star Trek series could stand against the original Doctor Who.
Technically, if you can say that Doctor Who has run for 43 years (i.e. counting the interim years where no new Doctor Who was made), The Twilight Zone has run longer (44 years by my count: first episode in 1959, last in 2003). However I don't believe it had even close to 700 episodes.
And if you look at the entire Star Trek Franchise as a whole, it is "younger" than Doctor Who (40 years) but has almost 4 times as many episodes.
Stargate doesn't even come close to making that cut, with only 10 years for SG1 and 3 I believe for Atlantis. I don't even understand how they get the longest running consecutive Sci-Fi show.... Doctor Who (the original) should probably win that one, too.
Slashdot Mirror
Good catch.
Also, for pretty graphs, see ArsTechnica.
Personally I don't care which of those two are on top. I'd much rather go with a Lenovo or Toshiba than an HP or Dell, any day of the week. Just because they're on top in terms of sales does not mean they're on top in terms of quality.
Did you actually watch the webisodes? The new content is about 30 seconds per webisode, the rest is titles and a commercial made from clips of the upcoming series. They ran the same 2 clip commercials over and over, across the 10 webisodes. So this whole fuss is over 5min of original made-for-the-web content.
First, 30 seconds per webisode is an exaggeration. It was probably more like 1.5-2 minutes per. And while that is still short, the actual "meat" of the webisodes are all original content, and content which is integral to understanding what's going on relationships-wise when Season 3 starts. I actually watched the start of Season 3 before watching the webisodes, and it made so much more sense after seeing that little bit of content.
There are other obvious problems with this new season's shows. Apparently they got tired of spending so much money on computer graphics, so almost all of the new shows are set in a muddy field, with some tents and some junk. It's turned into a freaking soap opera about mommies and babies. Fuck that shit, I want to see some nuclear explosions in space!
Then BSG was clearly not meant for you. Stop watching.
Seems to me as much creative energy went into creating those webisodes as did the full TV episodes (albeit 3 minutes at a time). It's not like the webisodes are just clips of scenes from other episodes all strung together into a 30 second commercial... they are all unique content, things you can't get from just watching TV episodes.
I wonder if the actors got paid for the time they spent shooting those "promotions." Or makeup, costume, cameramen, the list goes on.
FTA: "NBC Universal, the studio behind "Battlestar," refused to pay residuals or credit the writers of these "Webisodes," claiming they're promotional materials. So "Battlestar" executive producer Ron Moore said he wouldn't deliver any more of them, including the 10 that were already in the can."
10 refers to the Webisodes, not to the episodes of Season 3 running on SciFi itself.
I'd say that they only quit because someone put pressure on them, not because they want to stop making money on those transactions
Seems that you were right. The music industry pressured Visa to cut allofmp3
What does this have anything to do with what I said? Maybe those folks at Power Computing left Dell because they didn't like what Dell was doing and wanted Power Computing to do things differently. Otherwise, why wouldn't they have stayed at Dell in the first place? When I said Mac users like what Apple has to offer, I wasn't referring to the case that the computer came in.
I am not an Apple zealot. Far from it. But I believe that what draws Mac users to be Mac users would die a horrible death if Dell got their hands on the rights to make Apple hardware. Yes, Dell does a lot of business. But they are not known for reproducible quality. They are known for low end customization (giving people what they think they want while skimping where it really matters). And I don't think that's what Mac users want Apple hardware to be.
Gomen nasai! I actually realized the error after submission but couldn't do anything about it.
Are you trying to say that Apple can make computers, and they can make mp3 players, but they can't make it so their own computers can be used to manufacture their own mp3 players instead of buying someone else's computers to do so? And that the reason for that is because the big bad Windoze-boys made up some sort of rule that says "No Macs Allowed"? No wonder I got modded troll! The Mac fanboys are out tonight!
Not only that, since the problem was "traced to a particular Windows machine in the manufacturing lines of a contract manufacturer that builds the iPods for Apple," I would think that if they're going to talk so high-and-mighty against Windows that they would be smart enough not to use Windows as part of their manufacturing process.
Seems like just another bad attempt at deflection.
If the blatant rip off the Time Machine wasn't enough to make me completely lose any respect for this article, the reference to the ironing out of the races and the development of a "uniform race of coffee-coloured people" just put the last nail in that coffin.
Skin tone is not the result of blending in the sense that the article leads us to believe. This site explains it quite nicely. Dark skinned people can produce children with much lighter skin than either of the parents, just as light skinned people can produce children with much darker skin than either of the parents, because the genes for one skin tone can be masked in one person, but then get passed on and expressed in their child. No matter how much inter-racial breeding happens, humans will not all eventually converge on one "coffee-colored" skintone. And if the article can't even bother getting that right, what does that really say for the rest of it?
So what you're saying is that the spike seen in the study in the Pacific Northwest was not in fact caused by increased TV watching, but by the rise of Microsoft and the jobs that came with it!
Seriously, it is possible that TV and autism are correlated but that one did not cause the other. Perhaps the rise in TV watching happened around the same time as a rise in the diagnosis rates of autism. Or that people who are autistic tend to be plopped in front of a TV more often because of their condition. Though I haven't RTFStudy, so I can't say what kinds of controls they had in place or confounding factors they considered.
"Patrons nationwide are urged to quickly return their M-logoed sticks for replacement..."
Somehow I think replacement is the least of their worries.
I had the same thing happen to me just the other day. Some days you win, some you lose. I'm just impressed your comment managed to get modded up rather than down. Be happy for small victories.
And for the record, I don't know exactly when you submitted the story, but I submitted mine early Friday morning, and it only just got published today. Stories yesterday sat for hours before being accepted/rejected. They must have had a large number of submissions. So it's possible we submitted our stories around the same time.
"Trialled" was used in TFA, so if you're going to complain about made-up words, go whine at The Register.
I'd be interested to know exactly what problem tagging everyone is supposed to solve.
Well, I believe one of the side benefits mentioned was being able to find lost kids. Think of the children!!
How is the parent a troll?
I guess it's not cool to make fun of AOL. Or police investigations.
I'm actually not surprised by the modding. I was hoping people would take my comment humorously, as it was intended, but I guess some people took offense on behalf of Reiser.
They forgot to mention the most important piece of evidence in their arsenal: They reviewed the AOL search records that were released and identified record #456365 as likely to belong to Reiser, and noted many suspicious searches such as "I hate Nina Reiser" and "how to kill Nina Reiser without getting caught".
The most offensive part of this evidence of course is that Hans Reiser uses AOL Search....
Wow, I wish I had submitted this story to Slashdot. Then I'd be so cool.
... Wow, I love the scientific way in which stories get accepted and rejected on Slashdot.
Oh wait. I did. Yesterday. And got rejected.
I hope that they lock DVDs down so tight that no one can even play them on their regular players. Then, when the next blockbuster movie sell a grand total of four DVDs, maybe the movie and television studios will finally realize how much money this is costing them.
I don't know about you, but reading about this stuff makes me more and more warry of buying any new media. So they don't even need to lock DVDs down tight to feel the hurt. Just the *idea* that they *might* lock them down, or that media is being locked down right now and people can't always tell which ones are locked down and which ones aren't, should have an effect on their "bottom line." If only a fraction of them get this level of protection, but the consumer has to put extra effort into their consuming to make sure they don't get media with that protection, it's going to become (or already has become!) too much trouble to buy anything at all.
You conveniently neglected to consider his use of the term "unlawful" in his definition of murder. The death penalty is lawful in that it it state-sanctioned killing of someone as punishment for a crime they committed. Therefore it is lawful and by his definition not murder.
Exactly! I would mod up if I had points. He's using the term "rat hole" to describe online distribution as untested territory. He doesn't think it's bad, and doesn't eliminate the possibility of using it at a later date, he just doesn't want to jump in too early and get burned.
One word: Kuru.
Star Trek has several shows with different characters.
Which is why I specifically said "the Star Trek Franchise." I have no illusions that any one Star Trek series could stand against the original Doctor Who.
Technically, if you can say that Doctor Who has run for 43 years (i.e. counting the interim years where no new Doctor Who was made), The Twilight Zone has run longer (44 years by my count: first episode in 1959, last in 2003). However I don't believe it had even close to 700 episodes.
And if you look at the entire Star Trek Franchise as a whole, it is "younger" than Doctor Who (40 years) but has almost 4 times as many episodes.
Stargate doesn't even come close to making that cut, with only 10 years for SG1 and 3 I believe for Atlantis. I don't even understand how they get the longest running consecutive Sci-Fi show.... Doctor Who (the original) should probably win that one, too.