I was under the age of ten when I saw this but the actors pretending to type while text scrolled up on the screen at a uniform rate is some I still remember (hopefully correctly).
People operating computers with typed commands well into the graphical OS era is a common "bad computer scene". And people playing video games on a modern system with sound effects date from the early 80's added over the top.
Looks like the framework is being pout place to make sure we all remain loyal to the Australian government (and the financial interests it serves), or else.
If the reader thinks we are really under threat from terrorists look up "false flag operations". Do these people sit around twiddling their thumbs waiting for terrorists give them the chance to introduce this type of legislation?
These people have too much taxpayer money. Let's divert their funding into something useful and ignore the army whinging about having limited bullets for training exercises like we ignore legitimate complaints about a lack of funding in vital areas. I know people who are fans of the American military-industrial complex's products will hold the exact opposite opinion about how all those taxes that are levied on Australians should be divided up.
Don't play that card, yet another Liberal term would have seen something similar unfolding, they'd still be trying to turn the Australian people into slaves in their own way. Both parties have a grip on power and we're stuffed until we can get rid of them.
It's always better to leave the party early. If I had rolled along with the strip's popularity and repeated myself for another five, 10 or 20 years, the people now "grieving" for "Calvin and Hobbes" would be wishing me dead and cursing newspapers for running tedious, ancient strips like mine instead of acquiring fresher, livelier talent. And I'd be agreeing with them.
I think some of the reason "Calvin and Hobbes" still finds an audience today is because I chose not to run the wheels off it.
He's definitely taking a shot at Garfield and Jim Davis there.
Not offtopic you stupid fucker with mod points because this ties into how much money the movie studios make. They supposedly "lose" millions from people viewing a free low-res version.
The Rainbow Six games (1 to 3 at least) have realistic damage where the enemy can kill you in one shot. I think this makes these games better. But for games involving hails of bullets like Medal of Honor or Call of Duty realistic damage might make these games unplayable. I think it could be worked into a lot more games though, it would just require being more careful which is an acceptable part of the learning curve.
Yes, things like this need to be staged to remind us that our rights need to be suspended to keep us safe. The audio-only Bin Laden tape from this year was laughable.
While reading over some the replies, one solution would be to copy the entire wikipedia and host it on a site with un-restrictive policies, have a fixed total of maybe ten administrators for the entire site (rather than the 1700 of Wikipedia) and let all vandalism be corrected by regular editors. All copyright-infringing material would remain online until a complaint is submitted.
"Wikipedia's implicit notion that everyone has an equal right to edit entries."
Due to the presence of "administrators" who can bar non-administrators from editing (i.e. locking an article), that has never been true. Not that I agree with increased restriction but at least the anons can still submit edits and they'll be evaluated by editors who probably won't have the "what I say goes" attitude of the administrators.
I think most people here believe this is simply the route that was taken to get rid of Pirate Bay, this way the people who created it have sold out and they will not be spending all their creative energies on maintaining the existing site or setting up a new one.
"The ballet box is the only way to get rid of these goons."
No it isn't, because Liberal will implement basically the same polcies. We don't have a viable third party so for the forseeable future we will be at the mercy of the same bunch of goons (Labour/Liberal).
because China is already fairly undemocratic. Not on a downward slide like the west, I guess we'll meet them at the bottom with our censored internet and police state with plutocrats at the top doing what they like.
I'll keep that name in mind, it seems like an awful way to go just for one senator's vote. Surely the other issues are trivial compared to this (assuming these people have not been bought and are not just using censorship as a cover). I wish I knew more about how the country is really run. I guarantee you there is something larger going on here though. I just hope the mainstream media's on our side.
So it's nothing larger than a small group of Christians then? What explains the rather extensive blacklist then which will of course be added to as time goes by, and trying to pull a swift one by saying that we could opt out? Considering that pretty much all the fundamentalists are in the U.S., why is internet censoring not being introduced there? And let's not forget that Conroy is not a sole agent, I wonder how involved in this Rudd is.
Well, I hope is just down to censorship elements within the government and not part of a plan to extend the Great Firewall of China across the entire globe. I don't think people are realising how bad the possible implications of this could be if we let it happen, imagine if the first order of business is to filter all sites criticising the introduction of censorship. Even if you use proxy anonymisers, it'd take forever (for most people) to download large files.
I wonder if it goes up to the level of plutocrats or oligarchs who already have English language mainstream media marching in lock-step, making online news sources (eg. Slashdot) a better source of information. I know that Jay Rockefeller, from one of the American banking families whose immense wealth was created through such things as fractional reserve banking said that we might be better off without the internet (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8PCmLPPVnA) on grounds of security, so there are very powerful (i.e. monied) interests interested in locking down the internet through a smokescreen of legitimacy (protecting minors in our case). I wonder if we're a testbed for seeing the level of acceptance, if it can go all the way to concrete reality and acceptance by the general public.
Slashdot Mirror
When can we get height data with good enough resolution to show individual trees and buildings?
According to Wikipedia JÃnkÃping has an average high of 4 degrees celsius in November, but these people are dressed like it's summer.
I was under the age of ten when I saw this but the actors pretending to type while text scrolled up on the screen at a uniform rate is some I still remember (hopefully correctly).
People operating computers with typed commands well into the graphical OS era is a common "bad computer scene".
And people playing video games on a modern system with sound effects date from the early 80's added over the top.
Looks like the framework is being pout place to make sure we all remain loyal to the Australian government (and the financial interests it serves), or else.
If the reader thinks we are really under threat from terrorists look up "false flag operations". Do these people sit around twiddling their thumbs waiting for terrorists give them the chance to introduce this type of legislation?
I assume that the entire amount was borrowed at interest from a bank?
Note that even central banks (eg. the Federal Reserve) are invariably privately owned.
Speaking of duopolies don't forget Labor and Liberal, their cosy arrangement doesn't help.
These people have too much taxpayer money. Let's divert their funding into something useful and ignore the army whinging about having limited bullets for training exercises like we ignore legitimate complaints about a lack of funding in vital areas.
I know people who are fans of the American military-industrial complex's products will hold the exact opposite opinion about how all those taxes that are levied on Australians should be divided up.
Talking about Jaguars and multiple processors reminds me of a certain console...
Don't play that card, yet another Liberal term would have seen something similar unfolding, they'd still be trying to turn the Australian people into slaves in their own way. Both parties have a grip on power and we're stuffed until we can get rid of them.
An interview with the president of the Pirate Party here http://www.truthnews.com.au/radio/wordpress/?p=868
I read somewhere that one government job costs two private sector jobs (fair enough as it's supported by tax money). Rudd also has 150 beureacrats working on the ETS scheme that wasn't even passed. I wonder how much domestic security is sucking us dry http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/technology-news/australia-responds-to-threats-of-internet-war-20100115-mcgv.html
It's always better to leave the party early. If I had rolled along with the strip's popularity and repeated myself for another five, 10 or 20 years, the people now "grieving" for "Calvin and Hobbes" would be wishing me dead and cursing newspapers for running tedious, ancient strips like mine instead of acquiring fresher, livelier talent. And I'd be agreeing with them.
I think some of the reason "Calvin and Hobbes" still finds an audience today is because I chose not to run the wheels off it.
He's definitely taking a shot at Garfield and Jim Davis there.
Not offtopic you stupid fucker with mod points because this ties into how much money the movie studios make. They supposedly "lose" millions from people viewing a free low-res version.
With all those returns can they tell their P2P spying contractors to lay off people downloading AVIs from torrent sites?
The Rainbow Six games (1 to 3 at least) have realistic damage where the enemy can kill you in one shot. I think this makes these games better. But for games involving hails of bullets like Medal of Honor or Call of Duty realistic damage might make these games unplayable. I think it could be worked into a lot more games though, it would just require being more careful which is an acceptable part of the learning curve.
Yes, things like this need to be staged to remind us that our rights need to be suspended to keep us safe. The audio-only Bin Laden tape from this year was laughable.
While reading over some the replies, one solution would be to copy the entire wikipedia and host it on a site with un-restrictive policies, have a fixed total of maybe ten administrators for the entire site (rather than the 1700 of Wikipedia) and let all vandalism be corrected by regular editors. All copyright-infringing material would remain online until a complaint is submitted.
"Wikipedia's implicit notion that everyone has an equal right to edit entries."
Due to the presence of "administrators" who can bar non-administrators from editing (i.e. locking an article), that has never been true.
Not that I agree with increased restriction but at least the anons can still submit edits and they'll be evaluated by editors who probably won't have the "what I say goes" attitude of the administrators.
I think most people here believe this is simply the route that was taken to get rid of Pirate Bay, this way the people who created it have sold out and they will not be spending all their creative energies on maintaining the existing site or setting up a new one.
"The ballet box is the only way to get rid of these goons."
No it isn't, because Liberal will implement basically the same polcies. We don't have a viable third party so for the forseeable future we will be at the mercy of the same bunch of goons (Labour/Liberal).
because China is already fairly undemocratic. Not on a downward slide like the west, I guess we'll meet them at the bottom with our censored internet and police state with plutocrats at the top doing what they like.
Robocop - there never was a good FPS made.
Terminator - Terminator Skynet's a bit old.
X-Wing/TIE Fighter
The Lucasfilm point-n-click adventures.
Rainbow Six - put some stealth and espionage missions back in.
I'll keep that name in mind, it seems like an awful way to go just for one senator's vote. Surely the other issues are trivial compared to this (assuming these people have not been bought and are not just using censorship as a cover).
I wish I knew more about how the country is really run. I guarantee you there is something larger going on here though. I just hope the mainstream media's on our side.
So it's nothing larger than a small group of Christians then? What explains the rather extensive blacklist then which will of course be added to as time goes by, and trying to pull a swift one by saying that we could opt out?
Considering that pretty much all the fundamentalists are in the U.S., why is internet censoring not being introduced there?
And let's not forget that Conroy is not a sole agent, I wonder how involved in this Rudd is.
Well, I hope is just down to censorship elements within the government and not part of a plan to extend the Great Firewall of China across the entire globe. I don't think people are realising how bad the possible implications of this could be if we let it happen, imagine if the first order of business is to filter all sites criticising the introduction of censorship. Even if you use proxy anonymisers, it'd take forever (for most people) to download large files.
I wonder if it goes up to the level of plutocrats or oligarchs who already have English language mainstream media marching in lock-step, making online news sources (eg. Slashdot) a better source of information.
I know that Jay Rockefeller, from one of the American banking families whose immense wealth was created through such things as fractional reserve banking said that we might be better off without the internet (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8PCmLPPVnA) on grounds of security, so there are very powerful (i.e. monied) interests interested in locking down the internet through a smokescreen of legitimacy (protecting minors in our case).
I wonder if we're a testbed for seeing the level of acceptance, if it can go all the way to concrete reality and acceptance by the general public.