Wat.

Greedo wanted to take Han to Jabba for the bounty, there was absolutely no chance he would have fired without Han forcing his hand. He even offered to let Han go if he bribed Greedo with Jabba's money. Han briefly tried talking his way out of it, but got visibly pissed when Greedo brought the Falcon into the conversation.

Greedo would NOT have fired unprovoked, not a chance.

For a Slashdotter, you really don't know your Star Wars very well.

Luckily, they weren't allowed to read the bible for one and a half thousand years. Unluckily, they had scary bigoted old men telling them what god really meant.

It seemed to me to at least have a better plot then many many other movies, not that that is saying all that much.

My farts smell better than many other peoples farts. Doesn't mean you want a lung full.

Personally I really enjoyed Avatar and thought it should of been longer, but then I was more interested in learning more about Pandora the world then the story.

Good luck. Gargamel has been trying to get info on that place for decades, but keeps getting foiled at the last minute. Azriel has had no luck, either.

It might not be original, and maybe people can say "Oh pocahontas did it first!" but that doesn't change that it was a suspenseful, well-made film with some good points that people could think about.

How can it be suspenseful when you've seen it a dozen times before? I wasn't even thinking of Pocahontas, I was think of Dances with Wolves (the South Park guys agree - the mocked it with "Dances with Smurfs"). It's a very old and rehashed plot.

This is Slashdot. Of course popular movies (with their comfortable, predictable, paint-by-numbers plot) are going to be panned. The movies that don't follow a formula are never mainstream-popular, and the ones I like might not be the ones you like, so there'll never be consensus there.

Get over yourself. If you want to turn your brain off and follow the herd (hurd?) don't be surprised when thinkers look down on you.

and his Gentoo compiling microwave oven

My microwave compiles NetBSD , you insensitive clod!

Get over it, dude. Go take something apart.

Easier said than done. These unwashed masses are diminishing my options, and are dumbing down my devices. I can tune out most of the world-I-don't-care-about, but once that world starts impacting on my world, it's overly simplistic to dismiss my concerns with a "get over it" throwaway line.

Why is it that all Opera users assume they've discovered some grand secret, some golden app that trumps everything else and only they know about - and they must proselytise!

Look, this is Slashdot, we all know about Opera, we've all tried it, yet we don't use it. Get over it. Opera isn't "the shit", it's just shit.

The iTunes lockin was necessary to keep the record labels from suing the living crap out of Apple

I hear this from Apple apologists a lot. And no matter how often you repeat it, it doesn't make it true

Apple loves lock-in. It had nothing to do with the labels. Apple could have licenced Fairplay to anybody, but they didn't, because they love lock-in. The labels wanted Apple to licence Fairplay to thirds parties, because it would have increased their revenue and increased marketshare, but apple loves lock-in, so they didn't.

Apple is a walled garden. They've never claimed otherwise (well, their fans do).

Seriously. I'm a tech person. I use Linux. I'm not trendy, and I don't have any interest in being trendy. But if I'm going to own an MP3 player, I want one that doesn't have a terrible design, and for some reason Apple seems to be the only tech company interested in solving their customer's problems.

Now, seriously. I'm a tech person. I use FreeBSD (linux is for trendy try-hards). I'm not trendy, and I don't have any interest in being trendy. But if I'm going to own a media player, I want one that doesn't limit itself to MP3s and Apple's proprietary format, requiring shitware like iTunes to make it functional, and for some reason Apple seems to be the only tech company interested in lock-in and a "walled garden".

The OS X UI however, makes sense to someone who's never sat in front of a computer.

I know this isn't what you meant, but everytime I hear an Apple apologist say that, I think "The OS X UI makes sense to somebody that doesn't know what they're doing".

If you know what you're doing, and you want to get real work done, OS X isn't for you.

Also, it's 2010, who hasn't sat in front of a computer?

as you open an application you are back were you started with a desktop orientated application with menu's etc that are not tablet friendly

Something to think about: While you're correct that Win7 isn't a tablet OS, and for the most part Windows apps aren't tablet friendly, Microsoft saw your complaint coming. For all the whinging that people did over the ribbon interface, MS have tweaked the ribbon to work extremely well with touchscreens and tablet style interfaces (even if tablets aren't where you want to type shit into MS Office).

For years people predicted the demise of x86, but it's now a permanent fixture for the foreseeable future. It's history pushed it forward until it's now the default ISO for virtually all creative computing platforms. ARM is superior in many ways, but will never unseat x86. MS Windows is the same. It's not suited to tablet computing now, but it's not going anywhere.

I think this'll be another situation where MS are very slow to start, but they'll have a lot of inertia once they get going. People continually underestimate MS's resilience in the computing world.

You're also part of a self-selected group which is not only more skilled at technology, but which has a higher degree of interest in it in general.

I completely disagree with this assertion. I have never seen any evidence that the younger generation is more skilled at technology or has a higher degree of interest in it. Quite the opposite. When tech is new, only the enthusiasts are involved in it, be it automobiles, flight, communications, computers, whatever. Once established and accessible to the masses, the general skill and interest in a tech falls to a minimum. Only the sort of people that read "news for nerds, stuff that matters" maintain an ongoing interest.

I'm 35, I grew up on C64s and DOS. I first used Linux before it hit version 1 (but have since moved on to FreeBSD). People today are no different than they were in the 80's - they're not skilled at much, but they're comfortable with what they grew up with. They have no real interest in any form of technology, just what the technology can do for them.

Is someone that grew up with television more skilled at fixing or tinkering with televisions? Are they more interested in how they work? What about cars? More people drive cars now than any time previously, but are they skilled at motoring and mechanics, and do they have a higher degree of interest in cars in general? Or are they just interested in what cars can do for them?

It probably will never go away, but it will never take over either.

While I agree it's a current fad (the glasses requiring kind), I do think 3D will eventually become the norm.

Once glasses-less 3D is practical and cost effective, and once 3D TVs can display 2D at the same high quality that they display 3D (current 3D TVs do 3D well, but aren't too good with 2D), then 3D will become ubiquitous. You'll sit in front of the TV and watch the old stuff in 2D, and new stuff in 2 or 3D, just like you can watch old black and white movies on your new HD TV.

It won't happen in the immediate future, but I'd guess within 10 years 3D TVs will be 90%+ of what's sold (the non-glasses kind). Buying an old style 2D TV will be like trying buy a VHS player now. They exist if you want one, but it's no longer the consumer norm.

They're following the bible, to the letter, how much more Christian can you get?

Apart from following the anti-gay teachings in both Deuteronomy and Leviticus, they also refuse to allow bastards and sons of bastards into church, "to the tenth generation he shall be banished" (Deuteronomy 23:2), they refuse medical support such as blood transfusions as taught in Deuteronomy 12:16, and they generally promote biblical law wherever possible.

The bible does not quite say "love thy neighbour". You're misquoting Leviticus, chapter 19 where it says "love one's neighbour as oneself". Since the WBC feel every human has fallen short of the glory of god, they do love their neighbour as they love themselves - which is not very much.

The WBC also "turns the other cheek". Jesus' sermon on the mount in Matthew chapter 5 states "If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other so he may strike it also". It's about responding to violence without violence, and they certainly don't get violent at their protests. In fact, when they are attacked they literally do "turn the other cheek" to be struck again.

The WBC are about as Christian as you can possibly be without having a complete mental collapse.