Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment The Hobbit didn't take the material seriously (Score 3, Interesting) 156

What's so horrible about The Hobbit?

The movies are stretched and it shows. They simply didn't have enough plot or action to fill the time and I got fairly bored at times. There are seemingly endless and mostly pointless action scenes that serve no purpose and frankly aren't all that well done either. The special effects were rushed. The dialog they added is insultingly bad. Etc... While I won't say they are horrible money grab movies on the level of say The Phantom Menace, they could have been a LOT better even if they had just spent more time in the editing room. Basically they knew they would be a commercial success so they really didn't try very hard.

LOTR all had battle scenes that took up half the movies that were too long. Songs were not included and plot from the book cut to make room for action and Hollywood.

The Hobbit is worse regarding the action scenes - the ones in LOTR didn't feel nearly as stretched out. And as for the "songs", there are lyrics but no actual music in the books so any music would be contrived. And frankly NOBODY wanted these movies to be a musical. (If you did then you are the only one) I sure as hell didn't go into them wanting to hear a bunch of "music" and I've read the Lord of the Rings probably close to 20 times. That is not what is the really interesting bit about the books - it's more of an intellectual curiosity than anything else that would have been terrible on the big screen.

Comment Re: Founders tend to make bad CEOs (Score 2) 183

To be fair Steve Jobs didn't make the transition from startup WizKid very well at all... He got kicked out of his company got ten years... And used the time to seriously adjust his attitude toward his workers/managers.

He did better than most. And you will notice that the company did quite badly once they kicked him out and recovered when he got back. No he didn't get everything right but he's one of the rare founders that was able to make the transition. Most do not.

And by all accounts he was still an ass when he came back. Maybe a more polished ass an ass nonetheless. People overlook it because he got good results.

Comment Bullets will not win this conflict (Score 3, Informative) 868

The people in Gaza are not Israeli citizens.

And yet Israel insists on controlling the territory. They may not get a vote but they ARE Israeli citizens until such time as Israel actually stops trying to control their political processes and truly leaves. Israel conquered the territory, they control what goes in or out and they fairly regularly send their military in. Even the maps show Gaza as a part of Israel. What they have done is to conquer a territory full of people who don't like Israel and never made a secret of that and then treated them badly for a long time. Shocking why things have gone badly.

Since I'm sure you'll mention the naval blockade, So for your information, the blockade was enacted in June 2007, when the Palestinians elected a terrorist organization (Hamas) to lead them, and started firing rockets in to Israel. Btw, right after their election, Hamas eradicated PLO members from the Gaza strip (which were *relatively* moderate muslims), through a series of violent clashes.

Yep, both sides are doing all sorts of evil things to each other. That's what happens in a civil war. Ever consider that a big part of the reason Hamas has such a large voice is because of the decades of stupid decisions by Israel? I totally get that Israel is a bit touchy given that they are surrounded by neighboring nations who have to put it mildly been quite hostile. But this is a conflict that will NEVER be won with bullets or walls. It will be won with cooperation and discussion and genuine caring about others.

Comment Win hearts and minds (Score 1) 868

So what do you think should be Israel's response to the constant bombing of their country?

Here's a notion. How about trying to win the hearts and minds of the people who aren't trying to bomb Israel and get them on Israel's side? This conflict will NEVER be won by force of arms unless we countenance genocide. If Israel really wants to have a solution they need to listen to what the Palestinians are saying and actually work out a deal. They need to bring economic prosperity to the region and give it a voice in political matters even though the people there aren't Jewish. If they need to establish separate nation states then do that. Stop moving into contested territories. Stop making Gaza an outdoor prison camp. Kindness might work here. Bullets never will.

The fact that Israel hasn't just wiped the country off the map is perplexing to me. It is usually what happens when a weak country continues to poke at a stronger one.

So you are proposing that the Jews commit genocide? Have you forgotten the Holocaust? If ANYONE would be reluctant to do that I should think it would be the Jewish people.

Comment A pointless conflict (Score 1) 868

You also have to consider that the Palestinian people as a whole are not Hamas, in the same way the Northern Ireland population were not the IRA.

And yet the Palestinians have not rejected Hamas wholesale either. Obviously a large percentage of the Palestinian people supports Hamas and their goals. Some don't but clearly not enough to clear out the radicals willing to use force. The Israelis for their part are just as bad. They keep electing people who support policies that they know are provocative to the Palestinians and they damn well ought to know what the results of those policies will be by this point.

Comment No innocent governments here (Score 2) 868

Hamas started it and reuses to agree to any proposed cease fire.

Doesn't matter who started it. That's an argument that children make to justify their own bad behavior. There is no innocent party here.

Israel isn't the group calling for the extermination, Hamas is.

Israel has turned Gaza into a large open air prison. Many people in Gaza are innocent of any criminal action and yet they are made to suffer along with the terrorists. Israel will not give any voice in government to anyone who is not Jewish. Israel is not remotely being a fair minded party here. They conquered this territory and haven't done a good job of winning hearts and minds. They aren't going to convince the extremists but they could have convinced the more reasonable people to deal with the extremists. There is no evidence I can see that this was ever tried with any serious intent.

Israel has also offered legitimacy to the Palestinian government in exchange for a cease fire and removing the language in the charter to kill all jews.

Hamas is not the Palestinian government. Neither is Fatah which is the other major political group involved. They are roughly akin to political parties with a percentage of their membership (particularly Hamas) who are radical. There are extremists in the Israeli government too and they keep provoking the Palestinians even when it is clearly not a good idea. Neither side is listening to what the other cares about and neither has been willing to do what it will take to bring peace.

Comment No innocents here (Score 1) 868

Israel never bombed their own citizens, you probably mean Hamas.

The people living in Gaza are not citizens of Israel? They are for all practical purposes since this is territory controlled by Israel. So in real terms how is this anything other than a civil war? Both sides are bombing each other and neither side is willing to be calm or rational. If you ever needed a better example of why I think organized religion is a terrible thing I certainly cannot find it.

Israeli citizens has all the rights that Americans have.

Tell that to the people living in Gaza. I'm sure they'll agree that their "rights" aren't being trampled on in any way and I'm sure they're fine with being kept in what amounts to a large prison camp with walls and guards.

Comment Founders tend to make bad CEOs (Score 3, Interesting) 183

Why the hell didn't they hire a competent CFO???

It's a good question and more common than you might think. Part of the problem is that bringing in competent outsiders can be uncomfortable for company founders. Gygax clearly had a problem with involving anyone who was not a wargamer but the people who are competent at finance don't overlap heavily with people who are gamers. Plus when things are going well it is easy to think that you can handle it. After all, it's gone well this far right?

One of the big challenges in growing a company is that the skill sets for founding a company and the skill sets for running it when it gets larger overlap far less than most people think. For every Steve Jobs or Jeff Bezos there are thousands of people who simply cannot make the transition from small company founder to big company manager. The founders of Google were actually smart enough to bring in some outside management relatively early because they knew they didn't really have the skillset at the time to manage a company with a stratospheric growth rate. It would be like hiring a guy who has never managed a network larger than 10 computers to suddenly take charge of Amazon's data warehouses. The skills needed are just on a completely different level.

Comment Stock warrants (Score 1) 183

But if Gygax already controlled 51.1%, it doesn't matter how many shares they buy; unless Gygax sold some of his own, they should never have more than 48.9% and thus never have been in a position to oust him.

What you are overlooking is treasury stock and stock warrants. Treasury stock is stock owned by the company itself (often through buybacks) and most companies have some. I'm guessing the options held by the Blume family were in the form of warrants to buy treasury stock (or something very similar). A warrant is a form of an option. When a stock warrant is issued shares for that warrant are created but held by the company until the option is exercised. This means that the shares already existed and were owned by TSR but the Blumes had the right (but not the obligation ) to buy them at a fixed price. Warrants are dilutive so while Gygax held a majority of outstanding shares he did not own a majority of issued shares. Gygax's majority was contingent upon those share not getting exercised. When Gygax declined to buy the shares (he declined his first right of refusal) then they could be exercised and sold and at that point he was no longer a majority shareholder.

Comment Set expectations up front (Score 1) 183

Actually, that's a real problem for most of us.

Shouldn't be in general. When your children misbehave or under-perform in school do you have a problem disciplining them? You did set out expectations in advance right? If you didn't then shame on you. Same with going into business with family. Set out expectations right up front and then hold them to those expectations and communicate how they are doing in relation to those expectations. If you do that things usually work out ok.

A sociopath has no problem flipping the switch, to decide that they can ignore the family ties.

Very few people are sociopaths but also too few are good at keeping business and family separate. Business is completely unforgiving of family relationships. The mere fact that someone is family in no way enhances the profits of the company. You can solve a lot of problems by being very clear right up front about how the business relationship will work. This doesn't mean it will necessarily be all kittens and rainbows but if you have a contract up front and live up to that contract then things usually work out fine in the long run. Understand though that there is a non-trivial chance of some seriously ruffled feathers if a family member or friend is performing such that they have to be fired. They are unlikely to be happy about it. But they also usually will forgive if you are simply doing what you said would happen before they started.

You have to be very careful when hiring family. I'm married into a family where the family has had a successful business for three generations stretching over 100 years. It can work fine but it's hard and you have to be VERY clear about how it will work in advance. I haven't gotten involved with the business in part because I recognize the challenges of working closely with family.

Comment Contracts up front even with friends/family (Score 1) 183

Firing a relative or friend has repercussions outside of your business relationship.

Yes it does. Which is why you need to exercise caution when hiring relatives or friends. Just as important you need any appropriate contract outlining the terms of their employment. If things go south (as they sometimes do) then you follow the contract to the letter. I've been business partners with friends and family and we took the time to agree how things would work up front. Some of the businesses didn't work out but they were dissolved amicably because we were clear up front about how things would happen. I'm still on good terms with them because we were honest with each other regarding what we wanted out of the arrangement and how it would work if things went well and if they didn't.

Do you really think that a nasty money fight between friends and relatives with contractual obligations in a business would not affect the personal relationships between them?

Of course it would but you can head most of those issues off by being VERY clear up front about how things will work. Say what you are going to do and then do exactly what you said you would do. If the other party can't deal with that then things were probably doomed from the start. I once had someone I respect a lot give me some very good advice. He said "Never get into a business deal you wouldn't be willing do as a handshake agreement but also never do a business deal where the details aren't spelled out on paper either." If you don't trust someone, don't go into business with them. If you do trust someone, protect yourself from being wrong by proper use of contracts.

Comment Larger bladder needed (Score 1) 119

I'd love to have an 800+ mile range but no car I've ever owned has ever even teased that (best tank ever 436miles).

Doesn't really matter since you don't have an 800 mile bladder. Unless you plan on wearing diapers while you drive you're going to pull over sometime for, umm... well, you know... and may as well refuel while you do.

Comment Start waking up (Score 1) 119

Wake me when it has a 500 mile range, can be fully charged in 5 minutes, and will last more than 5 years. Oh, and it has to work in a non-streamlined vehicle like a loaded F-150 pickup.

The only bit of that specification that would be difficult right now in pure electric form would be the 5 minute recharge unless we are talking about battery pack swaps. Nobody has done it yet but it's not actually impossible judging by the range achieved with the Tesla and some others.

Furthermore those specs could easily be done today albeit in hybrid form with better fuel economy, more torque/hp, equal refueling time and it certainly would last more than 5 years baring unexpected malfunction. Might not be cheaper but it is certainly technologically feasible. Honestly I think trucks should be diesel-electric hybrids like trains. Electric motors drive the wheels and get charged by a diesel engine.

Comment Different country. Different rules. (Score 4, Informative) 96

If you can see it from public property and tell what it is, it's (effectively) in the public domain, isn't it?

Not necessarily. This isn't the United States. Different laws and customs applied differently. Your normal expectations regarding the law may not apply.

I'd say Google's doing them a favour. If any of their secret installations turn up on it, you know it's time to shut them down or move them.

Yeah... I'm sure that's exactly how they will see it too... [/sarcasm]

Slashdot Top Deals

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...