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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Good movie? (Score 4, Interesting) 774

I was so ready to be disappointed, fearing that this would be another jumpcut, way-too-zoomed-in CGI-infested snoozefest like so many other action movies of the last few decades.

I was pleasantly surprised to be presented with a lean mean, no-holds-barred guns-a-blazing action blast with tons of awesome practical effects and long-duration shots that really let you take in every bit of the insanity instead of only showing you glimpses. It was great, honestly, truly great.

Comment: Re:Good movie? (Score 2) 774

To be fair it's more like 2 or 3 enormous chase scenes with a little bit of plot on top.

But oh man, those chase sequences (all nearly goddamn two hours of them) are utterly amazing. Awesome practical effects, absolutely insane stuntwork and some of the coolest vehicles ever built (and gloriously smashed to bits).

I know it sounds a bit silly when you sum it up like you did, but it really is one hell of a rollercoaster ride.

Comment: Re:Sooooo...... (Score 3, Interesting) 774

It's a damn good, straight-to-the-chase, no-holds-barred action flick, with absolutely stunning fabrication and stunt work and very little CGI. It is visually stunning, darkly humorous and never boring.

Is is arthouse cinema with obtuse symbolism and pathetic neurosis-filled characters? No, and it doesn't have to be. It's meant to be a big fun rollercoaster ride, and doesn't try to be anything else. There's no romantic subplot pointlessly tacked on, the closest to that is a very brief between two characters where one of them has been a sex slave all her life and one is a gasoline-crazed psychopath, but that's OK. It's very brief and sets up the latter character for his eventual act of ultimate heroism. There is no filler, just action from start to finish.

It delivers exactly what it set out to do and doesn't try to be anything more than it is.

Comment: Re:You're not a subscriber (Score 1) 616

by KozmoStevnNaut (#49711549) Attached to: Editor-in-Chief of the Next Web: Adblockers Are Immoral

I think there's also a random factor involved. I remember when I was a lurker, there would periods of up to a week where I couldn't browse the forums, and then it would be open again for a while.

Either way, it's only a $10 one-time fee. However I think the general forums aren't really worth it, and most of the specific ones are a bit so-so. The signal/noise-ratio in GBS in particular is horrendous, and most of the more specific forums tend to move rather slowly, but they're pretty good other than that.

However, the automotive forums (Automotive Insanity and Cycle Asylum) are the best damn car/bike-related forums I have ever used. Very little bullshit, some very knowledgeable users (one guy is like a Jeep whisperer, he knows EVERYTHING about them), and interesting projects. There's no muscle car/import hate, no EV hate, no macho street race posturing etc., and there is absolutely no common thread in which cars/bikes are represented, apart from the fact they all have wheels (a couple may have tracks, though).

Comment: Re:You're not a subscriber (Score 1) 616

by KozmoStevnNaut (#49711063) Attached to: Editor-in-Chief of the Next Web: Adblockers Are Immoral

SA doesn't require payment to read the forums, up to a limited number of views, after which you will have to wait or pay a one-time fee for a login. If you want to participate, you'll have to pay, but you can read a lot of threads without logging in, before you're locked out temporarily.

The forums also has the best revenue-generating feature ever: You can buy avatars and title text for other users, and it's obviously more expensive than changing your own.

Comment: Re:The paywalling of the Internet (Score 2) 616

by KozmoStevnNaut (#49711035) Attached to: Editor-in-Chief of the Next Web: Adblockers Are Immoral

I have no problem paying for a subscription (or forums account) for sites which matter to me. All of the truly important information I have found on the Internet has come from small enthusiast-run sites with no advertising, so I'm not too fussed if a majority of ad-sponsored sites either go subscription-only or simply die out.

Comment: What happened to me (Score 1) 360

by KozmoStevnNaut (#49692841) Attached to: What Happens To Our Musical Taste As We Age?

I'm 29, and I grew up listening first to the usual children-related pop stuff, then mostly what was played on the radio and popular. In my late teens and early twenties I was deep into metal, no other genres were acceptable. Now, over the last 6-7 years, my music tastes have broadened enormously, I listen to everything from country to jazz to rock to classical and just about everything in between.

I have hundreds of CDs, gigabytes and gigabytes of downloaded and ripped music, all of it something that struck a chord with me in some way at some point. Lately I've started a small LP collection, because there's just so much good music to be found in thrift stores and record store bargain basements for almost no money. I got a whole bundle of ELO albums for just a few bucks the other day, and as soon as I started playing them I thought to myself "why the hell haven't I listened to these guys before? This is awesome!".

Life's too short and music is too wonderful to limit yourself to arbitrary genres and popularity contests. There is amazing music in every genre, just waiting for you to listen to it.

Comment: Re:The true burden (Score 1) 385

by KozmoStevnNaut (#49509989) Attached to: Can High Intelligence Be a Burden Rather Than a Boon?

Absolutely. My IQ is above average according to the tests I've taken at various times.

Apparently I have high logical and spatial intelligence, and a good sense of rhythm, but I also have below-average social intelligence and "people skills".

It's all a tradeoff, very very few people are good at literally everything.

Comment: Re:The true burden (Score 1) 385

by KozmoStevnNaut (#49509971) Attached to: Can High Intelligence Be a Burden Rather Than a Boon?

Let's ignore IQ then.

Still, the fact remain, by most definition of intelligence, someone very smart would know more things, be more "aware" of the world, etc.

And the world fucking sucks. The more you know and understand it, the more depressing it is.

I agree 100%. Knowing too much and not being able to mentally ignore the obvious bullshit sucks so much.

Comment: Personally, happiness is fleeting (Score 1) 385

by KozmoStevnNaut (#49509951) Attached to: Can High Intelligence Be a Burden Rather Than a Boon?

My IQ is somewhere above 130, according to standardized tests. I am fully aware that IQ only measures very specific types of intelligence, and that I am probably both above and below average on other types of intelligence. For instance I absolutely suck at general small-talk. I love talking about things inside my sphere of interest, but the general "so, what's up?" kind of small talk completely flummoxes me.

I would say that being more informed of issues in the world, and being intelligent enough to know that there are better ways, definitely contributes to negatively to overall happiness. I mean, how can anyone be truly happy when there is war, hunger, injustice and exploitation in the world? How can anyone be content with the current situation when people are being mutilated and murdered by religious fanatics because they believe in different fairytales?

It's not that I never feel good emotions. I am moved to tears by particularly beautiful musical numbers, or sometimes movie scenes or books. I feel joy when I share good experiences with my friends and family. I am excited when I drive go-carts or ride my motorcycle. I am not a "*beep-boop* FEELINGS ARE ILLOGICAL" robot, I just don't think I have ever have felt true happiness, because I wonder and worry far too much.

Ignorance is bliss.

Remember, UNIX spelled backwards is XINU. -- Mt.