You do understand that is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether $190k then was, or was not, significantly different from 1m today, right?
You also understand that "making the film", specifically the part that got less expensive, is a tiny, tiny part of the undertaking, right?
You also understand that without dedicated props departments (such as those at DesiLu), props take much more time and energy and are less efficiently made in this case as compared to TOS, right?
You also understand that the number of dollars put out for anything from a bit of particle board to the plastic for a switch and the material for the costumes has increased proportionally as well, right?
You also understand that as these people are not professionals, they are no doubt at all putting in more work on some things than the crew at DesiLu, right?
I am sure your understanding is wide and deep, O Anonymous One.
Funny. I am reversed. Analog sounds better than digital to me.
But I don't want anything in my heads though. My audiologist did tell me that external bone conduction hearing aids are limited. It seems digital is worse than analog IMO.
I haven't been paying attention to the world news lately. What now with Russia and USA? Another cold war?
This is why I don't want any implants. I'm fine with external like headband bone conduction hearing aids. I finally switched to digital and geez it sucks compared to analog. I don't like this filtering and stuff in digital that causes (whistling/feedback)s, autochanging the volume, etc. Companies are trying to get rid of analog.
Smart people also do Dumb things.
Dumb people also do Good things.
Good people also do Bad things.
Bad people also do Smart things.
Smart people also do Good things.
Dumb people also do Bad things.
Good people also do Smart things.
Bad people also do Dumb things.
Smart people also do Bad things.
Dumb people also do Smart things.
Good people also do Dumb things.
Bad people also do Good things.
How to use statistics to imply anything
The zen of tiny sample sizes
Regression therapy, or, How to make someone think they remember something that never happened
The more letters you have, the more authoritative you can pretend you are. So come back for a baccalaureate!
Congratulations! You are now the proud owner of an Associate's Degree in Psychology!
Yeah, but you have to say that very, very softly.
Why a central bank would elevate economics to the status of awarding a Nobel prize is because they recognize just how valuable the field is to their work.
Why a central bank would elevate economics to the status of awarding a Nobel prize is because they recognize just how valuable the field is to defrauding the general public.
If you broaden your definition of science to include all fields of human investigation, sure.
Science is a method. When the only results of the method you can generate iare cloudy statistical results that may, or may not, apply to any specific instance you actually need to, or are trying to, understand, then you have not done anything useful or new, scientifically speaking.
On the other hand, if you can convince some moneyed party to part with same in following your cloudy statistical results, why then you do have something useful. This is the basis for every psychology shingle ever hung out, and every economic theory more meta than the math for interest and debt put on the table (which is really more simple math than economics anyway.) But you still have not done worthy science.
Psychology is a science, although a fairly new one.
Yes? Freud or Erikson? Psychosocial or psychosexual or psychoanalytic? Or primal screaming? Regression therapy and "repressed memories"? Momma's skirts and "everything is sex"? Standardized personality tests that are based on mid 20th century, middle-American groups of minimal sample size?
The only thing really "scientific" about psychology is its misuse of statistics to apply a behavioral theory that has some statistical traction, to the individual who may not fall into that theory's particular use of metaphor.
Psychology must start from this basis: Knowing how the mind works. But the fact is, we don't know how the mind works.
Ergo, psychology is something else. IMHO, that something else is significantly more akin to religion (by which I mean formalized superstition) than it is to a science that actually produces worthwhile conclusions.
Let's review science in a nutshell: Idea, prediction, test, data, peer review resulting in reliable, consensual, repeatable results... or right back to drawing board, folks.
Now psychology: a veritable cornucopia of ideas, consequent prediction failures, massively disjoint results, outliers and exceptions everywhere, fad driven and reminiscent of nothing so much as a pendulum that with a colony of rabid, highly kinetic squirrels nesting on the pendulum.
Science? No. The word we use for this kind of nonsense is "bunkum."
Inflation benefits governments and other profligate borrowers. Deflation benefits savers (and everyone else, to a lesser extent.)
Precisely this. For my part, this fairly obvious fact is highly likely to account for why inflation is never allowed to stop. Cynical? You bet.
TOS wasn't a million-dollar budget production either. Memory Alpha says it averaged $190k for the first season
You do understand that $190,000 in 1966 was equivalant to well over a million dollars today, right?
The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up until 5 or 6 PM.