Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:So is he a replicant, or not? (Score 1) 214

by rot26 (#49147169) Attached to: Harrison Ford To Return In Blade Runner Sequel
The power of the movie was due in large part to the uncertainty of Deckard's origins, and the uncertainty of his fate. Scott's opinion on the matter is valid, but if it were more than an opinion on a character he did not create, he could have made it explicit in the movie, which he did not.

So... opinion.

Comment: Re:Oh God No... (Score 2) 214

by rot26 (#49147137) Attached to: Harrison Ford To Return In Blade Runner Sequel
How do you conclude that replicants don't appear to age? Most of them didn't live long enough to appear older, but for those that don't have an expiration date (presumably Deckard and Rachael) , there was nothing to imply that they wouldn't appear to age as they, well, aged. Apparently quite a few people did not understand what a "replicant" was supposed to be in the movie, or, for instance, why they would need human organs, like eyes. Hint: NOT A ROBOT.

+ - Pat Robertson attacks NASA Mars exploration, says God did not create aliens->

Submitted by MarkWhittington
MarkWhittington (1084047) writes "According to a story in Salon, Pat Robertson, a televangelist and former presidential candidate, took to the airwaves on his “700 Club” and choose to inveigh against NASA in general and the exploration of Mars in specific. He seems to have it on good authority that God would not choose to create life on any other world but the Earth. His supposition is in the distinct minority among mainstream theologians though perhaps not of fundamentalist Christians like Robertson"
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:How does this compare to radio? (Score 2) 303

by rot26 (#49113367) Attached to: Pandora Pays Artists $0.001 Per Stream, Thinks This Is "Very Fair"
You were a DJ long enough to learn the weasel words, apparently. Paying for "adds" is not payola, although the effect is the same. Someone above (below) mentioned that not all networks accept paid-for adds now, that was news to me if true. However, following decades of precedent, they probably still do EXACTLY THE SAME THING but use different words, or funnel the money in different ways. I haven't seen mention of satellite radio yet, but the lack of diversity on it is also baffling to me, and the only explanation I can imagine is money exchanging hands SOMEHOW.

Nothing succeeds like success. -- Alexandre Dumas