Yes it was. I love the intermission during 2001, there's just something about a pause in the story accompanied by Ligeti that's just surreal.
I am well-aware my e-mail is visible, I have never been much into identity-shielding. A few of us reverted back to our old handles once that director left.
This is pure layman's WTFishness coming here, no legal experience whatsoever, but I can't quite understand how someone could feel they have a case here. How can one patent the actual "act" of doing something? At my place of business right now, we have a Xerox Workcentre 7775. We paid money for the purchase, the service contract with a local copier company for initial training, and now maintenance & supplies. We have many staff members entered into the simple one-touch menu, where it take their document, scans it, and e-mails a PDF attachment.
Are these people claiming they own a patent on us using a product we own, that was designed with this specific feature?
I once worked for a university IT department, where a lot of us still retained our old "not everyone needs e-mail" addresses well in to the late 90's, such as simple email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, and so on. One day our rather red-faced director, "Steve", came out to us and said it may be time for everyone to adopt the current "jsmith" standard, and told how a young woman on campus had just sent a quite amorous e-mail to her boyfriend, also name of "Steve", but she only put his first name in the To: field.
CraZy, that is.
This is the kind of craxy one finds on Alex Jones or rense.con. Or the local Tea Party rally.
to http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/, i.e. a faculty website of http://www.cira.colostate.edu/people/view.php?username=Hillger of Dr. Don Hillger, a Colo St meteorologist.
As long as the "U.S. Metric Association" continues to run out of the digital equivalent of a man's garage, and with a ~1999 web design to boot, it will not be taken seriously.
So, how many accounts did you lose today?
Why not jsut shoot them like dog in the backyard ?
Works for me. As far as I'm concerned, the lives of pedophiles are forfeit.
We have at present 973 devices in our organization, 589 of which are on WIndows XP.
Runs like a champ.
I agree. They're better than the originals, especially Revenge of the Sith.
I think the biggest problem is that the originals left so much open to the imagination when it came to the prequels. People grew up on them and their imagination of the prequels took hold and they imagined them to be something they couldn't possibly be. Too many people as adults continued to remember Star Wars from their childhood perspective and never acknowledged much of the silliness and flaws -- the silliness and flaws weren't apparent when we were children and they're hard to acknowledge as an adult because that would mean reassessing the quality of those films.
OMG that is EXACTLY what I have tried to convey to people I know, pretty much since 1999...I think my problem though was less-flattering terminology, i.e. "man-children still cherishing their Yoda Undaroos".
But yea, who among us didn't start concocting images in our heads of what the other movies would be like as soon as walking out of the theatre in '83? I think a lot of childhood imagination was pored into that 83-99 time period, and that late-20-early-30-something walked into the Phantom Menace expecting that same childlike wonder to wash over them, but y'know, they weren't actually kids anymore.
The later films had flaws, sure, but they weren't the high crime that many...many many many...fans made them out to be.
...who really kindof dug the 3 "new" Star Wars movies? Sure, there were parts that I didn't like...the stilted Christensen/Portman love dialog, the weakness of the Sifo-Dyas plot point, but few films are perfect.
Once I read the article, I discovered that this is an account of events from FIFTEEN YEARS AGO. 1997, dude.
The book itself is coming out now, is the point of the article.
If at first you don't succeed, you are running about average.