Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Eh, we had the older skywalker (Score 2, Insightful) 629

He was a whiny teen. Luke Skywalker just accepts his fate. In an ACTION movie, that is important. Leave the shallow soul searching for MTV. The problem with the movie is that Darth Vader it truly and wholy evil. The "saving" at the end of Return of the Jedi was already bad enough (in the books and expanded universe it is made clear that he can't cross over nearly as easy, hence the reason to burn the corpse where Yoda and Obi-wan just faded away) but it still doesn't sit well with the hero ending of the bad guy being blown away, but is excused because it is different enough to be seen as original.

But he AIN'T a hero character. And in the first three movies you are supposed to care about this guy who really is not going to end up saving the day. It would be like making a movie about Adolf Hitler's youth and expecting people to root for him. Sorry, no. And there was a remote possibility that we could have cared, if we had seen him fighting the dark side only to be tricked fatally in the end in a way nobody could forsee. But the entire 3 movies are like a Punch and Judy show, with the audience screaming "look out behind you" and punch looking the wrong way and saying "where". Hilarious when 4 year olds see it done in a good puppet show, but the political antics were beyond young kids and below adults. Where were those supersmart jedi, were was the mastermind of the emperor. No action hero to save the day, no intense manipulation by unseen puppeteer masters who turn wheels within wheels. Just... well just the 3 prequels which told a story that could have been told in a simple expanded universe book in a way that would not have focussed on the villain but on a new hero whose path crosses that of the villain.

There is a reason this guy takes 70 minutes to tear the movie down, because the prequels are really that fucking bad. Not the kinda bad that you get when a producer gets his hand on something he doesn't understand (Uwe Boll) or the producer just can't direct (Plan 9 from outer space) but the kinda bad that arrives when a lot of very talented people forget just what the fuck they are good at doing.

The simplest example of this is the CGI battle on the grassy plane. What did CGI do well in those days? Tech scenes, hard corners, steel and concrete. So what did they render, lush grass land. It looks fake! They managed to get a green lawn which you can shoot for real on any golfcourse looks horribly fake.

And if you think 20 minutes is 1/3 of the movie, then your brain must have carefully restructured itself to shut out the most damaging memories, memories that if they were to surface would turn you into a bliddering murderous psycho.

Proof, you think the movie could be fixed. Amazing healing capacities the brain has. I can remember it all, but I am sane! Ain't I Mr. Fibble?

Comment Re:Scripting not programming±±? (Score 1) 752

Fair enough, and I agree with your prior statement, which was that C is not hard to learn. I'm old enough to have worked extensively in C because we didn't have the more modern alternatives. Even C++ was new, dinosaurs were still leaving tracks in the mud, and Kernighan was still dating.

I have not recently encountered many problems where I needed to take on C or C++ to create a sufficiently efficient solution. I have nothing against C, indeed I loved working in it back in the day. I never worked with C++ to become comfortable with the libraries, so I just steer clear of it. Java/Scala have worked well enough for anything that was intensive, and Python is just easier for everything else. It's a rare problem in my world where developer efficiency isn't a primary goal, and that hardware can't be used to solve the rest of the need for speed (assuming a reasonably efficient implementation). I know there are many cases where that isn't true, they're just rare in my work.

Comment Who needs that? (Score 4, Insightful) 196

Although faster is better and will be every Slashdotter's wet dream, but I'd rather have power-efficient laptops rather than a gazillion Ghz laptop. I don't get why an average Joe needs a Core 2 Duo laptop for Word processing and surfing the web, which is what most people have and what most people do now. And now they're going to put i7 on the laptops. There will be some people who needs it, but not the majority of casual laptop users, who don't do video encoding or kernel compilation (which should be the work of a desktop IMHO).

I have two atom powered laptops and I even sold my laptops because I was so in love with those machines, which wouldn't burn my lap and my balls whenever I have to sit them on my laps. Other than the pitiful 950 graphics, I have nothing to complain about.

And I heard they fixed it with the Z5x0 chipset - on Windows at least, but as I don't have one, I can't verify it.

Comment Battletech RTS (Score 1) 135

In the early 90's Infocom released the Crescent Hawk's Revenge. It was an RTS, no resource harvesting or manufacturing but it played out in real-time as you moved your units around and shot at stuff. Extremely primitive by today's standards but fun back in the day. That game royally kicked my ass.

Cellphones

Journal Journal: AT&T Turning Away iPhone 3G Buyers

Stopping into an AT&T store early in order to inquire about the quantity that my local store will have for launch day, I decided to check my eligibility for a subsidized upgrade because I just upgraded 5 months ago under the assumption that the 3G iPhone would not be subsidized like the original version. Upon looking up my account information, the sales person stated that I would be unable simply skip the subsidy and buy a full price iPhone 3G July 11th. I asked if he could verify this and h
Education

Submission + - National Academies mount new defense of evolution

mpsmps writes: The National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine today released SCIENCE, EVOLUTION, AND CREATIONISM, a book laying out the latest and overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution and why non-scientific approaches do not belong in the science classroom. It also discusses how our understanding of evolution has been essential in scientific advances, such as the analysis of the SARS virus. You can download the press release or read the entire book for free online.

Slashdot Top Deals

The cost of feathers has risen, even down is up!

Working...