riddler

With Facebook, MySpace, and all the other social networking sites, cards are a bit unnecessary, IMO. Instead of sending a card once a year, we can keep in touch on a much more frequent basis. The whole spiel about there being a "personal touch", blah, blah, is nothing more than rhetoric for teachers to feel good about teaching cursive to kids, and making paper companies and Hallmark happy. It takes time and effort to make videos and get photos onto a website, all so your friends and family to see your kids and dogs. You can type a personal email message if you really want to say something specific to that person. One look at what they're doing to the rainforest of Indonesia, just to make more paper, is all the justification I need to break with another silly tradition. I suspect that you're getting fewer cards because they're unnecessary, not because your friends and family are being cheap. They still love you Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I heard the Little Mermaid hooked up with the Village People back in the 80's. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Wiki says it was the improvement of Soviet surface-to-air missiles that obsoleted this aircraft, not Kennedy. I'm interested in your source of information. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

You guys had girls in your engineering program?? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I'm guessing you don't live in Denver - it's 13 degrees and snowing right now. Best to stay inside. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

It's been around a while. I personally like the Star Wars databank, but it's also nice to have an alternate non-partisan source, like Wookieepedia, since Lucas controls the Star Wars universe with an iron grip. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I don't believe that was the reason. Carter authorized covert funding to forces that were in opposition to the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan, not because they were socialist, but because it was an effort to weaken the Soviet Union. The equality-centered government of the PDRA (some on here would call it "communist"), was popular with urban Afghans, but was not popular with rural farmers, that preferred Islamic rule. Carter attempted to use that as a way to create a resistance to the PDRA, so that the neighboring Soviet government would become more isolated. The end result was that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Afghanistan was no more than a pawn on the chessboard of the Cold War. Of course, the Soviets tried to do the same thing to us, which resulted in the Cuban missile crises. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Are you saying that continuing to kill Iraqis and American soldiers, despite the fabricated reasons was the correct thing to do? Or are you saying the continuation of the nation-building effort was the correct thing to do? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I agree. I have not heard one right-winger say that they now support Obama. I would like to hear from one former detractor that now thinks Obama has done something worthwhile, and may consider voting for him for re-election. Any takers? Beuller? Beuller? On the other hand, this is going to lose Obama a lot of democratic votes. I agree with the mission to find and kill OBL. I don't think another nation-building effort is necessary, and this mission is shaping up to be that. It's going to be extremely difficult to build there, much harder than in Iraq. I will surmise that Obama is doing what he believes is the best thing to do, regardless of his political standing, and I respect him for that. I don't agree with him on this decision, however, and it may cost him the re-election. Quade mentioned that war-time Presidents are almost always re-elected, and that's true, but I really think people are getting tired of this war that has been going on for more than eight years, on top of the eight-year Iraqi war. If we find OBL, or there is another terrorist strike in the US, then the population of the US may get behind Obama again. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Difference is that the government expects people to read the Driver's Handbook. The Judeo-Christian leadership doesn't really want people reading the Bible. They want to quote it and hope you just listen to their interpretation. Anyone that actually reads it is going to have issues with it - a LOT of issues - and that act may shake the faith of the reader. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Does reeling after looking at BillyVance's pictures count? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

You have two options: 1. Act like an old geezer that doesn't need any of this new-fangled technology (maybe your grandparents thought that way about telephones. 2. Get on Facebook. But learn how to turn off the games and quizzes as soon as you sign up. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

There are a lot of options for reproducing other than the old fashioned way. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Revisiting the classics. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Touche - this is a good argument. I'll take Newt over Jar-jar any day of the week. But Darth Maul cancels out Jar-jar - he was too cool. Edit to add - and Jar-jar was actually the second most popular character of Episode 1. The kids liked him, so he got good ratings. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Did you really think this was a redeeming scene in The Matrix? She said "it was you", but what I heard was "you had me at Hello". Blech - I distinctly remember sticking my finger down my throat to plug the bile coming up during that scene. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I thought it was going to be about food. Maybe that means I'm part French. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Sometime well after mankind gives up sex, self-indulgence, destruction of their surroundings, disregard for all other lifeforms, the need to accumulate junk, territorialism, belief in invisible spirits, and laziness in general ... Sometime after all that, they may give up their need for war. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I really think Santa Claus ruins God for a lot of young people. I did some bad things when I was a kid, and I never got coal in my stocking. So, I'm supposed to believe that I go to Hell when I die, right? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Antennas have ladders. Minarets - I think that's just free-climbing. Dunno, I never really looked closely at one. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Previews look great, but James Cameron writing and directing? That raises some serious red-flags with me. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Yeah, if you listen to the directors and producers, they admit the biggest problem was fitting a 1,000 page book into a two-hour movie. It's difficult to understand all the context without reading the book first. Not enough space-ship time, although the folding-space concept was interesting. Edit - I'm speaking of the original film and the first book. The remake doesn't even qualify as a film, IMO, much less good Sci-Fi. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

You could even say that it has religious themes - I was surprised how close Scientology matched LRH's "fictional" book. But yeah, one of the funniest parts is when they talk about disintegrating people, and the ray-gun just made them fall over. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Good movies vs. great movies. A great Sci-Fi movie has: 1. At least two different planets (Matrix counts, because Machine World and Zion are different enough) 2. Really cool spaceships (Matrix barely makes it with hovercrafts and squids) 3. Religious undertones that make me question atheism. 4. Love stories are minimized, because they make me feel uncomfortable with my emotions. Not that the movies mentioned here aren't good (or even very good): Aliens - very awesome, I have it on DVD, but Newt isn't all that appealing, and there is no religious reference. Fifth Element - also awesome, I own it. Too much comedy to be great Sci-Fi. District 9 - not bad, but no other planets, thinly-veiled apartheid message was too "human" to be good Sci-Fi, and unforgivable plot holes. Children Of Men - loved this movie, love Alfonso Curan - wouldn't call it Sci-Fi, more like a genetic drama in the near future (I want my spaceships, dammit!). Bladerunner - right on the border of great, with it's awesome Vangelis soundtrack, but a bit over-immersing, and IIRC, the entire thing was on Earth, with only references to "off-world" colonies. Terminator - also on the border of great. Future Earths count as different worlds, IMO. Spaceships and religious references are the only thing missing. Dune - great book(s), nonsensical, confusing movie. Black Hole - remake has potential! In general, I don't think the "classic" Sci-Fi films are all that appealing. The Day the Earth Stood Still and it's remake aren't that good, IMO. Metropolis get a mention for a great silent film. Planet of the Apes - awesome movie, awesome plot, the "future ship" doesn't really count as a spaceship. Maybe this counts as great Sci-Fi, but it was missing something. E.T. - please It was a love story with kids and a squishy alien. Could've been a smart dog running from the dog-catcher, and the plot would be nearly the same. Close Encounters - good movie, nice government conspiracy, no other planets. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

There have been only two really great Sci-Fi movies in my lifetime. They are Star Wars (trilogy) and The Matrix (trilogy). I'm counting the trilogies as one movie, which is entirely unjust, because we all know that The Empire Strikes back beat the crap out of the other two Star Wars films, and The Matrix started out great, then went downhill fast. Yeah, I know the Star Wars plot was a rip-off of Kurosawa's Hidden Fortress, but it had laser-sword-wielding Shaolin monks with new-age mind-powers! How cool was that? Star Wars came out 1977-1983, and I had to wait sixteen years for another good series to start (Matrix came out in 1999). Matrix was very original and awesome, IMO, with good theological references, and human drama, but not enough cool ships. I don't exactly see Hollywood getting more creative, so I'm guessing there will be even a greater time gap before someone busts out with another sweet Sci-Fi movie. Don't get me wrong, I love Firefly, but it's television with limited effects, and Serenity was just OK. Even a great indie film would be fine with me, like THX1138 without the love story, and a lot more CGI. Except it can't be really, really complicated, like Primer; there's something like eighteen different timelines in that brain-lock of a film. It seems like there is more often good fantasy than good Sci-Fi in film. I heard that they are making "Ender's Game" into a feature film, and I hope it's as good as the book (or books, since they are supposed to build Ender's Shadow into the same script). Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD