So...
does one cube have little pins in it that stick out? And another one might play The Birdy Song repeatedly, or spew fire, or create localised rain storms? So long as they last longer than 47 minutes anyway.
9611 publicly visible posts • joined 11 Sep 2009
We all know what happened to Worf. He fell through a hole in the space time continuum and wound up in Slough in 1932. Understandably of course, his frustration at being dumped in Slough of the 1930s, caused him to repeatedly try to beat his own brains out by head butting the damp plaster moulds hanging in the chocolate factory he had taken refuge in. The resulting confectionary cast using the damaged moulds was an instant success, and Forrest Mars took Worf on as senior mould-maker until Worf's untimely demise in 2006, after which time the company was no longer able to fend off aggressive corporate takeovers by meeting them with a level of aggression not seen in the boardroom since.
TOS is, in the Enterprise line of things, when the Federation were building starships and crazy 60s retro design was in vogue.
A bit like how, in the 2010s, the design zeitgeist for some crazy reason ditched advanced skeuomorphic desktop design for flat 8-bit CLUT 70s style iconography. I expect in 20 years time we will look back on Windows 8/10 and iOS 8/9 and OS X 10.9/10/11 and laugh at it.
Sorry. Have you never heard of the term "spinoff"?
They (TNG, DS9, Voyager & Enterprise) are neither "reboots" nor "sequels". They are set in the original TOS universe, but do not continue to use any of the original cast as regular characters (beyond Majel Barrett, and I don't think we can count "Federation Computer" as an actual "character")
They are SPINOFFS. With occasional cross-overs and guest appearances.
The only true "sequel" would be ST:TAS.
The only "reboot" is the new film series set in the lens-flare universe. Does anyone have a handy chalk-board in their living room in order to sketch out where the time-line skews?
Because. OK?! How many readers got into science and technology as a result of watching programmes like Dr Who, Blake's 7, Star Trek, Tomorrow People, Tomorrow's World etc etc as a youngster? I know I did, and as Dr Who's the only one that's still going out of that list (except Tomorrow People and we'll ignore that as the reboot isn't anything like the 1970's job), I think it's a valid way to engage the readers. Now if you want to complain about the Reg reporting on fantasy TV, hold your ire for when they put out a Twilight article. Oh, and they do the occasional Bond piece too. Live with it.
I like Capaldi in this. Some of the writing's dreadful, but he does really well considering some of the steaming turds they toss to him. Unfortunately when you get someone as good as he is in the role, the writers either think they can get away with poor plot ideas or they don't notice when they've slipped up and have to try harder.
Breakfast need never be boring again with the new Ronco "Toast-o-graphic" photo image maker!
Just stand in front of the discrete lens and minutes later the toast rack on top will be full of delicious hot toast, each slice bearing your image. Or get the whole family in on the act and use it to reserve a personalised slice; no more popping off to use the bathroom only to find all the toast gone when you get back.
A lot of the drugs are developed from compounds that they buy for a pittance or steal from small, tax payer funded research groups doing basic research. The government has cottoned on to this and said that we must all do translational research now if we expect the public purse to be funding it. That means you have to work on a disease and aim to produce results which will treat that disease. Universities are all too often happy to sell out their share of intellectual property which shows potential, and sell it out far cheaper than the value of a developed product, because they don't want to be asked to pay the cost of developing it. They want cash in the bank, quick as they can.
So the argument that the cost of drug development is proportionate to the profits cuts no ice with me. They're making out that they're doing everything required to being a drug to market, and they aren't. They're doing a lot, yes, but not as much as they would claim credit for.
Yes, I just found that with my local newspaper's website. They've changed something and the ads have become even more intrusive.
A few months ago, I read a news article about a big spender visiting a local strip club. The advertising on the page picked up keywords from the news story and started showing adverts about "legitimate bussinessmen's clubs". That, somehow, influenced the targeted ad vending on other pages, not even news related, in such a way that about a quarter of the ads were suddenly for things from the seedier side of the web.
It's changed now, thank God, but for a month I was getting a vastly increased advertising from casinos, strip clubs and "executive" services. All from reading the news.
I put it to you that there are as many wankers in market research and product development as there are in the "post-production" marketing weasel-fest.
In support of this, I ask you to consider how far from the truth is the following:
MARKETING GIRL: When you have been in marketing as long as I have, you’ll know that before any new product can be developed, it has to be properly researched. I mean yes, yes we’ve got to find out what people want from fire, I mean how do they relate to it, the image -
FORD PREFECT: Oh, stick it up your nose.
MARKETING GIRL: Yes which is precisely the sort of thing we need to know, I mean do people want fire that can be fitted nasally.
westbriton. A local newspaper. Full screen pop-overs, ninja self-rolling audio equipped videos and javascripted so you can't back button out of the site.
Anyone who argues that adblockers are evil should be sent to westbriton's site.
Other contenders below please, and experiences of visiting with and without adblockers.
Ha, yeah. Bill Hicks. Playing to a packed house there. Good job they let all those people who bought tickets know that the show was on... do you think it was just from putting up a poster outside the theatre and maybe an ad in the listing section of the local rag? That's fine. No problem with that. Employing someone to ring up chat shows and telling them they can get a cut price appearance from a celebrity in return for pushing the show/book/DVD on the show... thin ice.
Just to be clear, advertising = publicising, i.e. telling you about something. Marketing is trying to make you buy it, usually by lying, misrepresenting or targeting the most gullible/vulnerable group of people for that product or service..
For example...
Actual Game Footage... advertising.
Not Actual Game Footage... marketing.
Marketing managers are, to the last man (or woman) a bunch of wankers.