Considering he's focusing on the fact that it's a 48FPS movie when watching it, a second time no less, doesn't that kind of detract from the conclusion that it's a bad thing?
I thought it was pretty magical for a movie to flow like this, I felt the 3D was well focused and in many cases hard to notice (As it should be), and not just a layer slapped on.
All in all I'd rather watch it in 3DHFR first, and 2D later, to make a fair judgement on whether it's a good thing.
I agree that in the start I was a bit focused on the looks of it all, but after a few minutes it added to my immersion rather than detract from it.
Isn't it possible that the reason you're distracted by this new way of doing things, is because it is in fact new, and different from other movies? If everything looked like this, we can focus on the right things instead.
That a promo code could be used more than once, or that you could use it in ways it was never meant to? Of course the problem it's not simple, but anyone who thinks it is shouldn't be working on these things. Either someone screwed up building the system, or someone thought they could use it in ways it wasn't intended and screwed up. Sure, the solution might not be as simple as a lack of server-side validation, but either way, the solution is simple, the problem isn't.
Search engines could be localization-aware. Google already makes quite complex transformations to the queries, I don't think this would be insurmountable.
I'm not sure this is the definition of 'first come, first served', I hit the register button the first time around 07:00:06, watching painstakingly as every spinner eventually return "No tickets found". What a slap in the face.
But since nearly every character is valid in an email address before the @ sign (within ""), it's much easier to validate `*@thisisavaliddomain.com` and just try sending an email. The way we do it, if the user enters an email that matches our reasonably comprehensive regexp we consider it valid, if it doesn't match we send the user an email and get them to verify it with a link, that way most users don't have to go through an annoying click-and-confirm email validation but we can still catch a few edge cases of people mistyping
No. Adulthood has nothing to do with the fact that everyone is using a word that doesn't accurately describe the action taken.
Just because it's not stealing doesn't mean it's not illegal. You can't call anything that's illegal "stealing". It's piracy, which is illegal, but a different act than stealing.
People who started calling piracy stealing are the same people that cannot accurately understand what is actually happening, and people who benefit from calling it stealing instead of correctly portraiting it as it's own crime.
The desensitized image of piracy that people have is somewhat close to the way some people have a desensitized image of credit card fraud. The image that you're hurting a faceless corporation, and not an actual person. Introducing the moral part in an action that doesn't accurately portray a victim is the hard part. When stealing it's easy because you can relate and imagine the victim of an action.
I love that you have a problem with people calling copyright infringement "stealing", but no qualms at all about calling it "piracy" instead, which is an entirely different affair.
Certainly the last time I downloaded a TV program I did using BitTorrent, rather than boarding the content producer's boat and taking it with force.
>I love that you have a problem with people calling copyright infringement "stealing", but no qualms at all about calling it "piracy" instead, which is an entirely different affair.
Pirate, verb, sense 3:
The unauthorized use or reproduction of another's work - to pirate software
Steal, from the dictionary, first and only sense as a verb:
Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it: "thieves stole her bicycle".
I thought it was pretty magical for a movie to flow like this, I felt the 3D was well focused and in many cases hard to notice (As it should be), and not just a layer slapped on.
All in all I'd rather watch it in 3DHFR first, and 2D later, to make a fair judgement on whether it's a good thing.
I agree that in the start I was a bit focused on the looks of it all, but after a few minutes it added to my immersion rather than detract from it.
Isn't it possible that the reason you're distracted by this new way of doing things, is because it is in fact new, and different from other movies? If everything looked like this, we can focus on the right things instead.
I thought it was pretty damn magical.