Farscape could be really over the top sometimes, but then I think that's at least part of what I liked about it, overall I thought the show was pretty well written and I enjoyed the hell out of a lot of the characters. As for why people tend to deify Firefly so much I think it could be compared to just falling in love with someone and then having them promptly die on you, they weren't around long enough to really disappoint you in any big way so your memory of them will be pretty much be eternally perfect.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Reefie:
Farscape is definitely a show that has to be watched from beginning to end in order to follow the threads and feel like you know where you are with it. It's a stark contrast to Firefly where episodes are an entire story unto themselves with only a couple of background story threads being maintained at any one point. IMO Farscape's complex story is second only to Babylon 5's epic-ness when considering the story-arc aspect of sci-fi TV shows.
Also helps to be a little bit crazy to fully appreciate Farscape. A love of the 1812 Overture by Tchaikovsky helps too

That doesn't explain the characters, they were sometimes very poorly written, by any standard.

>> ^Reefie:


Farscape is definitely a show that has to be watched from beginning to end in order to follow the threads and feel like you know where you are with it. It's a stark contrast to Firefly where episodes are an entire story unto themselves with only a couple of background story threads being maintained at any one point. IMO Farscape's complex story is second only to Babylon 5's epic-ness when considering the story-arc aspect of sci-fi TV shows.
Also helps to be a little bit crazy to fully appreciate Farscape. A love of the 1812 Overture by Tchaikovsky helps too


That doesn't explain the characters, they were sometimes very poorly written, by any standard.

Hated that episode. It was so poorly written and put together. Nothing made sense, too many conveniences
("There's no way to change time!"
"We can do a paradox"
"That's impossible"
"No, it's not, look"
"Oh, they changed time. Well done"),
the Amy and Rory thing at the end was like "Oh, so that just happened. Wait, what exactly happened?" and the Angels, the creatures from one of the scariest, most exciting episode of Dr Who have been turned into nothing more than a cliched, action movie monster

>> ^spoco2:

He did not explain things particularly well.
He said it was a pre-cooler, it showed that it could cool air from +1000C down to -150C in 1/100 sec which is pretty amazing. And he said that this was cooling air going into the engine down to that temp...
However he never explained the problem this was solving. What temperature is air usually going into the engine? Why does it need to be cold? What happens if you don't cool it?
Just a poorly written piece, did not lay out Problem->Solution very well at all.
By the sounds of it, it's pretty amazing tech, just wish this were better at explaining it.


my guess would be cold air is denser, which means the engine can produce more thrust and is therefore more efficient. Just a hunch.

He did not explain things particularly well.

He said it was a pre-cooler, it showed that it could cool air from +1000C down to -150C in 1/100 sec which is pretty amazing. And he said that this was cooling air going into the engine down to that temp...

However he never explained the problem this was solving. What temperature is air usually going into the engine? Why does it need to be cold? What happens if you don't cool it?

Just a poorly written piece, did not lay out Problem->Solution very well at all.

By the sounds of it, it's pretty amazing tech, just wish this were better at explaining it.

>> ^kevingrr:

@Yogi
I'm sorry my fellow sifters advocate "offing" these guys. These guys work seven days a week and they work to make a profit - just like every other business.
J.P. Morgan Chase was the go to entity to take over Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual when they failed. Why? Chase was strong enough to bear the burden.
Regarding TARP money Chase never wanted it or needed it. Link
The Dodd Frank and Consumer Protection act is a poorly written gargantuan hydra of a bill. I know this because the small community bankers I know are saying they are not going to be able to stay afloat.
My companies president - someone who I know for a fact has voted as a democrat for over 40 years - told me yesterday he will vote against Obama in the upcoming election. Why? We work in real estate and the paperwork needed to finance a project has multiplied - and with it the number of lawyers and legal hours required - that is if we can get something financed period. Good for lawyers - bad for anyone who might want to work building a new shopping center(architects, tradesmen, engineers, etc) or working there in the future.
Make the rules simple, make them fair, and enforce them effectively.


Oh Yay! Another lying apologist Fuckhead.

@Yogi

I'm sorry my fellow sifters advocate "offing" these guys. These guys work seven days a week and they work to make a profit - just like every other business.

J.P. Morgan Chase was the go to entity to take over Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual when they failed. Why? Chase was strong enough to bear the burden.

Regarding TARP money Chase never wanted it or needed it. Link

The Dodd Frank and Consumer Protection act is a poorly written gargantuan hydra of a bill. I know this because the small community bankers I know are saying they are not going to be able to stay afloat.

My companies president - someone who I know for a fact has voted as a democrat for over 40 years - told me yesterday he will vote against Obama in the upcoming election. Why? We work in real estate and the paperwork needed to finance a project has multiplied - and with it the number of lawyers and legal hours required - that is if we can get something financed period. Good for lawyers - bad for anyone who might want to work building a new shopping center(architects, tradesmen, engineers, etc) or working there in the future.

Make the rules simple, make them fair, and enforce them effectively.

>> ^Porksandwich:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^Porksandwich:
No one matches Varys. Beware the castrated.

Yeah I think that's actually poorly written...if he and Littlefinger run things and win all the time, it's just annoying and it's lazy.

Have you read very far into the books? They hardly win all the time. I mean hell in the TV show alone Littlefinger spends most of his time being threatened.


No I'm not talking about the books I'm talking about the TV show. I'm really tired of the idea of invincible people who are good at talking in a medieval world. That may be true what you're saying about the books, but I'm not reading the books I'm watching a TV show.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Porksandwich:
No one matches Varys. Beware the castrated.

Yeah I think that's actually poorly written...if he and Littlefinger run things and win all the time, it's just annoying and it's lazy.


Have you read very far into the books? They hardly win all the time. I mean hell in the TV show alone Littlefinger spends most of his time being threatened.

>> ^Porksandwich:

No one matches Varys. Beware the castrated.


Yeah I think that's actually poorly written...if he and Littlefinger run things and win all the time, it's just annoying and it's lazy.

Below is a copy of the email I sent to Vic Toews, the sponsor of this terrible legislation. I again suggest that all thoughtful Canadians contact their Member of Parliament to voice their concerns.

MP's email addresses and other contact information can be found here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/MainMPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E

Dear Mr. Toews;

Thanks for taking the time to send an automated response to the automated email I had previously sent to you. In contrast to our previous correspondenced, this email represents my considered position and thoughts as a citizen of Canada, and not those of a robo-responder, nor of a political staff.

In response to the "Myths and Facts" listed below your correspondence, I respectfully submit that I don't buy a word of it. There's a common expression used to describe information which is not representative of the truth, which I'm sure that, coming as you do from an agricultural area like Provencher, you are quite familiar with. It's commonly used to fertilize pasture-land.

Bill C-30 is a poorly written, overly broad and dangerous piece of legislation. One thing which has been demonstrated over and over again is that when delegated powers that intrude on privacy, those in authority inevitably will abuse them. I have no doubt that the power resulting from C-30 will likewise be abused, and that it will, contrary to your statements, be used for non-criminal purposes. This legislation is fatally flawed and should be abandoned forthwith.

I'd also like to point out that though I vehemently oppose this legislation, I am certainly not "...with the child pornographers". I find your characterization of myself and other thoughtful Canadians to be offensive in the extreme. You remain unrepentant for this despicable comment, instead denying making it though one finds it readilly available in video and in Hansard. I would hope that at some time you might offer an apology to myself and those Canadians who might not agree with you. I suggest to you that it is un-Canadian to use such extremist rhetoric.


Paul Blank
Vancouver, Canada


From: vic.toews.c1@parl.gc.ca
To: xxxx
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:47:02 -0400
Subject: RE: Stop Online Spying

Thank you for contacting my office regarding Bill C-30, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act.

Canada's laws currently do not adequately protect Canadians from online exploitation and we think there is widespread agreement that this is a problem.

We want to update our laws while striking the right balance between combating crime and protecting privacy.

Let me be very clear: the police will not be able to read emails or view web activity unless they obtain a warrant issued by a judge and we have constructed safeguards to protect the privacy of Canadians, including audits by privacy commissioners.

What's needed most is an open discussion about how to better protect Canadians from online crime. We will therefore send this legislation directly to Parliamentary Committee for a full examination of the best ways to protect Canadians while respecting their privacy.

For your information, I have included some myths and facts below regarding Bill C-30 in its current state.

Sincerely,



Vic Toews

Member of Parliament for Provencher

Myth: Lawful Access legislation infringes on the privacy of Canadians.
Fact: Our Government puts a high priority on protecting the privacy of law-abiding Canadians. Current practices of accessing the actual content of communications with a legal authorization will not change.

Myth: Having access to basic subscriber information means that authorities can monitor personal communications and activities.
Fact: This has nothing to do with monitoring emails or web browsing. Basic subscriber information would be limited to a customer’s name, address, telephone number, email address, Internet Protocol (IP) address, and the name of the telecommunications service provider. It absolutely does not include the content of emails, phones calls or online activities.

Myth: This legislation does not benefit average Canadians and only gives authorities more power.
Fact: As a result of technological innovations, criminals and terrorists have found ways to hide their illegal activities. This legislation will keep Canadians safer by putting police on the same footing as those who seek to harm us.



Myth: Basic subscriber information is way beyond “phone book information”.
Fact: The basic subscriber information described in the proposed legislation is the modern day equivalent of information that is in the phone book. Individuals frequently freely share this information online and in many cases it is searchable and quite public.

Myth: Police and telecommunications service providers will now be required to maintain databases with information collected on Canadians.
Fact: This proposed legislation will not require either police or telecommunications service providers to create databases with information collected on Canadians.

Myth: “Warrantless access” to customer information will give police and government unregulated access to our personal information.
Fact: Federal legislation already allows telecommunications service providers to voluntarily release basic subscriber information to authorities without a warrant. This Bill acts as a counterbalance by adding a number of checks and balances which do not exist today, and clearly lists which basic subscriber identifiers authorities can access.

This is a marketing video for just that. You can find the company's poorly-written website if you watch the first few seconds of the unchopped video. I was thinking about the military and peeping tom applications myself, but neither are mentioned there.>> ^Payback:

I'm thinking someone should start using these for Search/Rescue.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Translation: Total Ownage of the left.

"Liberals go straight to ugly racist stereotypes when attacking conservative blacks, calling them oversexualized, stupid and/or incompetent.
The late, lamented, white liberal reporter Mary McGrory called Justice Antonin Scalia "a brilliant and compelling extremist" -- while dismissing Thomas as "Scalia's puppet."
More recently, Democratic Sen. Harry Reid called Scalia "one smart guy." In the next breath, he proclaimed Thomas "an embarrassment to the Supreme Court," adding, "I think that his opinions are poorly written."
When Bush made Condoleezza Rice the first black female secretary of state, terror swept through the Democratic Party. What if people began to notice and ask questions: "Who's that black woman always standing with George Bush?" Never mind! He's probably arresting her.
In addition to an explosion of racist cartoons portraying Rice as Aunt Jemima, Butterfly McQueen from "Gone With the Wind," a fat-lipped Bush parrot and other racist cliches, allegedly respectable liberals promptly called her stupid and incompetent.
Joseph Cirincione, then with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Rice "doesn't bring much experience or knowledge of the world to this position." (Unlike Hillary Clinton, whose experience for the job consisted of being married to an impeached, disbarred former president.)
Democratic consultant Bob Beckel -- who ran Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign so competently that Mondale lost 49 states -- said of Rice, "I don't think she's up to the job."
When Michael Steele ran for senator in Maryland in 2006, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee dug up a copy of his credit report -- something done to no other Republican candidate. He was depicted in black face with huge red lips by liberal blogger Steve Gilliard. Oreo cookies were rolled down the aisle at Steele during a gubernatorial debate in 2002.
Trafficking in racist imagery is consequence-free for liberals because they have ruined charges of "racism" with their own overuse of the term. By now, any accusation of racism has the feel of a Big Foot sighting."
AC "Why Our Blacks are Better than Their Blacks"



Not one of the people you mentioned commenting on Conservative Blacks is on the "Left" in anyway shape or form. Please apologize to us lefties immediately because we can't take this sort of abuse.

Translation: Total Ownage of the left.



"Liberals go straight to ugly racist stereotypes when attacking conservative blacks, calling them oversexualized, stupid and/or incompetent.

The late, lamented, white liberal reporter Mary McGrory called Justice Antonin Scalia "a brilliant and compelling extremist" -- while dismissing Thomas as "Scalia's puppet."

More recently, Democratic Sen. Harry Reid called Scalia "one smart guy." In the next breath, he proclaimed Thomas "an embarrassment to the Supreme Court," adding, "I think that his opinions are poorly written."

When Bush made Condoleezza Rice the first black female secretary of state, terror swept through the Democratic Party. What if people began to notice and ask questions: "Who's that black woman always standing with George Bush?" Never mind! He's probably arresting her.

In addition to an explosion of racist cartoons portraying Rice as Aunt Jemima, Butterfly McQueen from "Gone With the Wind," a fat-lipped Bush parrot and other racist cliches, allegedly respectable liberals promptly called her stupid and incompetent.

Joseph Cirincione, then with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Rice "doesn't bring much experience or knowledge of the world to this position." (Unlike Hillary Clinton, whose experience for the job consisted of being married to an impeached, disbarred former president.)

Democratic consultant Bob Beckel -- who ran Walter Mondale's 1984 campaign so competently that Mondale lost 49 states -- said of Rice, "I don't think she's up to the job."

When Michael Steele ran for senator in Maryland in 2006, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee dug up a copy of his credit report -- something done to no other Republican candidate. He was depicted in black face with huge red lips by liberal blogger Steve Gilliard. Oreo cookies were rolled down the aisle at Steele during a gubernatorial debate in 2002.

Trafficking in racist imagery is consequence-free for liberals because they have ruined charges of "racism" with their own overuse of the term. By now, any accusation of racism has the feel of a Big Foot sighting."

AC "Why Our Blacks are Better than Their Blacks"