Sign In

CatBus

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
18-Aug-2011
Last activity
21-Feb-2018
Posts
6705

Post History

Post
#1173864
Topic
Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 MKV IS OUT NOW
Time

Cedric T Sealion said:

towne32 said:

Cedric T Sealion said:

Is version 3 going to be created using scans of 35mm prints? Or is it derived from the official blu-ray like previous versions?

This project will always have a blu-ray (or highest quality available) backbone.

Ah. So version 3 will have fairly similar colour timing to the previous versions?

The color timing is not directly related to the primary source material. i.e. the Blu-ray could be used for the highest-quality image, but it is always retimed to approximate the color of a 35mm print. The Blu-ray hasn’t changed, but the available color references and tools used to match colors have changed quite a bit, at least since the latest release of Star Wars. Star Wars is probably in for the biggest color changes, Jedi is probably not likely to see much color change at all.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1173395
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-guns-20180220-story.html

The Supreme Court made clear again Tuesday that the government has broad power to restrict and regulate firearms, dismissing a 2nd Amendment challenge to California’s 10-day waiting period for new gun purchases.

While the court has ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns, the justices have repeatedly refused to go further by blocking strict gun regulations, including state bans on the sale of semi-automatic weapons or limits on who can carry a weapon in public.

Dissenting alone, Justice Clarence Thomas said “the 2nd Amendment is a disfavored right in this court.”

In 2008 and 2010, the high court struck down ordinances in Washington, D.C., and Chicago that prohibited the private possession of handguns as violations of 2nd Amendment. Americans have a right to have guns at home for self-defense, the court said in 5-4 decisions.

But since then, the justices have turned down gun rights advocates who have sued to challenge gun regulations based on the 2nd Amendment.

The first sentence isn’t correct because the Court only declined to hear the case, and the Justices can have all kinds of reasons beyond the merits. I don’t think the 8 other Justices would vote to uphold the law if they decided to hear the case. But this is a good example of the leeway states have had (so far) in passing gun control laws.

Agreed. Declining to hear the case may, and often does, have nothing to do with the merits of the case itself. Thomas trying to insert an opinion into a procedural matter isn’t really unusual either.

Post
#1172969
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

https://twitter.com/JohnCornyn/status/954739322388930562

Not enough facepalms in the world. I don’t know what’s worse: that after a US Senator was informed he was personally helping spread Russian propaganda, the Senator’s first instinct was to pretend he wasn’t just personally implicated and yell “Fake News!” at the media, or that, for his followers, that’s probably a good enough reaction.

Favorite Twitter response to his suggestion that “the Press” in particular needs to work to avoid spreading so much Russian propaganda on Twitter:

Funny. Most people only use one “s” when abbreviating “president.”

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/02/19/flashback-cnn-and-msnbcs-enthusiastic-coverage-russian-sponsored-anti

😮

Right, NewsBusters: “Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias”. Let’s see how that works, shall we? So Russia sets up TWO opposing rallies, one in support of Trump, and one against him, in an attempt to cause tensions or violence or some such thing. So far, so good, that much is in the Mueller indictments. News organizations cover both events as “large political rallies in the middle of New York around a major US election” are newsworthy items, and nobody yet knows the Russians helped set them up. So NewsBusters comes in for the scoop–by showing that the media reported on the anti-Trump rally, and completely glossing over their coverage of the pro-Trump rally. Yep, typical NewsBusters. Manufacturing a liberal bias so they can posture against it.

Muahaha. Firstly, I don’t know if both events were covered the same way - in terms of time and tone - and that is important to the bias question. Secondly, NewsBusters is one-sided and the indecorousness of posting the link gave me a cheap thrill. (And I would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn’t been for you meddling kids). Thirdly, how important was it that the media was unwittingly giving the Russians a megaphone for their propaganda?

Heh. Well I don’t have any Tivo’d recording or whatnot, but they were both covered for sure (I remember the whole week was duelling rallies, in multiple cities), and I’m certain a fair share of strident and loudmouthed folk on both sides were broadcast and/or quoted, whether there was quote-for-quote parity is not something I think is really all that worth getting into. Especially because then you’ll get into arguments like “if one rally was a quarter the size of the other, shouldn’t it get a quarter of the coverage by unbiased media?” and it’s all downhill from there, especially because I’m pretty certain the attendance discrepancy was more like 500:1 in most cities, simply due to voter demographics – you’d have to resort to bribery to get an equivalent-sized pro-Trump turnout in a major metropolitan area.

The media unwittingly spreads disinformation all the time, which is how everyone takes advantage of it (politicians, corporations, and hostile foreign powers). Just covering a rally really doesn’t do much for spreading a message, when it sounds like both events were the sort of disorganized flash-mob response you’d get for such things. People yell outrageous things, and so on, and sometimes it gets on camera or elicits a reaction from a reporter.

I think there are degrees of unwitting. Fully unwitting is completely forgivable. You literally have no idea. Fully witting is Pravda, you’re literally just a tool of propaganda. But there’s a lot in between. Stuff you know isn’t true but you report it because people are saying it and that in itself is news (voter fraud stories, etc). Stuff you’re pretty sure isn’t true but you have to report it because you want to provide “both sides of the story” (and now we hear from an expert saying not all Nazis are necessarily racist). Things you wish were true so hard that you forward the e-mail to all your friends in spite of the fact that any degree of examination would reveal it’s untrue (Pizzagate). Those things, the media has done all of, and needs to own up to, and not just with disinformation coming from Russia.

But the rallies? I’m not seeing it. The people attending the rallies maybe, but not the people behind the cameras.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1172958
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

https://twitter.com/JohnCornyn/status/954739322388930562

Not enough facepalms in the world. I don’t know what’s worse: that after a US Senator was informed he was personally helping spread Russian propaganda, the Senator’s first instinct was to pretend he wasn’t just personally implicated and yell “Fake News!” at the media, or that, for his followers, that’s probably a good enough reaction.

Favorite Twitter response to his suggestion that “the Press” in particular needs to work to avoid spreading so much Russian propaganda on Twitter:

Funny. Most people only use one “s” when abbreviating “president.”

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/02/19/flashback-cnn-and-msnbcs-enthusiastic-coverage-russian-sponsored-anti

😮

Right, NewsBusters: “Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias”. Let’s see how that works, shall we? So Russia sets up TWO opposing rallies, one in support of Trump, and one against him, in an attempt to cause tensions or violence or some such thing. So far, so good, that much is in the Mueller indictments. News organizations cover both events as “large political rallies in the middle of New York around a major US election” are newsworthy items, and nobody yet knows the Russians helped set them up. What’s missing from this set of facts is some sort of controversy OTHER than Russians meddling with US political affairs.

So NewsBusters comes in retroactively for the scoop–by showing that the media reported on the Russian-backed anti-Trump rally, and completely glossing over their coverage of the pro-Trump rally. Yep, typical NewsBusters. Manufacturing a liberal bias so they can posture against it. The takeaway? Big political rallies are considered newsworthy. Covering Charlottesville doesn’t make you a Nazi, covering a big Russia rally doesn’t make you a Russian, even if the Russian ambassador is right there up front claiming credit. News is still news. Certainly the media had a role in over-credulously spreading disinformation around the election, particularly on the subject of voter fraud, but this covering big rallies as they happen doesn’t seem like anything atypical.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1172565
Topic
you meen hes a....mormon?
Time

There was a recurring character on the Bob Newhart show, Norman the doorman. Quite a few episodes into the show, Norman announces he’s got plane tickets to go on a trip. Bob looks at his tickets and says, “Oh, I never knew your last name before. Corman. Norman Corman. The doorman.” Norman nods, and say how happy he is to finally get to see his brother, who’s usually very busy. He’s in construction, you see. “He’s a… foreman?” guesses Bob. Norman nods. He grabs his tickets, tips his hat, and says, “Okay, good-bye, off to Utah!”

Post
#1172419
Topic
Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)
Time

Okay, here’s some more current screenshots of the new no-longer-condensed font. Current version 10.0 is on top, new version 10.1-beta is on bottom, and they are all clickable for larger image. You’ll see that the new font is actually smaller in terms of point size but at the same time still thicker in terms of stroke width. I did check this out on my classic “small TV, sitting far away” test, and it still checked out as comfortably readable, so I think it’s close to an even trade. Actually I think the previous size was a little extra large to assist with the DVD format, which used to be more of a thing around here, but the new one works well on DVD downscales too. There are still the font scaling scripts for less common cases where larger or smaller text would be preferable.

The SDH subtitles have also undergone a couple of revisions. I’d initially done them with a black outline and the black background, but that was too distracting. I finally just made the black background a little more opaque and dropped the outline.

Project Threepio: Spanish double-dialogue
Project Threepio: Spanish double-dialogue

Project Threepio: SDH subtitles
Project Threepio: SDH subtitles

This post has been edited.

Post
#1172278
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Believing preposterous things merely makes you spectacularly ill-informed – but you can be that without also being an idiot or an asshole. Thus, while Frink is correct that both Trump and Bevin are saying things that are completely unsupportable by any conceivable interpretation of the available evidence, his “idiot” and “asshole” designations did not logically flow from that factual assessment. They were either an injection of political opinion, or they were based on a longer-term analysis of other facts that do support those designations.

Not to mention, you can say preposterous things without actually believing them, but that does make the case for the “asshole” designation a little more clear-cut.

EDIT: It should also be noted that an early draft of Silence of the Lambs had Hannibal Lecter escaping the FBI by calling in to have them check on a teenager’s threats of violence. With the FBI’s resources completely focused on that, he just booked a flight and left. So I guess it’s not that preposterous.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1172223
Topic
Curious about plans for long term cultural legacy of the efforts here
Time

solkap said:

(The films were shot in 4K resolution, right? So there wouldn’t be much point as far as preservation goes to try to get any higher resolution than that, correct?)

It gets weedy there. 35mm negatives are presumably 4K-equivalent, but that varies a bit based on filmstock quality (little known fact–Star Wars and Empire were both shot on photosensitive lunch meat, only Jedi used actual film) and other factors (optical effects, etc). 35mm projection prints, the actual movies as seen in theatres, were significantly lower resolution, as they are a few generations removed from the negatives (also varying based on process–normal, Technicolor, or 70mm blow-up). Sometimes more than 2K, sure, but not likely anywhere near 4K in any way. The DeEds may already show more detail than people actually saw in theatres, in some spots. So the question is (as with any Blu-ray transfer), what exactly are you preserving? Negatives have levels of detail nobody ever saw. 4K is definitely more than enough. 2K, from a good enough source, though, could be close enough.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1172053
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Sir Ridley said:

CatBus said:

Sir Ridley said:

CatBus said:

Sir Ridley said:

DominicCobb said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

TV’s Frink said:

None of it means anything in relation to the current topic.

I don’t know, my name is Jacob and I do in fact use ladders from time to time.

Ok but I need to know if you’re a Rush fan, a Huey Lewis fan, or an Adrian Lyne fan.

That’s like Sophie’s choice, man. Harsh. Sometimes bad is bad.

These are 1/3 of fighting words.

Oh, so I’m walking on a thin line, am I?

WRONG 1/3

If this is it, please let me know.

The men who hold high places must be the ones to start.

You crack me up.

Be cool or be cast out.

I said cool is the rule.

I was at this obligatory social event with a friend once. We didn’t really want to be there, so we entertained ourselves by inventing a game. While we were having conversations, every time one of us named a band from the 80’s, we’d get a point, but only if nobody else noticed what we’d done – i.e. if it worked relatively well in the conversation and nobody said, “Hey, wasn’t that a band from the eighties?” There were lots of easy ones – the Police, for example. I was particularly proud of working the Dead Milkmen into normal conversation without anyone noticing.

Not sure what made me think of that. And no, I’m not suggesting it. Yet.

Aha ha ha ha. That sounds fun.

I don’t think anyone noticed, you won! 😉

D’oh! Nobody noticed until you did! Now the only way he can earn the point is if you’re also playing.

The trick is that this was initially conceived as a verbal, in-person game, and rules may need to be adjusted for text. So instead of making a reference and raising an eyebrow at the other player, maybe you’d use a winking smiley or something. The other problem is that many of the references might only be visible if you say the words out loud, as the reference may cross all sorts of lexical boundaries in text form but be pretty straightforward when spoken. This would be especially visible as your references drift further away from vanilla. I see we’re off to a pretty good start though 😉

I’m in on the rules, so technically maybe I’m playing even though I haven’t made a reference yet. So let him have the point! Somebody has to notice or nobody would get a point.

Well, the other variation on the print form is everyone could have read those rules and known about them. Points are mostly self-awarded, I can’t see how you could say “Hey, I made a reference! Did anyone catch it?” aside from the winky smiley example above, and that’s probably still too obvious, even if the reference itself is pretty well-hidden.

Yes, it doesn’t really work that well here, so let’s not rush into anything and start referencing in excess. The clash between references and serious politics could be poison to this thread, leaving the game out of this should be the cure, I think you too see this.

I just wanted to point out Cobb’s reference which was cool. And the gang completely missed it, so I had to, to not let it go unnoticed.

It was a nice journey while it lasted, a cheap trick for simple minds and children at heart, but now its time for some new order in this thread before the police gets here. Let’s get this motley crew back to talking about guns. And roses will be awarded to the winner of the game from this foreigner, but let’s make sure the talking heads in the right direction now.

It sticks out that this may be a case where knowledge of English beats out other considerations, and gives me (and you too) an unwarranted advantage over players from Berlin, the rest of Europe, and Asia. I agree perhaps we should stop trying to do this, lest we get our prints all over the thread. It’s fun, but there is such thing as too much joy.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1171974
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Sir Ridley said:

CatBus said:

Sir Ridley said:

DominicCobb said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

TV’s Frink said:

None of it means anything in relation to the current topic.

I don’t know, my name is Jacob and I do in fact use ladders from time to time.

Ok but I need to know if you’re a Rush fan, a Huey Lewis fan, or an Adrian Lyne fan.

That’s like Sophie’s choice, man. Harsh. Sometimes bad is bad.

These are 1/3 of fighting words.

Oh, so I’m walking on a thin line, am I?

WRONG 1/3

If this is it, please let me know.

The men who hold high places must be the ones to start.

You crack me up.

Be cool or be cast out.

I said cool is the rule.

I was at this obligatory social event with a friend once. We didn’t really want to be there, so we entertained ourselves by inventing a game. While we were having conversations, every time one of us named a band from the 80’s, we’d get a point, but only if nobody else noticed what we’d done – i.e. if it worked relatively well in the conversation and nobody said, “Hey, wasn’t that a band from the eighties?” There were lots of easy ones – the Police, for example. I was particularly proud of working the Dead Milkmen into normal conversation without anyone noticing.

Not sure what made me think of that. And no, I’m not suggesting it. Yet.

Aha ha ha ha. That sounds fun.

I don’t think anyone noticed, you won! 😉

D’oh! Nobody noticed until you did! Now the only way he can earn the point is if you’re also playing.

The trick is that this was initially conceived as a verbal, in-person game, and rules may need to be adjusted for text. So instead of making a reference and raising an eyebrow at the other player, maybe you’d use a winking smiley or something. The other problem is that many of the references might only be visible if you say the words out loud, as the reference may cross all sorts of lexical boundaries in text form but be pretty straightforward when spoken. This would be especially visible as your references drift further away from vanilla. I see we’re off to a pretty good start though 😉

I’m in on the rules, so technically maybe I’m playing even though I haven’t made a reference yet. So let him have the point! Somebody has to notice or nobody would get a point.

Well, the other variation on the print form is everyone could have read those rules and known about them. Points are mostly self-awarded, I can’t see how you could say “Hey, I made a reference! Did anyone catch it?” aside from the winky smiley example above, and that’s probably still too obvious, even if the reference itself is pretty well-hidden.

Post
#1171918
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Sir Ridley said:

DominicCobb said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

TV’s Frink said:

None of it means anything in relation to the current topic.

I don’t know, my name is Jacob and I do in fact use ladders from time to time.

Ok but I need to know if you’re a Rush fan, a Huey Lewis fan, or an Adrian Lyne fan.

That’s like Sophie’s choice, man. Harsh. Sometimes bad is bad.

These are 1/3 of fighting words.

Oh, so I’m walking on a thin line, am I?

WRONG 1/3

If this is it, please let me know.

The men who hold high places must be the ones to start.

You crack me up.

Be cool or be cast out.

I said cool is the rule.

I was at this obligatory social event with a friend once. We didn’t really want to be there, so we entertained ourselves by inventing a game. While we were having conversations, every time one of us named a band from the 80’s, we’d get a point, but only if nobody else noticed what we’d done – i.e. if it worked relatively well in the conversation and nobody said, “Hey, wasn’t that a band from the eighties?” There were lots of easy ones – the Police, for example. I was particularly proud of working the Dead Milkmen into normal conversation without anyone noticing.

Not sure what made me think of that. And no, I’m not suggesting it. Yet.

Aha ha ha ha. That sounds fun.

I don’t think anyone noticed, you won! 😉

D’oh! Nobody noticed until you did! Now the only way he can earn the point is if you’re also playing.

The trick is that this was initially conceived as a verbal, in-person game, and rules may need to be adjusted for text. So instead of making a reference and raising an eyebrow at the other player, maybe you’d use a winking smiley or something. The other problem is that many of the references might only be visible if you say the words out loud, as the reference may cross all sorts of lexical boundaries in text form but be pretty straightforward when spoken. This would be especially visible as your references drift further away from vanilla. I see we’re off to a pretty good start though 😉

Post
#1171843
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Careful Arizona, you might (effectively) lose your independent voting commission:

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/arizona/articles/2018-02-14/legislative-leaders-push-redistricting-commission-changes

As Arizona turns more and more purple, it seems fairly predictable there’d be pressure on the GOP to go the way of Virginia and North Carolina on this, to maintain certain control of the state for another few decades.

How’s it work? Keep the commission, but guarantee gridlock in the commission, then the legislature effectively draws the maps because the commission mysteriously stops performing its stated function, and right in 2020 when Arizona needs it most.

Please vote Hell No on this if you live in AZ. Why overhaul something that seems to be working reasonably well, right before you need to use it?

This post has been edited.

Post
#1171833
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Mrebo said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

Warbler said:

Yackwicks?

still waiting for an answer for this.

Sometimes you can get cheaper fares there than Heathrow, that’s all I know.

You made me google Yackwicks. Interesting top result.

Can’t make me 😉

But… back to the topic at hand, ineffective legislation is not necessarily bad. If your legislation addresses 0.000001% of cases, but A) it can pass and B) it doesn’t actually harm or even really inconvenience anyone, there’s no reason not to go ahead with it, assuming more effective legislation is simply unworkable. Which is why background checks, waiting periods, assault weapons bans are all okay in my book, even though they fall well short of a handgun ban. Well, except for “A” they’re okay 😦

This post has been edited.

Post
#1171791
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Anyway, Hispanic doesn’t necessarily mean non-white.

true, but how white Hispanics are members of white nationalist groups?

Why are you even still on this track? Why do these questions even matter if it’s been confirmed he’s a white nationalist?

I was not trying to argue that the nut is not a white nationalist.

Great. End of this discussion then because there’s no point.

Hey, the good news is it means George Zimmerman’s 15 minutes of fame are officially over.

Post
#1171761
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Seriously though, since Mueller made it through January without getting fired, I think his next firing window isn’t until Tuesday November 6th at 11:00pm Eastern Time (the point at which there are no electoral consequences for the firing). That’s a lot of time to get some work done. Enough time? That I don’t know.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1171753
Topic
Curious about plans for long term cultural legacy of the efforts here
Time

Make analog prints, that’s what Legacy did. For digital degradation issues, just use a crazy amount or RAR/PAR2 redundancy. Your average time capsule is only going for a 100-year increments anyway, so they won’t have a proper official version of Star Wars then anyway, so they’ll go through the extra effort.

Post
#1171739
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

chyron8472 said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Maybe the focus on ineffective broad proposals is the problem. Raising the age to own a firearm to 21 would be more focused and I think legally defensible.

the inevitable argument would be “whoa, I’m old enough to be drafted to carry a weapon in a war, but not old enough to buy one myself???”

Raise the draft age. Or, even better, eliminate the draft.

We did that. The United States military is a 100% all-volunteer force. No one is drafted ever anymore because of the response by the anti-war movement during the Vietnam War.

Carter (no, not Carter USM – President Carter) resurrected the draft in 1980, one of his nastiest legacies. Nobody’s been drafted since due to lack of need, not lack of ability.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1171731
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

TV’s Frink said:

None of it means anything in relation to the current topic.

I don’t know, my name is Jacob and I do in fact use ladders from time to time.

Ok but I need to know if you’re a Rush fan, a Huey Lewis fan, or an Adrian Lyne fan.

That’s like Sophie’s choice, man. Harsh. Sometimes bad is bad.

These are 1/3 of fighting words.

Oh, so I’m walking on a thin line, am I?

WRONG 1/3

If this is it, please let me know.

The men who hold high places must be the ones to start.

You crack me up.

Be cool or be cast out.

I said cool is the rule.

I was at this obligatory social event with a friend once. We didn’t really want to be there, so we entertained ourselves by inventing a game. While we were having conversations, every time one of us named a band from the 80’s, we’d get a point, but only if nobody else noticed what we’d done – i.e. if it worked relatively well in the conversation and nobody said, “Hey, wasn’t that a band from the eighties?” There were lots of easy ones – the Police, for example. I was particularly proud of working the Dead Milkmen into normal conversation without anyone noticing.

Not sure what made me think of that. And no, I’m not suggesting it. Yet.

Post
#1171721
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

CatBus said:

TV’s Frink said:

Possessed said:

TV’s Frink said:

None of it means anything in relation to the current topic.

I don’t know, my name is Jacob and I do in fact use ladders from time to time.

Ok but I need to know if you’re a Rush fan, a Huey Lewis fan, or an Adrian Lyne fan.

That’s like Sophie’s choice, man. Harsh. Sometimes bad is bad.

These are 1/3 of fighting words.

Oh, so I’m walking on a thin line, am I?

WRONG 1/3

If this is it, please let me know.

The men who hold high places must be the ones to start.

You crack me up.

To the top