yhwx

Dek Rollins said:

.

!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Dek Rollins said:

yhwx said:

Dek Rollins said:

Physical writing will not lose it’s place in society. It just won’t. People will always have to give physical signatures for things. That’s just how it is.

Nope.

I simply deny almost all arguments that just say “that’s just how it is” when relating to change over periods of time. Things will change.

Dek Rollins said:

Physical writing will not lose it’s place in society. It just won’t. People will always have to give physical signatures for things. That’s just how it is.

Nope.

I don’t think writing will be important in tomorrow’s day and age.

And I don’t recommend typing because it’s easy. It’s because it’s the future.

Jeebus said:

yhwx said:

Most people don’t have good cursive penmanship.

I don’t even have good printing penmanship. I can hardly read my own handwriting.

Ditto.

Instead of schools wasting time on cursive, they should spend that time on typing.

ImperialScum’s arguments break my brain.

Most people don’t have good cursive penmanship.

It has no point.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Who says he didn’t sense it? Just because he didn’t spell it out load for you it doesn’t mean he didn’t pick it up. It was just insignificant in the situation. He only said it out loud in case of Luke to inform his TIE flight because it was relevant to the battle. Luke was a serious potential threat because of it.

We make fun of Ric being Captain Obvious in PT and spelling everything out loud, but it seems there are people here that actually need it.

He could have sensed it but the fact that would omit such a thing from Tarkin when the topic of her resisting the mind probe is improbable. Also it seems Vader was talking to himself when he said the Force was strong with Luke. The TIE Pilots wouldn’t even be able to appreciate how much an advantage being Force Sensitive could be in such a circumstance.

Just how would such a pointless information help Tarkin? The reason for her resistance to the probe is inconsequential and it wouldn’t change absolutely anything. If anyone had any skill to break her that way, it was Vader. He clearly couldn’t do it even if he knew she was force sensitive. Reporting the details and reason for his failure to Tarkin makes no difference or sense. Asking Tarkin for an advice on a matter (force) that he had no clue about (and which was actually Vader’s expertise) makes even less sense. Above all, in the end Tarkin had his own method that was inconsequential to the force.

Then why did Vader talk about the Force and mention Obi-Wan in the movie?

Because it those two cases it was a relevant information. A small fighter with force sensitive pilot was a threat (as proven later in the film) and Obi-Wan did actually infiltrate the Death Star. Whether Leia was force sensitive or not was absolutely irrelevant.

Sometimes people say things that are irrelevant to other people.

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Who says he didn’t sense it? Just because he didn’t spell it out load for you it doesn’t mean he didn’t pick it up. It was just insignificant in the situation. He only said it out loud in case of Luke to inform his TIE flight because it was relevant to the battle. Luke was a serious potential threat because of it.

We make fun of Ric being Captain Obvious in PT and spelling everything out loud, but it seems there are people here that actually need it.

He could have sensed it but the fact that would omit such a thing from Tarkin when the topic of her resisting the mind probe is improbable. Also it seems Vader was talking to himself when he said the Force was strong with Luke. The TIE Pilots wouldn’t even be able to appreciate how much an advantage being Force Sensitive could be in such a circumstance.

Just how would such a pointless information help Tarkin? The reason for her resistance to the probe is inconsequential and it wouldn’t change absolutely anything. If anyone had any skill to break her that way, it was Vader. He clearly couldn’t do it even if he knew she was force sensitive. Reporting the details and reason for his failure to Tarkin makes no difference or sense. Asking Tarkin for an advice on a matter (force) that he had no clue about (and which was actually Vader’s expertise) makes even less sense. Above all, in the end Tarkin had his own method that was inconsequential to the force.

Then why did Vader talk about the Force and mention Obi-Wan in the movie?

That might have been a secondary objective during the battle. But the primary objective before the battle was obviously protection.

That’s not what is stated in the film. Again, you’re projecting headcanon onto what actually happened in the film.

What is stated in the film is a temporary tactical decision in the battle, not the purpose of the fleet’s presence (before the battle).

That seems more than a distraction to me.

Don’t get me wrong, I love ROTJ and can tolerate the Ewoks, but there are some problems.

My two cents on why the Death Star looked so unprotected is that the Empire had a careless attitude towards massively armed but ultimately small-scale vehicle driven attacks. The Empire just thought that the excruciating power of the Death Star would crush anything in its sight. Sort of like how you can kill one bee quite easily, but a large number of them is hard to control.

Earl said:

I’m gonna use that one.

About equivalent to a -5 on a 10 rating scale.

TV’s Frink said:

Donald Trump said:

'Tis not to be taken 100% seriously.

Donald Trump doesn’t say “tis.”

DuracellEnergizer said:

yhwx said:

They have to learn somehow.

A good leg-breaking will set 'em straight.

Maybe a bit too far.

http://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/977547

Then we’d just have a bunch of the same person running around.

Chill, dudes, it’s just nine.

😉

They have to learn somehow.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

If a person thinks that a certain film is bad it is simply an opinion. There is no objective measure for “badness” or “goodness” of the film.

Huh, dodged the question. So I repeat:

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

This question is completely off-topic and I answered it indirectly within the topic. But I will now grant you a direct answer.

AOTC is a bad film. It is bad because I think it is bad. I think it bad because I didn’t like it. I didn’t like it because of <various subjective reasons>.

Give me the reasons.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

If a person thinks that a certain film is bad it is simply an opinion. There is no objective measure for “badness” or “goodness” of the film.

Huh, dodged the question. So I repeat:

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Don’t worry, I never do.

The fact is by saying that you’re embarrassing yourself.

So please, don’t embarrass yourself.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

That is all subjective crap. I am sorry you chose to further embarrass yourself. One person likes this kind of pace, the other person like that kind of pace. One person prefers minimalistic text, while other prefers lots of text. One person likes some subtext, while other dislikes it. One person sees certain subtext, while other sees some different subtext. Etc. Etc.

You don’t understand the very basic concept of “objective measure”. I will give you an example. Object has properties, such as length and mass. There are objective measures for those two properties (completely independent of personal opinion), such as meters and kilograms. You use meters to measure two objects and you can compare which one is larger in meters. Same for kilograms.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Think of a bad movie. Tell me why it’s bad.

imperialscum said:

yhwx said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective.

I don’t mind you disagreeing with the truth. It is just not good for one’s mental health.

Don’t embarrass yourself.

Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.

So then, provide me the objective measure for dialogue and acting.

(A friendly hint: there isn’t one and I would highly recommend you don’t further embarrass yourself)

I think there’s certain things, such as pace, how much subtext vs text there is, etc… that can tell if dialog and acting is good or not.

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

imperialscum said:

Lord Haseo said:

You believe all of the OT films are of the same quality?

First, quality is non-existent property when it comes to art (i.e. completely subjective things).

It’s nonexistent in the fact that it’s not something physically tangible but it exists in the mind and that is all that is pertinent for this conversation.

Quality of a product (and its properties) must be measurable, otherwise it is not quality. If it is measurable, it has to have an objective measure. Completely subjective things (like film) do not have an objective measure. There is no objective measure for properties such as story, acting, dialogue, music, sound, etc.

I’m going to have to disagree with you saying that film is completely subjective. Whether you like something is totally different from if it is a good thing. You can like an objectively bad film. I can say that the dialog in the prequels is objectively bad: It’s stale, it doesn’t make sense, etc. Just like with other fields, film has objective qualities that can be measured.