I'll never understand the people that are hurt by changes to something that they could just avoid. Why does an American movie hurt it? Will it make you enjoy the original less? I'll also never understand the fascination with subtitles and the Japanese voice, which anime fans seem to think is more dramatic.
The people who read the original manga probably feel a certain way about the anime. The same way that people who read books feel about movie adaptions because they know there will be differences in it. A movie can bring things to a wider audience and then a lot of them may check out the original, which they may or may nor prefer.
>I'll never understand the people that are hurt by changes to something that they could just avoid. Why does an American movie hurt it? Will it make you enjoy the original less?
Because it spoils the 'reputation' of the original work? If the movie is done crappyly, then people will assume that the anime/manga will also be crappy.
>I'll also never understand the fascination with subtitles and the Japanese voice, which anime fans seem to think is more dramatic.
It's not that anime watchers hate english dubs. It's just that they hate crappy dubs. I watch a ton of anime and I usually prefer japanese with english subtitles, but sometimes the english dubs are better than the original and in that time, I'll stick with the english dub.
It's just a matter of which version has better quality voice actors and dialogues.
This is the case for many popular headphones because a lot of them are priced low. This almost happened to me, but luckily I was too suspicious of a $90 drop in a pair of $150 monitor headphones. Once I did a google search, I found a thread that mentioned many fake ones and showed people how to check if a pair they got was real.
I am shocked that the Sony MDR-V6 cans are so low on the list. Those headphones are legendary and there is still none that can top them in the price range (got mine for $65 on Amazon). Sennheiser is great, but I cannot put the 280 over the V6 after having both, and this is coming from a bass head.
I love mine too, but only after I replaced the pleather pads with velour pads. I liked the soundstage and smoother high end of the 280s, but they just weren't comfortable. Wish I had a door on my office so that I could use Grados...
ive had mechanical issues with every headphone ever. V6 has a flimsy folding hinge mechanism with tiny plastic tabs that break off, Beyer 770's cable has split in half and frayed open several times, and earbuds 3.5mm connectors with crap strain relief that lose connectivity after a few dozen pocketing cycles of your phone/musicplayer.
i just use cheap throwaway earbuds in girly colors on commute and FM radio for music into solid Advent loudspeakers that have been going strong since the 70s
I still use the V300's; I've had them since middle school and they're still ridiculously comfortable. The pleather's started to fray, but a new pair is only like $40.
And they presented this openly for it to be checked. Einstein was not proven wrong because of this and Physics textbooks were not rewritten because of it. This was a great was to handle something that seemed very suspicious and trying to find out if it was correct. They did everything on their end and then presented it to the public for further scrutiny so I am not sure what you wanted them to do.
Math is a lot easier to do independently than Physics though. Maybe it is different for pure mathematics, but applied mathematics can be used independently and in class without going to grad school. It is like someone going to school for programming and learning different programming languages, but never really doing to much with it. It would be up to that person to do some independent projects for themselves and the same with applied mathematics.
I don't even think a degree in physics or pure mathematics is even worth much by themselves without grad school.
And your point is right because I would not have been able to do Calc I if I did not know Trig and Algebra. The same way that I would not have been able to do Algebra without without basic math. I hate memorization and prefer immersion, but it was important to remember how to do that stuff because it was needed later on.
I love the more logical side of math that does not even deal with that many numbers (which is why I am majoring in), but the stuff in school is definitely maths. The way it is taught is questionable, but it should not be dismissed.
I am always at odds with this because I find myself talking about our freedoms being taken away while I think back on my grandfather and what he went through. Gay people are even getting closer to the vast majority accepting them and possibly marriage (depending on the supreme court). This country was built with women and blacks having no true freedom. That does not mean I am not appalled at what is happening now, but what should we go back to? People constantly mention "freedom" like everybody in this country always had it. The government is just finding ways to do what it has always done, which no includes technology. The main difference is that the internet lets us know without a short time-span.
I do hope that we can make a better future, but it is not like the past was the greatest thing either.
One of the nice facts about history is that you will never see any group trash "liberty" and "freedom." Just about every dictatorial, authoritarian, or megalomaniacal political movement thinks it's pro-freedom. Communists? "The bourgeois have enslaved the proletariat, and we lock them up in the name of liberating the people." Nazis? "The actions of the Jewish Conspiracy at the end of the Great War have enslaved the German people." The U.S. Civil War stands as one of the most explicit examples: one side rallied behind the idea that slavery must be abolished; the other side rallied behind the idea that the federal government has no right to tell its member states what to do. It was a war where the liberty of the lowest class was pitted against the liberty of the state.
It's as if Mother Liberty was the Goddess herself: for whenever two nations come into a fight, people in both are always saying that "God is on our side"...
This is because of the nature of freedom. Freedom is to constraints as silence is to sound. Constraints are the things that positively exist, freedom only exists as the negative space.
This is also why the concept of free will is so problematic: how free does will have to be to be called free will? Does it have to be free from the laws of physics? Does it have to be free from coercion?
I think there are more concepts where we have it the wrong way around like this.
I think your first sentence is really interesting & insightful, kind of treating "true" freedom as a sort of absolute zero -- that is, a never-actually-reachable ideal.
I feel like free will doesn't have much to do with the kind of freedom we're talking about, though. If some other human being (or group) has the ability to make you do something you don't want to do, that's a problem of freedom, not free will. (After all, you could decide not to do that thing and suffer the consequences).
Free will is much more about things that you have no ability whatsoever to actually make that decision in the first place, whether because of the manipulative hand of some supernatural force, or via some radical rationalist explanation of decision making.
I see at least two implications of what I said, one being that freedom is an absolute zero, the other being that shifting freedom around is a zero-sum game. Maybe these two are related in some game-theoretic way, I'm not sure. The only fundamentally productive way of obtaining freedom is by getting more control over our environment, i.e., technological progress.
I understand the distinction you're making between freedom and free will; I mentioned it because the compatibilist notion of free will is what you're calling freedom here. But yeah, it's probably not too relevant to the original discussion.
Nothing, the problem is not with reality (of course :-). The problem is that most people seem to think about freedom as something positive. You can only create freedom for Joe by coercing Jane to not violate it. This enables the kind of scenario that the parent to my original comment describes.
This goes back a _very_ long way; politicians used similar rhetoric in the Roman Republic (which was a slavery-based state which granted a meaningful franchise only to a wealthy elite).
I hate when they just pull these numbers out of their ass. I can agree that they lose money (even though I feel it is necessary to force them to innovate), but they are just creating random figures of things that would have never happened. It would be like Michael Bay coming out claiming Transformers lost 250 million dollars because of piracy.
Their problem is that they did not have a strong detailed message that could be related. You had liberals and libertarians fighting over nonsense and you had a lot of misinformed people. Plus, they should have been protesting our Government officials and demanding that they work for the people instead of protesting Wall Street. It just turned into a mess and got even more disorganized, which made it easier for someone to point a camera in several people's faces and make them seem like an idiot or a "socialist (which seems to scare people)."
I disagree pretty strongly, what I found most refreshing and "revolutionary" about the occupy movement was it's lack of a strong detailed message. It made it massively inclusive, it is not a one issue movement it is a new way of involving all kinds of people in the political process. That is what gave me hope (I'm cynical enough to know that it might not pan out as I'd like) it actually IS addressing the broken system the OP is complaining about.
The political process can only be corrupt as long as people aren't paying attention - I think the occupy movement did a great service in focusing attention on the inequalities inherent in the current system and provided a model for what democracy is supposed to be. People talking, debating and voting on the actual issues that affect them - when contrasted with the BS that is the congressional sausage factory and the media circus that surrounds it I know which I'd prefer to be the basis for a redefined version of democracy.
The lack of a strong detailed message did allow it to be massive and inclusive. But with no direction or goal, it's just a self-licking ice cream cone.
With no strong detailed message, it makes it really hard for politicians/media to argue against, but it makes it really easy for politicians/media to mock.
<The political process can only be corrupt as long as people aren't paying attention.>
I hope it will be like that forever: here in Italy politicians don't even need to fake the formality of democracy, the dialogue with the "real world".[referring to the facts of 15th november 2011]
I cringed at a lot of the coverage, so I know what you mean. A lot of the organizers were very new to this sort of politics. From what I've read (no articles on hand), they've moved into an office and have started acting like a coherent organization.
I'm sure we'll see a round two, and it'll have a clear message and better organization.
He is being very blunt, but what he is saying rings true because none of this is a long-term solution. These are baby steps and soon enough it will lose this momentum and get passed someway. People could boycott and hurt companies with what matter the most, but most people do not seem to be willing to do this because it inconvenience them. I can see how NDAA got passed, but when it comes to the internet, you would think that most of these sites would be boycotting. If this can't spark boycotts than I have no idea what will.
The people who read the original manga probably feel a certain way about the anime. The same way that people who read books feel about movie adaptions because they know there will be differences in it. A movie can bring things to a wider audience and then a lot of them may check out the original, which they may or may nor prefer.