Comments | andrewducker: Interesting Links for 11-02-2013

andrewducker

Interesting Links for 11-02-2013

Feb 11, 2013 11:00

viafanf, news, bacteria, web, rights, snow, spaceflight, gameofthones, usa, globalwarming, satire, academia, sex, viadraxar, farming, publishing, copyright, links, history, uk, bbc, funny, starwars, comics, assassination, lemmings, money, tv, lasers, space, relationships, robots, electricity, disney, religion, politics, valentines_day, medication

Comments 19

bart_calendar February 11 2013, 11:28:23 UTC

As a marketing person I have to say that Disney's decision to make standalones has "worst marketing fail ever" written all over it.

The risk of completely over-saturating the market is huge - and not one I'd advise a company to take with a 4 billion buck investment.

andrewducker February 11 2013, 13:31:50 UTC

It does seem odd. I wonder if they're thinking of it as a variant of the Avengers method - producing multiple movies that lead into an Event movie.

bart_calendar February 11 2013, 13:34:04 UTC

I'm thinking that they think that the best way to recoup their 4 billion buck investment is to generate as many toys as possible, which means needing to create an expanded universe quickly.

andrewducker February 11 2013, 13:40:03 UTC

They already have a pretty expanded universe! It's not like the SW canons are tiny.

Thread 6

bart_calendar February 11 2013, 11:30:20 UTC

Also, just talked to Han Solo. He supports all decarbonisation projects.

marrog February 11 2013, 12:13:12 UTC

310.

andrewducker February 11 2013, 13:32:31 UTC

Wow. Actively impressed!

marrog February 11 2013, 13:33:36 UTC

Really? I wasn't sure whether that was good or not; felt my technique could've been better, but only did it the once what with actually having to do some work at some point.

holyoutlaw February 11 2013, 15:09:37 UTC

If it was "310/404", the 310 is the number that died, not the number you saved. Although that's still better than I did either time.

Thread 8

danieldwilliam February 11 2013, 12:50:52 UTC

I wonder if, instead of laser armed robots, you might be better off giving the robots secateurs. The laser seems like over kill to me. Compared to a simple set of blades it seems expensive to manufacture, expensive to maintain, energy hungry (query relative weights), expensive to license and not that much more effective.

I think what I’d aim for would be something that went round the fields just cutting down weeds or stripping them of their leaves mechanically. If it could drag the waste to a central methane from compost tank so much the better.

andrewducker February 11 2013, 13:39:22 UTC

Secateurs wouldn't work on weeds that are largely ground based, would they? And it would require grasping and suchlike.

I'm not convinced that lasers are expensive in any sense any more. They seem to be able to churn them out for pennies nowadays.

Tall weeds could be cut down,of course.

danieldwilliam February 11 2013, 14:15:55 UTC

Mmmh, you might well be right about the different weeds. I was thinking of something that would at worst just shred the leaves of the weeds and leave them to die back from a combination of hunger and disease. Which would work on any plant. With repeat application. A more focused policy of targeting emerging seed pods might work better ( ... )

ashfae February 11 2013, 20:34:24 UTC

Man that Don Rosa article is depressing. Not entiely surprising, but depressing. I come from a family of Ducks addicts; Carl Barks and Don Rosa are heroes of ours. He deserves so much better.

Disney, you are stupid.