From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 1 23:20:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id XAA18330 for chat-outgoing; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA18283 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:20:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from word.smith.net.au (lot.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [203.20.121.21]) by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA28791 for ; Tue, 2 Sep 1997 15:49:52 +0930 (CST) Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [127.0.0.1]) by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA01380; Tue, 2 Sep 1997 15:45:31 +0930 (CST) Message-Id: <199709020615.PAA01380@word.smith.net.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: "Riley McIntire" cc: Mike Smith , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: What's the daemon chasing? In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 01 Sep 1997 22:55:33 GMT." <199709020605.XAA19714@train.tgci.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 15:45:30 +0930 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > ps. Microsoft shouted me to go see Contact last night, which is funny > > because while I'm a "Sales Partner", I never volunteered for the job > > and have never sold any of their "product". All in all, not a bad > > movie. Particularly if you remove the bogus reductionist "religious" > > philosophy. However, about halfway through I realised that I had read > > the story it was based on *many* years ago. > > > > At the end of the movie, the credits claimed that it was based on the > > book of the same name by Carl Sagan (I clapped at the "for Carl" credit, > > but nobody else got it. Morons.), and that based on a story by Sagan > > and someone else. However, I expressly *don't* recall the original > > story I read as being written by him; does anyone remember the > > original, or have it on their shelf? There was a lot less religious > > bunkum, and (IIRC) *three* capsule travellers, not one. > > > > I was pleased to see the "for Carl" credit too but missed the > reference to the book. The book was to me the first credible use > (kinda--you'd still get squished) of the concept of the wormhole as a > means to traverse space-time. Hmm. It's interesting to note that it's only the traveller that assumes that it's a "wormhole" as such; the guy playing the "aleen" did a *very* good job of being relaxed and indefinite 8) You could argue that it was the capsule that did the managing of non-squishiness, I guess. > Anyway, the book was worth reading, but I don't know if I'd read it > again solely because of its literary value. That's fair enough. Actually, another thing that surprised me about the film was the stark contrast between some of the moderately subtle things that happened and the incredibly blatant way they rammed other quirks (18 hours of static) down your throat. Oh, and they (*&^(*&^ didn't include any footage of our installation down the road from Arecibo. Bastards. Still, they did a reasonably good job of avoiding too many Really Bad computing gaffes. > I wish M$ had bought my ticket! :) You do? On the plus side, it was free and there were *no* trailers or adverts; on the minus side we had to listen to the local distributor co-hosting the presentation wanking on about how wonderful Microsoft's "product" was. I've seen Amway conventions on TV; at least this lot didn't dance and sing. mike