text:
I have been asked to bring the recent draft of Checkpoint 3.3 (included at the end of this message) more into line with the format used in the rest of WCAG 2.0 [1]. I have been doing a lot of thinking about 3.3 in recent weeks, and in this message I will attempt to lay out some of those thoughts (coherently, I hope) for discussion by the group. Checkpoint 3.3 has potential overlaps with a number of other checkpoints, most notably: Checkpoint 3.1: Use consistent presentation. Checkpoint 3.2: Emphasize structure through presentation, positioning, and labels. Checkpoint 1.5: Separate content and structure from presentation. Checkpoint 3.4: Supplement text with non-text content. Checkpoint 3.5: Annotate complex, abbreviated, or unfamiliar information with summaries and definitions. To begin, we can remove from the 3.3 draft some of the advice that more logically belongs under one of these other checkpoints. Doing so will allow us to focus on one thing in 3.3: clear writing. Thus for purposes of this checkpoint we can set aside issues that are explicitly covered elsewhere, such as graphical illustrations (3.4), annotations and definitions (3.5), and much of the advice about document layout and presentation (1.5, 3.1, 3.2). I also agree with Loretta and Lisa that support for decision-making and task-completion (including forms) merits its own checkpoint. Such a checkpoint might belong under Guideline 2 rather than 3. Checkpoints in the working draft of WCAG 2.0 are presented with the following components: 1. Success criteria 2. where necessary, Definitions of terms that appear in the Checkpoint (informative) 3. Benefits (informative) 4. Examples (informative) Definitions in WCAG 2.0 provide explanations of specialized terms used in the checkpoint itself, and not all checkpoints are accompanied by definitions. Looking at 3.3, I do not see any terms that require definitions, with the possible exception of "content" (Charles, do you think that a definition should be provided for "content"?). As we discussed as a recent telecon, many of the items included in the 3.3 draft as definitions actually look more like success criteria. I will attempt to pull these items out for consideration as success criteria, unless they are already covered in other checkpoints. The Benefits section of 3.3 has not been updated since the working draft of 24 August 2001. We will need to revisit it. Among other things, I would like to capture the benefits for people who use alternate modes of browsing (such as listening with a screen reader, reading a braille printout). It would also be good if we could provide more detail in the Benefits section about the ways in which cognitive, learning, and reading disabilities can affect how people process written text. Some of the expert material posted to the list in recent weeks will help us add specificity to the Benefits. The Examples have been discussed somewhat but remain to be written. The Examples section is where we typically discuss the application of a checkpoint to different kinds of content. For instance, 3.2 offers examples for "documentation for a product" and "a data table." Once we have given more thought to the different categories of written content, we will be better able to select the most useful examples. Of course, the variety of written content is almost infinite, but let's start by dividing "written content" into two categories: 1. First, we have content that cannot be altered by the web author. This category includes such things as works of literature, proceedings of the Hague tribunal, the budget plan for the Ministry of Health, or anything that exists in published form elsewhere and cannot be amended or tampered with. In these cases, the web author would not be obliged to rewrite the content (she can't). Rather, she would need to annotate and supplement the content in a way that facilitates comprehension. Techniques she could use include summaries, outlines, links to dictionaries or specialized glossaries (internal or external), explanations of non-literal language, proper markup of all structural divisions within the existing material, and all manner of talmudic marginalia, depending on how much explanation the content requires and how far the web author is willing to go. 2. Then we have content that is being created (or re-created) specifically for the web. Most commercial sites would fall into this category, as would an increasing amount of material from governments, educational institutions, individuals, etc. Here we can ask the web authors to follow the editing and web-writing advice that they are not free to apply to content that cannot be rewritten: break up long sentences and long paragraphs, make sure each paragraph contains a single idea expressed in the topic sentence, choose words that are commonly understood, etc. This second category can be further subdivided, and for our present purposes I think the most significant sub-set of Category 2 is step-by-step instructions. Instructions are such a specialized form of writing, and there are so many techniques that apply specifically and solely to instructions, that I wonder whether we should pull them out and give them a checkpoint of their own rather than trying to encompass them in the success criteria and examples for 3.3. A separate checkpoint devoted to instructions might allow us to treat them more fully, and might also be appreciated by web authors who are trying to create accessible instructions. And I'm not sure, but it might also help us as we tackle the success criteria and examples for 3.4, since effective illustration of instructions is one of the things we've been trying to address in that checkpoint. Does anyone have thoughts on the matters discussed above? Next, I have been attempting to pull out of the current 3.3 draft anything that looks like a success criterion, restate it as clearly as I could without changing the meaning, assess its testability, and comment on its appropriateness/usefulness as a success criterion. Some general comments: As we've been working on success criteria for the checkpoints in Guideline 3, we continue to run into a vexing problem: some criteria are testable but not particularly useful or sufficient, and others contain supremely sound advice but are, alas and damn it, not objectively testable. Again and again we have circled 'round to this fact: we have a wealth of good advice that needs to be published, if not in the criteria, then somewhere equally prominent where people will find and use it. We do not want to throw this advice out or bury it in techniques documents simply because it does not meet our standards for objective testability. 3.3 is certainly a case in point. Some of our useful success criteria are indeed testable. However, many are not. We are going to wind up with several sound principles regarding word choice, editing, brevity, information-chunking, and usability that defy our attempts to cast them as testable success criteria. In fact, I think we will need to decide just how far we wish to pursue the subject of web writing. (The question of how far the Web Content Accessibility Working Group should stray into the area of general usability continues to come up). If we do wish to create more supplemental materials to help authors write clearly and edit their writing for the web, we have a wealth of resources upon which to draw. Richard Lanham's _Revising Prose_ is one good source. So are the style guides for newspapers, which (in the USA, at least), have to aim at a sixth- or seventh-grade reading level. Lee has collected additional research. And of course the burgeoning field of usability studies offers much that we can use, if we want to. I will address the 3.3 success criteria individually in a subsequent message, as this one is getting extremely long. Final note: recently there has been further list discussion of interface design issues, particularly as they affect people with cognitive disabilities. Perhaps in a future telecon (or on the list) we can start to talk about where the various pieces of interface-design advice can best be incorporated into the Guidelines. Clearly, not all of them belong under 3.3. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-WCAG20-20010824/ -- Jo Miller >Checkpoint 3.3 Write as clearly and simply as is appropriate for the content. > > > > > >Definitions (informative) > > > >Clear and simple writing requires planning and work on the level of >the document each sentence and individual words. Clear and simple >text has been broken up beyond the level requirements by good >markup. > >A clear document has a structured flow of ideas. > A clear document provides the flow of ideas summarized in a >summary, diagram or page map to help the user orientate themselves >within the document. >A clear document specifically states each step within the flow of >ideas and does not leave stages inferred or implied. >A clear document has an easily scanable layout with key information >highlighted through presentation and positioning. > A clear document contains tools to aid comprehension including: > >Illustrations:illustrations of instructions, illustrations of flow >of concepts, >Support of decision making: Provide forms element examples. Provide >calculation assistance. Provide prompts for procedures, cues. >Support "wizards" which offer help, simplify configuration, and >assist with sequences. Structured tasks, cued sequences, and >step-by-step instructions. >Reduction of decision making: Automated complex sequences like user >registration. Reduce the need to calculate Providing forms element >defaults and make it easy to re-establish them. > >Note: Loretta suggests moving this whole "provide additional support >" part to an extra checkpoint. I think that that may be wise. > >A clear paragraph expresses a single idea that can be summarized by >its first sentence. >A clear paragraph has an easily scanable layout with key information >highlighted through presentation, markup and positioning. >A clear sentence contains a single point. >A clear sentence is as short as can be used to expressed a single point. > A clear instructions focuses on concrete rather than abstract >indicators using absolute reference controls rather than relative >ones. > >Simple word are words that easily understood. This means that words >should be of short and of common usage. >Use of jargon may be simple, were as the long term may complicate >the sentence (eg: ROM or read only memory) however translations of >jargon should be provided with each instance. >Clear words can not be misinterpreted by someone who is unfamiliar >with the language or can not process metaphorical sarcastic or non >literal use of language. Such unclear use of language should be >marked as such. >Clear words are meaningful and specific. > >It is sufficient to provide a mode with minimum and clear >functionality that eliminates or hides what isn't necessary for >completing the site's goals. > > > >Success criteria > > > >Document: >Provide overview >For flow: look at overview ( summary, diagram, heading outline or >page map)- It is possible to map the document to pieces that are in >the summary >Highlight key information using markup ( eg headings and emphasis) >- when the highlighted text >stands alone does it summarize the key ideas. > >Paragraphs: >Short paragraphs - Paragraphs should have with fewer than five >sentences . Use lists to break up long paragraphs. >can sentences be replaces by bullet points? If so markup sentence as a list >First sentence summarizes the point of each subsequent sentence - >does each sentence in the paragraph directly relate to the first >sentence? >one idea per sentence- Test: replace each paragraph with a one idea >sentence. Does the document >STILL make sense? > >Sentence: > -All: > Use short sentences - Write sentences with 20 or fewer words and . > Use lists to break up long sentences -can comas be replaced by >bullet points? if so markup sentence as a list >Sentence -Headings >Should be meaningful out of context >Headings should be unique > >Sentence - Instructional >It should be possible to identify a graphic representation of an > instruction. I.e. you can draw the picture. >Each step is clearly stated. You could you represent the flow chart >and successfully perform a dry >run. >Pictorial representation should be provided of each instruction >Use active rather than passive expressions >Sentences contain no more than one relative clause >Use goal/action structure for menu prompts. > >Words: >Non-literal text is identified and a literal translation is identified - >test by literal translating to another language and re- literal >translating back. Does it make >sense? >Jargon that is expected should be linked to a glossary / explanation. >Use simple words: Substitute common words for uncommon words >(without significantly expanding the size) does not change the meaning. Note >that this requires a dictionary that marks the "difficulty" of a word. > >Words - anchors (links) >hypertext anchors should be meaningful out of context > >Forms >All form elements should have a default or example provided >calculations should be performed automatically (eg severside) >Provide definite feedback cues Use a two-step "select and confirm" to reduce accidental selections. (IE nothing happens when an option is selected until a confirm/go/OK button is clicked)Received on Thursday, 28 February 2002 12:16:21 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:40 UTC


text:
Posted by IaGary on October 25, 2012 at 16:44:27 from (22.214.171.124):
In Reply to: plowing question posted by Super Steve on October 25, 2012 at 11:03:49:
Does the plow have disc colters?
They should be set so they slice one to two inches more than the plow bottom.
My colters are also set about 3 to 4 inches deep.
Without colters I don't ever see a furrow cutting clean
Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Optional Video Title:
Optional Video Embed:
Advanced Posting Options
TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Spy Charges for Air Force Retiree
Published 8:00 pm, Thursday, February 14, 2002
Associated Press Writer
A retired Air Force sergeant with thousands of dollars in debts sought $13 million from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in exchange for sensitive U.S. military secrets, and also offered to spy for Libya and China, the government says.
Bitter over "the small pension I will receive for all of the years of service," Brian Patrick Regan allegedly wrote to Saddam that the payment demand was a "small price to pay," the government said Thursday as it lodged new criminal charges in the government's latest espionage case.
Regan, 39, could face the death penalty. A grand jury in Alexandria, Va., indicted him Thursday on three counts of attempted espionage and one of gathering national defense information. He was previously indicted in October on a single espionage charge, although it did not specify whom authorities suspected him of spying for.
Regan previously pleaded innocent to the charge in federal court, and he was scheduled to be arraigned Friday on the latest charges.
Deputy U.S. Attorney General Larry Thompson declined to say whether Regan turned over any secret or otherwise classified information to foreign governments. Thompson also declined to say whether Regan actually delivered the letter he is accused of writing to Saddam.
But the indictment indicated that Regan in June flew to Berlin and possibly Munich before returning to Washington seven days later, and the trip was "not in connection with any official duties."
Prosecutors said Regan wrote personally to Saddam sometime between 1999 and 2001 and asked for $13 million in Swiss currency to provide information about U.S. satellites and other military secrets. Prosecutors said he offered to send a sample of secrets for $1 million, and offered additional information afterward for $3 million and $5 million payments.
"There are many people from movie stars to (athletes) in the U.S. who are receiving tens of millions of dollars a year for their trivial contributions," Regan allegedly wrote, falsely describing himself as a CIA officer near retirement. "If I am going to risk my life and the future of my family, I am going to get paid a fair price."
Court records indicated that Regan carried debts of at least $53,000 earlier this year, and he told a federal judge in November that he could not afford to hire a lawyer.
Regan allegedly described the demand to Iraq for $13 million as "a small price to pay to have someone within the heart of (a) U.S. intelligence agency providing you with vital secrets." The letter said the information being offered was worth "billions" and "worth many times what I am requesting."
Thursday's indictment also accused Regan of writing a nearly identical letter to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi between August 2000 and August 2001, but it apparently did not include demands for payment. That letter offered Gadhafi "top secret" information about satellites, early warning systems and overall U.S. defense strategies, prosecutors said.
It wasn't immediately clear how investigators found the letters that Regan allegedly wrote, though court records said computer files were recovered at his home in Bowie, Md., where he lived with his wife and children, on the day of his arrest Aug. 23.
U.S. officials have said Regan worked at the National Reconnaissance Office in Chantilly, Va., a U.S. intelligence agency that designs, builds and operates the nation's vast network of spy satellites. He worked at the NRO from July 1995 until his arrest _ first in the Air Force, then as a defense contractor for TRW Inc. beginning in October 2000.
Prosecutors said that shortly after he returned from Germany in July, he began repeatedly logging into the government's classified "Intelink" computer network and searching for information _ including satellite photos _ of military facilities in Iraq, Iran, Libya and China, even though those countries were not related to his official duties at TRW.
From Aug. 6 to his arrest, officials said he logged into the system every day, Monday through Thursday, when he was in the office.
But FBI spy-catchers, alerted by then to what they described as his suspicious behavior, were watching Regan on secret video cameras during some of the times he used Intelink, officials said.
Wary of falling into an FBI counterespionage trap, prosecutors said, Regan also demanded that Iraq subtly alter its official Web site on computers run by the United Nations _ and place an ad in The Washington Post for a 1996 Acura sports car _ as proof that Iraqi officials were cooperating.
That is similar to the case involving Robert Hanssen, the FBI agent arrested last February and convicted of spying for the Russians from 1985 to 2001. Court records said Hanssen instructed the Russians to place an ad in The Washington Times in July 1986 for a 1971 Dodge Diplomat as a signal of readiness to exchange secrets.


text:
These KOBRA Handguards are designed to fit the original handlebars, offering weather and crash protection.
Molded from impact resistant plastic in a classic design these handguards feature a strong, fully wrapped aluminum frame.
Optional accessories include:
- SW-MOTECH KOBRA Handguard extension kit, allowing 50% more protection
- SW-MOTECH LED Indicators for KOBRA Handguards (1 watt, overall 16 LEDs)
- SW-MOTECH KOBRA LED Resistors
|Manufacturer #


text:
Also, spend $50 and you will receive a copy of Eli Retschlag's "Scarlet Pearl" deck - limited edition of 250 decks (Limit 1 per customer), and also _every_ $50 spent on Carat Card Case™ v2 products gets one CCC v1 'single' deck acrylic display - while supplies last (and I have about 50 decks and 80 single Carat v1 cases).
Right now the store is in "bare bones" mode, mostly testing the checkout routines using PayPal Express, Shopify (by Stripe) and Amazon Payments, which also allows you to check out using almost any credit (or debit) card issued worldwide _without_ creating an account (through PayPal Express). The single thing we had hoped to provide but cannot is "ApplePay": support is not happening, because the vendor offering that service for Shopify was decertified by Apple about a week ago. The OG "Deck #17"("v1") by Lorenzo Gaggioti is on sale for $20 - $5 off normal price.
ALL Carat Card Case™ v2 crystal clear acrylic deck displays are now done through UCdecksales.com and also any new member-only sales formerly on the "UC offers" page will be only available using https://UCdecksales.com.... (you don't have to enter HTTPS, you will automatically be sent to the encrypted SSL certified side). All processing is on UCdecksales.com except checkout services, which always use "https://checkout.shopify.com" and then pass control back to UCdecksales.com after payment has completed (or not).
Shipping and pricing for the US (anyone with a 5-digit ZIP code), Canada and overseas now, because after the USPS increased prices about two months ago, it's now significantly cheaper to send things to Canada as opposed to overseas. ALL shipping is done using Priority Mail (International outside the US) and because we are physically located in South Carolina, taxes are computer for sales that are delivered in South Carolina, including exact taxes per county for "local option" sales tax, highway improvement (AKA "RoadWise") and any other local county- or city-wide taxes.
If you run into ANY problems, please let me know exactly what you see, including incorrectly computed shipping (there IS no handling and shipping is always at cost), etc
During the "Pre-opening Sale", everyone gets member discounted pricing on Carat Card Case™ products, but starting 1-April, those prices will be higher per unit varying from 0.50 for singles, $1 for doubles, $1.25 for triple and $1.50 for quad displays plus a 3% surcharge for postal shipping and packing supplies, which is always free for UC members.
One thing that Shopify cannot do, and I have tried numerous ways of trying to calculate things - decide what can (or cannot) fit in various sized Priority Mail "Flat Rate" shipping boxes, so if you need a custom order of mixed display sizes - and this applies to ANY order because otherwise the shipping has to be included instead of "by weight" which applies to everything else except uncut sheets and some specialty items that have not yet been listed (each requires a specific shipping free depending on destination). Please inquire using the feedback or "Contact Us" form or simply send me a PM here. If you use the form "over there", be certain to include your UC member name so I give you the preferred pricing. If your cost is over $150, I will automatically deduct 10% through 31-March.


text:
Posts tagged with "Lawn"RSS
5 Easy Ways to Assess Your Soil for GardeningBy Eartheasy.com, Posted February 19th, 2014
A productive garden begins with an understanding of the basic properties of your soil.» Read More
Megadroughts ahead? Let's all cut water use by 20%By Eartheasy.com, Posted February 6th, 2014
We can make a difference right now with a few household adjustments — our ecosystem may hang in the balance.» Read More
Grasscycling – The Easiest Way to Nurture Your LawnBy Eartheasy.com, Posted June 15th, 2011
This simple lawn care method will reduce lawn maintenance, retain water, and fertilize your lawn naturally…» Read More
Five spring tips for clear pond waterBy Drs. Foster and Smith, Posted March 9th, 2009
The following spring algae-busting tips will help you enjoy your outdoor space throughout the summer without having to constantly worry about algae.» Read More
Pesticides & Kids – why you should be concernedBy Karen R. Forbes, Posted January 28th, 2009
We are adding more chemicals in one form or another to our soil, food, water and homes. Is this a healthy trend?» Read More
Outdoor Pesticides – are they worth the risk?By Kimberly Monaghan, Posted January 28th, 2009
Now is the time to take a second look at what we decide to pass on to our families, our pets and our environment.» Read More
Lawn care chemicals: how toxic are they?By Greg Seaman, Posted January 28th, 2009
The benefits of using lawn care chemicals are easy to see, but the effects they may have on your family's health and the environment are less obvious.» Read More
Drought Survival for LawnsBy Greg Seaman, Posted January 28th, 2009
Drought is becoming more common in many parts of North America, and lawns need to be naturally vigorous and well maintained to withstand the stress caused by reduced watering.» Read More
Go for an Edible Estate …the case against lawnsBy Fritz Haeg, Metropolis Books, Posted January 28th, 2009
Why do we dedicate so much property to something that requires precious resources, endless hours and contaminates our air and water?» Read More
Home-Front EcologyBy Mike Davis, Sierra Magazine, Posted January 28th, 2009
What our grandparents can teach us about saving the world» Read More


text:
A fascinating and character-driven thriller, this novel delves into the deepest bonds of friendship, all accompanied by a rock 'n' roll beat.
After Richard Zale receives news of the death of a childhood friend, he returns to their hometown to pay his respects. It isn't long, however, before old frictions and a new puzzle emerge, drawing him deeper into the mystery of his friend's demise.
©2010 David Fulmer (P)2011 Blackstone Audio, Inc.
"Terrific! Great characters, great plot." (Jon Polito, actor,American Gangster)
There are no listener reviews for this title yet.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.


text:
Director Neill Blomkamp (District 9, Elysium) has been publicly flirting with the Alien franchise for months now. What was once thought to be simple fan fiction, may now actually become the next Alien movie in the franchise.
A few months ago Blomkamp began leaking concept art that he was working on as a "creative exercise." He is an admitted Alien fan and he got the opportunity to work with the star of the franchise, Sigourney Weaver, in his upcoming film, Chappie. Clearly getting the chance to work with Weaver inspired the science fiction visionary. A few weeks ago Blomkamp spoke about his concept art and his interest in making the movie:
"There was a reason. I wanted to make that film. I still may make that film. [Laughs] It may happen. But I did it on my own time. Like when Chappie was winding down in post and I had available time, I started to work on it. It was also from talking to Sigourney [Weaver] during the making of this. I mean, I asked her about Alien all the time. Alien and Aliens are my favorite films. So I genuinely wanted to make that film, I came up with the story, I came up with way more art than I put out and I never officially spoke to Fox about it, but Fox wanted to make it. So, I kind of touched on it and I didn't know what to do, and I didn't know if I was just gonna go leave directing for a whole bunch of time and then I was like, 'I might as well put some art out.' But I may make it. I don't know. That's where it stands."
Not only has Blomkamp shown the ability to create flawless visual effects for his films, he is also the writer of his movies as well. He has shown the inclination to combine high-concept science fiction, that is layered with pertinent social commentary. While his films have featured extra-terrestrials and spaceships, they have also been strong allegorical warnings about apartheid and the inequality of the classes. We have gotten numerous Alien movies, however we have rarely gotten any subtext from the series, perhaps since Ripley saved the orphaned Newt in Aliens.
Things became real for fans of Alien today when Blomkamp announced via Instagram that the Alien project was real:
Blomkamp is no stranger to science fiction. All of his films have been in that genre, however if he is looking to bring Alien back to its roots, he is going to have to make it a horror film. In District 9, there were moments and segments that had elements of a horror, it will be interesting to watch Blomkamp push himself in that area.
#ripley #hicks A photo posted by Brownsnout (@neillblomkamp) on
While Weaver was not a part of the announcement, expect to hear a confirmation of her participation in the movie as soon as the contract is negotiated. Last week she was asked if she would be interested in rejoining the franchise and she responded:
"It's not that so much as that we just left it at such a creepy place, sort of stranded above Earth. I was quite happy to move onto other things and I didn't want to go to Earth. I didn't want to manufacture a sequel and I felt like we were starting to do that. If something happens from this, it would be very organic and very original, and because of that, it would make me want to do it. If it was someone as talented as Neill, I'd certainly listen."
Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection were not horrible films, they simply could not come close to the quality craftsmanship of the first two installments. Fox decided to change gears and begin their Alien vs Predator movies, which plummeted the value of the franchise to a point where it was almost untouchable. It seems that Weaver wants the opportunity to right the sails of the franchise and from the sounds of it, she is confident that Blomkamp is the talent to get the job done.
Wtf? A photo posted by Brownsnout (@neillblomkamp) on
Original Alien director Ripley Scott, came back in 2012 with the prequel to the franchise, Prometheus. The movie has polarized viewers since its release. It was marketed as an Alien prequel, due to it having much of the iconography of his original film. However Scott chose to tell a different story that many were not expecting to see. There is a sequel to Prometheus on the way and Scott will be producing both his and Blomkamp's movies. Expect to see Prometheus 2 released first, since a release in 2016 has already been targeted.
This is a very exciting time and it is the first time in several decades when fans should actually be excited at the prospects of a new Alien movie. It's hard to predict what Blomkamp has up his sleeve, but I can guarantee a mech suit is involved, based on his filmography and the iconic scene from Aliens. We will be keeping a very close eye on this film as it moves through development.
So what do you think of the prospects of Blomkamp writing and directing Alien 5? Let us know on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Reddit! Make sure to share our stories on your favorite social media by clicking below.
Source: Instagram, ScreenRant, Coming Soon, The Wrap