And I call those people idiots who should be disqualified from even being around guns in the first place. Frankly, this is one of the reasons I generally prefer to train women* to shoot guns who are interested, because they tend to start off scared of the gun. It's much easier to instill respect for what a gun can do, which makes it much easier to train them to safely handle one.
I swear, the next time some Rambo-wannabe toys around with his gun at the range and points his muzzle towards me or anyone else (whether the gun is loaded or not), I'm going to break his arm and staple the four rules of gun safety to his forehead. This is also one of the reasons I rarely go to the local range these days.
* Note that not all guys act like Rambo and some gals don't treat the gun like the dangerous weapon it actually is. This is why I have an airsoft replica of my Beretta 92FS (complete with slide and safety action; even disassembles in mostly the same way) that I use to train people in my backyard before I let them try to use the real thing at the range or an open field away from any civilization. If they can't apply the gun safety rules during practice on the airsoft, there's no way I'd let them handle my real Beretta, or any of my other firearms.
I'm not so sure about this. If you're the expert you say you are, I'd realistically give you, at extreme best, a 50% chance of not getting immediately shot against anybody who is decently trained on how to draw and fire the gun from the hip, especially if they have the gun on their hip opposite of you (which all it would take is a step back with that leg). You can continue to play Internet tough guy if you want, but unless you already put yourself on the upper hand to start, like you already got their shooting arm locked or you are right behind them, facing off unarmed against someone with a handgun is not something you'd realistically want to ever do.
Also, two things:
1) The average mugger isn't an Internet ninja.
2) I agree that simply having a gun won't protect you against muggers. What would be more effective against would-be muggers (whether you have a gun or not) is to be aware of what's going on around you and not place yourself in a position where you'd be vulnerable.
Actually, close combat is pretty easy with a gun. At those extremely close ranges, you have to fire from the hip (like in old westerns). If they are close enough, block them with your non-shooting arm high on their chest. Just keep firing as fast as you can upwards into their chest cavity until they go down. There's no need to have to try to point the gun at chest or eye level at their face or upper chest. Though the martial artsy "gun-fu" stuff in the movies are pretty cool to watch, I'm pretty sure getting a bullet into the stomach or chest would be pretty distracting...
Sure, with ported handgun designs and some revolvers, you'll get burns on your forearm, and possibly chest and face, but that's better than multiple bullet wounds to the abdomen and chest.
And yeah, ideally you would want to use the gun where it has the absolute advantage: at a distance. Actually, scratch that. Ideally, you would be avoiding the situation where you have to draw and use a gun on someone. Running away should be the first priority if it's at all possible.
And if they have a knife or blade, well, I guess you're resorting to have to protect your torso, neck, or head from being stabbed, taking the blade into your arm and hand if you have to; better than taking multiple gunshots to the torso.
If they have a gun, well, your own gun does a poor job of stopping bullets...
Just to split hairs, he didn't actually call you stupid. He called what you wrote "stupidities".
On the other hand, he is implying that you're ignorant. Still different from stupid, in that it suggests the possibility that you will learn.
Yes, I am a "fucking dork".
The key is current emission requirements. The mandated levels only depend on the year the vehicle was made. Hence, your 1981 Delorean is not tested to the same standards as a vehicle manufactured in 2006.
Indeed, cars don't need emission controls to operate, in themselves. Just that some people seem to insist on being able to breath without inhaling large amounts of toxic fumes. Silly thing indeed.
Have to admit, those orange sunsets you get with smog can be pretty cool looking at times....
Is it really electronics that increase complexity in an engine, or is it what is being asked out of an engine that's increasing the complexity?
When it comes down to it, how much "mechanical" engineering will it take to build an engine that will get the power for the size and efficiency of a modern engine? Combine that with the fuel efficiency and emission requirements being forced on modern cars, how do you think any mechanical system will be able to determine how much air/fuel mixture is needed so that the catalytic converters can best convert any unwanted gasses that may result from the combustion process? Have you ever seen how complex a hydraulic control system for a 4- or 5-speed auto is? And it's just there to make a "current speed + how far pedal pushed down -> gear to use" calculation, too.
For an example, look at the 2003 Honda Accord I own. Computers and electronics control the air/fuel mixture, the spark ignition timing, and even the gear changing on the auto tranny. How can you replace these electronics with mechanical processes and maintain the same amount of reliability and performance? And these are only some of the parts I would consider "critical" in an engine. That is also excluding functions like ABS and airbag deployement (I.E., not only when to deploy them, but what "stage", as modern airbags have multiple stages that are used depending on severity of a crash and if the occupant is wearing a seat belt).
The real problem is not electronics, but what you alluded in your last sentence: poor engineering. If a part becomes a common point of failure on a type of car, whether it's a mechanical part or part of the electronics, it's from bad engineering at some level in designing that car. It could be that the part wasn't built to expected specs, or the part is being used in a way that it's not designed for. But in the end, it's still bad engineering. And that could be the result of any number of causes (oversight, cutting corners, etc.). Just because it's "electronics" doesn't make it any more prone to failure.
Enjoy your water. I'll enjoy my soda. We'll both die someday, I'll just have a bigger smile when I do.
Either:
1 - Soda is a significant contributor to happiness in your life (assuming that bigger smile at death means a larger accumulation of happiness during life)
Or
2 - You got some very special soda...
I largely do this now with my current (non-Dell) laptop. I had installed Ubuntu on it a year ago, installed VMWare Server (from the download on the VMWare site, not the repository), and installed Windows XP Pro so I have access to some software that is extremely useful to me (I.E., the Windows only map software that I got a few years ago with a USB GPS device. Yes, VMWare will pass through the USB GPS into the guest operating system without issue.
I'll probably be asking my company to buy the Dell Ubuntu laptop and an extra copy of Windows XP Pro sometime in the next week.
The issue isn't "a"/"an". It's the fact that "dice" is a plural noun. The correct phrase should be either "eleven-sided dice" or "an eleven-sided die".
I do submit that I might be incorrect in that matter, but I do think it's more fun to grammar-nazi myself.;)
But the campaign asked him for a price! If you take his side of the story, they made him come up with a number when he had no idea of how to come up with a value for the site, so he worked something out. When he gives the number with how he got there, the Obama campaign suddenly accuse him of trying to cash in and swipes the myspace URL from him with no negotiations or counter-offer.
Frankly, the Obama campaign is legally in the clear here, and Joe himself might be lying about the situation, but the immediate accusations of cyber-squatting and "trying to cash in" from the Obama campaign staff with few details of the meetings from their side does not make them look good at all. It could have been possible that he would have accepted a couple thousands or less if they had offered (and maybe they did), but it looks as though the Obama campaign burned that bridge instead.
And that does put a black mark on the Obama campaign, especially if he espouses to be "for the little guy" like I keep hearing.
There have been a few recent commercial attempts at recreating the old X-Com feel, like Altair's UFO series (UFO: Afterlight is the most recent one), but I haven't found any that has matched that feel.
The closest to the original that I've found is the Open Source project UFO: Alien Invasion. It's still a work in progress, so bugs are going to have to be worked out, and they need to setup destructible terrain to really complete the feel. Something about the Quake 2 engine doesn't allow them to easily do this. I mean, some of my favorite moments involved sending in a blaster bomb into a house to wipe out a nest of aliens, blowing out 2-3 walls in the process...:).
I've started out using Slackware, then moved on to Debian. My use of Ubuntu really stems from my knowledge of how Debian works.
That said, I find that there are no technical reasons that Ubuntu is in any way "superior" to RH/Fedora. It's simply just my preference. Don't let the fanboys fool you.
Actually, you *can* get this to work without your host machine having an IP on the web. I've done this at my previous job (Of course, with Linux as both the Host and the Guest). The trick is to have the host machine's Ethernet connection up while bridging the WAN side of the Guest router O.S. to it. In Linux, you can do this without assigning an IP to the WAN side. In Windows, this isn't possible, but I'm sure you can assign a non-existent WAN IP (Using IPs in the 192.168.y.z or 10.x.y.z ranges), and probably firewall that side to make sure.
In the end, I had the host system (and all of the other guests and physical machines on the network) actually connect through the net through the LAN side of the router VM!
Then again, that was my old job. My new employer was actually willing to pay for a proper router for an office...
Somebody that is setting up a Content Management System for a website better be competent enough to understand the jargon behind running a website. If they are not, they need to be willing to learn or pay someone who is competent to set it up for them.
Slashdot Mirror
And I call those people idiots who should be disqualified from even being around guns in the first place. Frankly, this is one of the reasons I generally prefer to train women* to shoot guns who are interested, because they tend to start off scared of the gun. It's much easier to instill respect for what a gun can do, which makes it much easier to train them to safely handle one.
I swear, the next time some Rambo-wannabe toys around with his gun at the range and points his muzzle towards me or anyone else (whether the gun is loaded or not), I'm going to break his arm and staple the four rules of gun safety to his forehead. This is also one of the reasons I rarely go to the local range these days.
* Note that not all guys act like Rambo and some gals don't treat the gun like the dangerous weapon it actually is. This is why I have an airsoft replica of my Beretta 92FS (complete with slide and safety action; even disassembles in mostly the same way) that I use to train people in my backyard before I let them try to use the real thing at the range or an open field away from any civilization. If they can't apply the gun safety rules during practice on the airsoft, there's no way I'd let them handle my real Beretta, or any of my other firearms.
I'm not so sure about this. If you're the expert you say you are, I'd realistically give you, at extreme best, a 50% chance of not getting immediately shot against anybody who is decently trained on how to draw and fire the gun from the hip, especially if they have the gun on their hip opposite of you (which all it would take is a step back with that leg). You can continue to play Internet tough guy if you want, but unless you already put yourself on the upper hand to start, like you already got their shooting arm locked or you are right behind them, facing off unarmed against someone with a handgun is not something you'd realistically want to ever do.
Also, two things:
1) The average mugger isn't an Internet ninja.
2) I agree that simply having a gun won't protect you against muggers. What would be more effective against would-be muggers (whether you have a gun or not) is to be aware of what's going on around you and not place yourself in a position where you'd be vulnerable.
Actually, close combat is pretty easy with a gun. At those extremely close ranges, you have to fire from the hip (like in old westerns). If they are close enough, block them with your non-shooting arm high on their chest. Just keep firing as fast as you can upwards into their chest cavity until they go down. There's no need to have to try to point the gun at chest or eye level at their face or upper chest. Though the martial artsy "gun-fu" stuff in the movies are pretty cool to watch, I'm pretty sure getting a bullet into the stomach or chest would be pretty distracting...
Sure, with ported handgun designs and some revolvers, you'll get burns on your forearm, and possibly chest and face, but that's better than multiple bullet wounds to the abdomen and chest.
And yeah, ideally you would want to use the gun where it has the absolute advantage: at a distance. Actually, scratch that. Ideally, you would be avoiding the situation where you have to draw and use a gun on someone. Running away should be the first priority if it's at all possible.
And if they have a knife or blade, well, I guess you're resorting to have to protect your torso, neck, or head from being stabbed, taking the blade into your arm and hand if you have to; better than taking multiple gunshots to the torso.
If they have a gun, well, your own gun does a poor job of stopping bullets...
He's probably talking about an engine block heater.
Just to split hairs, he didn't actually call you stupid. He called what you wrote "stupidities". On the other hand, he is implying that you're ignorant. Still different from stupid, in that it suggests the possibility that you will learn. Yes, I am a "fucking dork".
So which moron designed texts to use the more expensive way to send data regardless of the service available?
The "moron" that sold you the phone?But count($primary_concerns) will still yield 2!
Maybe he was expecting it to fall apart about 7 seconds before launch?
The key is current emission requirements. The mandated levels only depend on the year the vehicle was made. Hence, your 1981 Delorean is not tested to the same standards as a vehicle manufactured in 2006.
Indeed, cars don't need emission controls to operate, in themselves. Just that some people seem to insist on being able to breath without inhaling large amounts of toxic fumes. Silly thing indeed.
Have to admit, those orange sunsets you get with smog can be pretty cool looking at times....
Is it really electronics that increase complexity in an engine, or is it what is being asked out of an engine that's increasing the complexity?
When it comes down to it, how much "mechanical" engineering will it take to build an engine that will get the power for the size and efficiency of a modern engine? Combine that with the fuel efficiency and emission requirements being forced on modern cars, how do you think any mechanical system will be able to determine how much air/fuel mixture is needed so that the catalytic converters can best convert any unwanted gasses that may result from the combustion process? Have you ever seen how complex a hydraulic control system for a 4- or 5-speed auto is? And it's just there to make a "current speed + how far pedal pushed down -> gear to use" calculation, too.
For an example, look at the 2003 Honda Accord I own. Computers and electronics control the air/fuel mixture, the spark ignition timing, and even the gear changing on the auto tranny. How can you replace these electronics with mechanical processes and maintain the same amount of reliability and performance? And these are only some of the parts I would consider "critical" in an engine. That is also excluding functions like ABS and airbag deployement (I.E., not only when to deploy them, but what "stage", as modern airbags have multiple stages that are used depending on severity of a crash and if the occupant is wearing a seat belt).
The real problem is not electronics, but what you alluded in your last sentence: poor engineering. If a part becomes a common point of failure on a type of car, whether it's a mechanical part or part of the electronics, it's from bad engineering at some level in designing that car. It could be that the part wasn't built to expected specs, or the part is being used in a way that it's not designed for. But in the end, it's still bad engineering. And that could be the result of any number of causes (oversight, cutting corners, etc.). Just because it's "electronics" doesn't make it any more prone to failure.
Either:
1 - Soda is a significant contributor to happiness in your life (assuming that bigger smile at death means a larger accumulation of happiness during life)
Or
2 - You got some very special soda...
Ah well, it's a short life. Enjoy it...
Just keep IIS in its native environment and we'll get WIMP... :)
I largely do this now with my current (non-Dell) laptop. I had installed Ubuntu on it a year ago, installed VMWare Server (from the download on the VMWare site, not the repository), and installed Windows XP Pro so I have access to some software that is extremely useful to me (I.E., the Windows only map software that I got a few years ago with a USB GPS device. Yes, VMWare will pass through the USB GPS into the guest operating system without issue.
I'll probably be asking my company to buy the Dell Ubuntu laptop and an extra copy of Windows XP Pro sometime in the next week.
The issue isn't "a"/"an". It's the fact that "dice" is a plural noun. The correct phrase should be either "eleven-sided dice" or "an eleven-sided die".
;)
I do submit that I might be incorrect in that matter, but I do think it's more fun to grammar-nazi myself.
But thank you for the info about that rule!
And yes, I noticed my grammar mistake. Please remove that "an" in my question from the record...
Shouldn't that be 32d11? I mean, if you really want to combine Hex geekery with D&D...
Where can you get an 11-sided dice?
Lincoln shot first!
But the campaign asked him for a price! If you take his side of the story, they made him come up with a number when he had no idea of how to come up with a value for the site, so he worked something out. When he gives the number with how he got there, the Obama campaign suddenly accuse him of trying to cash in and swipes the myspace URL from him with no negotiations or counter-offer.
Frankly, the Obama campaign is legally in the clear here, and Joe himself might be lying about the situation, but the immediate accusations of cyber-squatting and "trying to cash in" from the Obama campaign staff with few details of the meetings from their side does not make them look good at all. It could have been possible that he would have accepted a couple thousands or less if they had offered (and maybe they did), but it looks as though the Obama campaign burned that bridge instead.
And that does put a black mark on the Obama campaign, especially if he espouses to be "for the little guy" like I keep hearing.
You can also download the MP3 from his myspace page...
I was waiting for someone to mention X-Com... :)
There have been a few recent commercial attempts at recreating the old X-Com feel, like Altair's UFO series (UFO: Afterlight is the most recent one), but I haven't found any that has matched that feel.
The closest to the original that I've found is the Open Source project UFO: Alien Invasion. It's still a work in progress, so bugs are going to have to be worked out, and they need to setup destructible terrain to really complete the feel. Something about the Quake 2 engine doesn't allow them to easily do this. I mean, some of my favorite moments involved sending in a blaster bomb into a house to wipe out a nest of aliens, blowing out 2-3 walls in the process... :).
"See"
:)
What interesting reading!
Well, could you post the link?
Actually, they do have a tutorial to setup separate VLAN on each port in their wiki: http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/VLAN_Detached _Networks_(Separate_Networks_With_Internet)
_ and_WLAN
And closer to the GP's request, there's a tuturial to separate the WLAN from LAN: http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Separate_LAN
I've started out using Slackware, then moved on to Debian. My use of Ubuntu really stems from my knowledge of how Debian works.
That said, I find that there are no technical reasons that Ubuntu is in any way "superior" to RH/Fedora. It's simply just my preference. Don't let the fanboys fool you.
Actually, you *can* get this to work without your host machine having an IP on the web. I've done this at my previous job (Of course, with Linux as both the Host and the Guest). The trick is to have the host machine's Ethernet connection up while bridging the WAN side of the Guest router O.S. to it. In Linux, you can do this without assigning an IP to the WAN side. In Windows, this isn't possible, but I'm sure you can assign a non-existent WAN IP (Using IPs in the 192.168.y.z or 10.x.y.z ranges), and probably firewall that side to make sure. In the end, I had the host system (and all of the other guests and physical machines on the network) actually connect through the net through the LAN side of the router VM! Then again, that was my old job. My new employer was actually willing to pay for a proper router for an office...
Somebody that is setting up a Content Management System for a website better be competent enough to understand the jargon behind running a website. If they are not, they need to be willing to learn or pay someone who is competent to set it up for them.