So what is the point of even having communications then, if you have significant problems that are not even mentioned, while everyone continues to spout "everything is nominal".
One of the engines was not supposed to fail, the built in redundancy is exactly that a redundancy and should not have been needed. Space flights and the engineering that goes into building the spacecraft are supposed to be extremely rigorous, such that you do not have entire engines that are so flawed that they fail on their very first flight. How much did this engine cost that did not even work?
It is not about the ratio who try to become good marksmen. It is a well known and accepted fact that women just have a very hard time becoming good shooters and most of the ones who try fail. We had to lower the requirements in the military to get more accepted, and in the olympics, the best of the best who train tirelessly cannot compete on a mans level.
Everything I have ever heard would lead me to believe that they would be all around worse at archery type skills, but olympic records do disagree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_archery). Not that it is entirely safe to take such a small elite sample and draw a general result from it. And I am still quite certain that accuracy using a big bow (as well as fire rate) would be on average far worse in women (disregarding strength based stuff).
Wow that as a lot lighter than I would've expected. But I guess the longer it is the lighter it has to be.
But to anyone who ever used hammers/malls. It becomes obvious quite fast exactly how heavy even 10 pounds feels when you use tools like that. A 50 pound sword/mace would be pretty unusable, easy to pick up and carry around, but not to actually use.
More importantly women are far far worse at other important attributes than simply strength. It would not matter if you made a 2 lb sword, the very best women who trained tirelessly would only be as good at a moderately above average man.
Most showenly this is demonstrated in marksmanship, where strength is not really an issue. You can take the military, or professional marksmanship as perfect examples of this. At pretty much any level of skill you will get far lower than a 19% ratio.
But they are all pretty much hopelessly in love, and 90% of them with the protagonist Rand. Adding in a bunch of females so you can have an occasional sex scene and a gaggle of women swooning over your protagonist is hardly applaudable. I really liked The Deed of Paksenarrion novels, but the woman protagonist is not particularly a woman. Other than the name the book reads like it is a man. Allan Cole's Anteros series is probably better, with its lesbian protagonist.
But then sometimes it seems so forced. Often writing a female into a book and particularly choosing a female protagonist seem like it was just so the author could call himself progressive.
"In Tolkien's case even when they are characters they are often far more passive than active." "Worse, when later fantasy did try to have empowered female characters, they were often more male fantasies, the classical "chicks in chainmail" and the like."
So first off you start by stating that putting women is passive, stereotypical woman, roles is sexist and bad. And then you state that putting women in active roles is sexist and bad. ??? So what is not sexist in your view?
And women characters in games need revealing armour, otherwise you would not be able to tell that they were women. They would look like any other tank, just with a funny feminine name (remember that the characters in games are not like ones on TV, where they are mostly close up; In videogames you have small character sprites and you need to exaggerate for players to be able to make what what they are at a glance.).
He has not been a champion of free speech, do you even follow wikileaks or the Assange case? He is a champion of truth and information, and never implied or said that you should not be able to sue someone who lied about you (particularly when that lie cost you tangibly).
How can a fugitive, on the run from the law, sue someone? I imagine that a lawyer might be able to set up a case, but would he not be expected to show up to court?
1TB drives are far bigger than normal SSDs, and normally the price is more per results in extremely low and extremely high performance devices. So I could imagine it is entirely possible that it is several times that amount.
You have to be joking, and either way it is not the robbers fault if someone is so sensitive that 60 seconds with a complete stranger who never touches them can lead to permanent psychological damage; They were going to live a horrible life no matter what.
You cannot ban all commercial sex online because some ass***s force children to do commercial sex shows. If you wanted to ban that you would just ban children doing sex shows. Now the whole industry has to go underground, and then there is no reason not to continue the children shows.
Oh, I am sure there are easy ways to get around this for one whose profession it is. There are cheap cell phones and virtual over internet lines. There is probably some online service you could pay a tiny amount to get a bunch of numbers and change the numbers all the time (just like there are services to get cheap throwaway email addresses).
This is like using DRM, the professional scammers will have no problem at all, but this would inconvenience and potentially stop the average joe.
Except you cannot make it default. Businesses are willing to work with someone who goes out of there way to say "please do not track", but of course that message becomes meaningless as soon as it is the default. It is harming consumers when it basically negates this "do not track" setting
Well this will not change that they are still a subsidiary of IMB, just that it costs more to hire people to manufacture them. If anything you would think that this will reduce quality, if you cannot cut costs in the employees then you might in the product/materials.
Slashdot Mirror
So what is the point of even having communications then, if you have significant problems that are not even mentioned, while everyone continues to spout "everything is nominal".
One of the engines was not supposed to fail, the built in redundancy is exactly that a redundancy and should not have been needed.
Space flights and the engineering that goes into building the spacecraft are supposed to be extremely rigorous, such that you do not have entire engines that are so flawed that they fail on their very first flight. How much did this engine cost that did not even work?
It is not about the ratio who try to become good marksmen. It is a well known and accepted fact that women just have a very hard time becoming good shooters and most of the ones who try fail. We had to lower the requirements in the military to get more accepted, and in the olympics, the best of the best who train tirelessly cannot compete on a mans level.
Everything I have ever heard would lead me to believe that they would be all around worse at archery type skills, but olympic records do disagree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_archery).
Not that it is entirely safe to take such a small elite sample and draw a general result from it. And I am still quite certain that accuracy using a big bow (as well as fire rate) would be on average far worse in women (disregarding strength based stuff).
Wow that as a lot lighter than I would've expected. But I guess the longer it is the lighter it has to be.
But to anyone who ever used hammers/malls. It becomes obvious quite fast exactly how heavy even 10 pounds feels when you use tools like that. A 50 pound sword/mace would be pretty unusable, easy to pick up and carry around, but not to actually use.
More importantly women are far far worse at other important attributes than simply strength.
It would not matter if you made a 2 lb sword, the very best women who trained tirelessly would only be as good at a moderately above average man.
Most showenly this is demonstrated in marksmanship, where strength is not really an issue. You can take the military, or professional marksmanship as perfect examples of this. At pretty much any level of skill you will get far lower than a 19% ratio.
But they are all pretty much hopelessly in love, and 90% of them with the protagonist Rand. Adding in a bunch of females so you can have an occasional sex scene and a gaggle of women swooning over your protagonist is hardly applaudable.
I really liked The Deed of Paksenarrion novels, but the woman protagonist is not particularly a woman. Other than the name the book reads like it is a man.
Allan Cole's Anteros series is probably better, with its lesbian protagonist.
But then sometimes it seems so forced. Often writing a female into a book and particularly choosing a female protagonist seem like it was just so the author could call himself progressive.
"In Tolkien's case even when they are characters they are often far more passive than active."
"Worse, when later fantasy did try to have empowered female characters, they were often more male fantasies, the classical "chicks in chainmail" and the like."
So first off you start by stating that putting women is passive, stereotypical woman, roles is sexist and bad.
And then you state that putting women in active roles is sexist and bad.
??? So what is not sexist in your view?
And women characters in games need revealing armour, otherwise you would not be able to tell that they were women. They would look like any other tank, just with a funny feminine name (remember that the characters in games are not like ones on TV, where they are mostly close up; In videogames you have small character sprites and you need to exaggerate for players to be able to make what what they are at a glance.).
Many many times, Assange applied to them for help repeatedly.
He has not been a champion of free speech, do you even follow wikileaks or the Assange case?
He is a champion of truth and information, and never implied or said that you should not be able to sue someone who lied about you (particularly when that lie cost you tangibly).
How can a fugitive, on the run from the law, sue someone?
I imagine that a lawyer might be able to set up a case, but would he not be expected to show up to court?
I agree, you cannot just start having employers start doing this. Make it illegal or make it illegal to hire/fire based on it.
You would probably will have to stand in line for TSA gropings.
So it is a herbivore, but all of its teeth are like those of a meat eater?
Yay right.
Or maybe just wifi that does not stop working everytime someone microwaves a burrito.
Mostly because for most use cases it is identical, or close enough.
So, meh.
1TB drives are far bigger than normal SSDs, and normally the price is more per results in extremely low and extremely high performance devices.
So I could imagine it is entirely possible that it is several times that amount.
Right now I am hardly getting by with my 2TB storage space.
"never recover [from an armed robbery]"
You have to be joking, and either way it is not the robbers fault if someone is so sensitive that 60 seconds with a complete stranger who never touches them can lead to permanent psychological damage; They were going to live a horrible life no matter what.
Well prison is mostly for violent crimes. So that sentence makes sense to me.
You cannot ban all commercial sex online because some ass***s force children to do commercial sex shows. If you wanted to ban that you would just ban children doing sex shows. Now the whole industry has to go underground, and then there is no reason not to continue the children shows.
Oh, I am sure there are easy ways to get around this for one whose profession it is. There are cheap cell phones and virtual over internet lines. There is probably some online service you could pay a tiny amount to get a bunch of numbers and change the numbers all the time (just like there are services to get cheap throwaway email addresses).
This is like using DRM, the professional scammers will have no problem at all, but this would inconvenience and potentially stop the average joe.
What does that prove, other than you have to be this rich to edit our site?
If you are a scammer you have enough money to buy a cell phone.
Except you cannot make it default. Businesses are willing to work with someone who goes out of there way to say "please do not track", but of course that message becomes meaningless as soon as it is the default.
It is harming consumers when it basically negates this "do not track" setting
Well this will not change that they are still a subsidiary of IMB, just that it costs more to hire people to manufacture them.
If anything you would think that this will reduce quality, if you cannot cut costs in the employees then you might in the product/materials.