I guess that'd make me 1111111111 seconds old, oh, right about... now.
(Well, not quite, really, it would've been 5:03:31 AM this morning for me, CST.)
If you paid attention at the link, 41% is how many forgot to send in rebates, amongst all those that didn't get rebates. The relevant amount you ought to have quoted (though it isn't as prominently place in the title) is, "Half of consumers never even try to get the rebates."
Pay attention! It's not about population density; if anything, higher (local) population density is better, as it means less driving back & forth to work, the market, etc. It's about energy use per capita. See some reports from the Energy Information Administration. Pay particular attention to Appendix E, World Energy Consumption (Btu) (unfortunately only available in Excel format; used to be able to get an HTML or PDF version, too). Note how the US used about 340x10^6 Btu/capita, while the world as a whole (even including that disproportionate part) used about 66x10^6 Btu/capita.
Hmm, there was supposed to be a link for that first sentence. If the link doesn't work right here, and this Google search doesn't link right either, go Google yourself for "Mars water Dasani site:.theonion.com", follow the only link that comes up, you'll see what I mean.
I'm quite familiar with whitehouse.org, but it definitely wasn't that. In the Snopes article that GoofyBoy linked to above, they say that it was the http://www.gwbush.com/ site (there's nothing there worth looking at now) that he was talking about.
Yeah, but in that context, he was talking about a web domain (I think either whitehouse.com or gwbush.com, or something like that) that mocked him, and his campaign was trying to have the domain reassigned to him by the courts. That's not exactly the kind of pressing concern that should require amending our First Amendment rights (you listening, Jerry Falwell?).
Thank you! I've been trying to make this same point myself in places, though I've been using "PATRIOT Act" instead of "USAPATRIOT Act". But the point remains that it has absolutely nothing to do with the common noun "patriot". Wish I had mod points for you.
Hmm... perhaps the sarcasm in the words "purely hypothetical" wasn't clear enough? Yes, I knew that perfectly well, though I can see how one might have thought I thought it was truly hypothetical, and that it referred to USS Enterprise aircraft carrier, or something like that. But even if I had thought that, that would still count as "naming things after other things," anyway.;-)
We (the geeks) would name things after other things. For instance, space shuttles could be named after spaceships from a SF TV show, or after ships of James Cook's explorations. Just to use a purely hypothetical example, of course.
On that note, I'd love to see the first unit of whatever replaces the shuttle (I think they're calling it "Crew Exploration Vehicle" for now, or something like that?) called the Resolution, after Cook's flagship on his second voyage, and obviously for what it would signify as well.
Shortly after the Columbia burned up, one of the related articles on CNN.com mentioned Sally Ride as "the first woman in space" for a time. I sent them a correction about it, and it was even actually fixed within a couple of hours. Hallelujah, maybe someone there actually does pay attention, if you rub their nose in it hard enough.
Thanks, nimrod. Did you bother to check on what Wikipedia's style recommendations for units are? It wasn't in keeping with them before you "fixed" it, but I suppose I'll have to go through and fix it up both ways now.
Damn, I started reading this article in high spirits (no, nothing to do with anything I've been smoking), remembering what I knew of Lunokhod from way back when myself, and seeing a link to Wikipedia, where I've made considerable contribution. But dimwits really seem to be getting under my skin as I read on. For what it's worth, Doug, it's not just you that has me sounding so harsh and irate right now.
OK, your vaunted Google search gives 29 results for 'Lunokhod + "11 days"'. Did you bother to find out how many it got for 'Lunokhod + "11 months"'? 39 hits. Duh.
And aside from that, if you follow the links, you'll see that it landed on November 17, 1970, and "operations... officially ceased" on October 4, 1971. It also happens to mention "Lunokhod was intended to operate through three lunar days but actually operated for eleven lunar days."
Yeah, the same dumb luck that had them dropping what are still the only robotic probes to return data from the Venusian surface, starting back in 1970. Can't you give them credit for anything? I remember way back when, around the time the Venera probes were still being sent out, one of the main then-current contrasts between "us and them" was their skill with the probes, while we got people to the Moon.
And, just so the rest of the world doesn't get the idea we're too wrapped up in ourselves, or Americans start to get the idea I'm one of "them", this American remembers learning about Lunokhod around 25 years ago, when I would have been somewhere between the ages of 5 and 10. Don't ask me what the ignorami did with their youths.
I well remember that suggestions arising from this ballad, led us into a train of thought wherein there became manifest an opinion of Usher's which I mention not so much on account of its novelty (for other men[1] have thought thus), as on account of the pertinacity with which he maintained it. This opinion, in its general form, was that of the sentience of all vegetable things.
[1] Watson, Dr. Percival, Spallanzi, and especially the Bishop of Landaff.-See 'Chemical Essays,' vol. v.
The footnote isn't in the electronic edition I linked to, but is in my print edition. I don't know if Watson et al. are real references or purely fictional, but they could count as even more prior art, possibly. Either way, Edgar Allen Poe certainly knew it long before that young Sid Meyer whippersnapper knew it. And he even attributed it to the fungi as well. (Read further for that bit.)
Slashdot Mirror
I guess I should have included the relevant links for those stories, since they're falling below the fold so fast:
Which would you rather see happen to Cmdr Taco after all these ThinkGeek posts?
I guess that'd make me 1111111111 seconds old, oh, right about... now.
(Well, not quite, really, it would've been 5:03:31 AM this morning for me, CST.)
Oh, that goes for prostoalex, too, naturally, and maybe even more so.
If you paid attention at the link, 41% is how many forgot to send in rebates, amongst all those that didn't get rebates. The relevant amount you ought to have quoted (though it isn't as prominently place in the title) is, "Half of consumers never even try to get the rebates."
Pay attention! It's not about population density; if anything, higher (local) population density is better, as it means less driving back & forth to work, the market, etc. It's about energy use per capita. See some reports from the Energy Information Administration. Pay particular attention to Appendix E, World Energy Consumption (Btu) (unfortunately only available in Excel format; used to be able to get an HTML or PDF version, too). Note how the US used about 340x10^6 Btu/capita, while the world as a whole (even including that disproportionate part) used about 66x10^6 Btu/capita.
"Starategy Analytics"?!? Is that what Bush is calling it these days?
Hmm, there was supposed to be a link for that first sentence. If the link doesn't work right here, and this Google search doesn't link right either, go Google yourself for "Mars water Dasani site:.theonion.com", follow the only link that comes up, you'll see what I mean.
Not necessarily so. Dasani might still be pretty special.
No, it's obviously the Fithp who are up to something out there.
Are you sure they weren't baboons? 99 of them?
I'm quite familiar with whitehouse.org, but it definitely wasn't that. In the Snopes article that GoofyBoy linked to above, they say that it was the http://www.gwbush.com/ site (there's nothing there worth looking at now) that he was talking about.
Yeah, but in that context, he was talking about a web domain (I think either whitehouse.com or gwbush.com, or something like that) that mocked him, and his campaign was trying to have the domain reassigned to him by the courts. That's not exactly the kind of pressing concern that should require amending our First Amendment rights (you listening, Jerry Falwell?).
Thank you! I've been trying to make this same point myself in places, though I've been using "PATRIOT Act" instead of "USAPATRIOT Act". But the point remains that it has absolutely nothing to do with the common noun "patriot". Wish I had mod points for you.
What, do you really want Yet Another Dupe that soon already?!?
Hmm... perhaps the sarcasm in the words "purely hypothetical" wasn't clear enough? Yes, I knew that perfectly well, though I can see how one might have thought I thought it was truly hypothetical, and that it referred to USS Enterprise aircraft carrier, or something like that. But even if I had thought that, that would still count as "naming things after other things," anyway. ;-)
We (the geeks) would name things after other things. For instance, space shuttles could be named after spaceships from a SF TV show, or after ships of James Cook's explorations. Just to use a purely hypothetical example, of course.
On that note, I'd love to see the first unit of whatever replaces the shuttle (I think they're calling it "Crew Exploration Vehicle" for now, or something like that?) called the Resolution, after Cook's flagship on his second voyage, and obviously for what it would signify as well.
Shortly after the Columbia burned up, one of the related articles on CNN.com mentioned Sally Ride as "the first woman in space" for a time. I sent them a correction about it, and it was even actually fixed within a couple of hours. Hallelujah, maybe someone there actually does pay attention, if you rub their nose in it hard enough.
I think somebody here needs to watch Star Trek I again. Or at least learn a thing or two about organic chemistry, carbon unit.
Thanks, nimrod. Did you bother to check on what Wikipedia's style recommendations for units are? It wasn't in keeping with them before you "fixed" it, but I suppose I'll have to go through and fix it up both ways now.
Damn, I started reading this article in high spirits (no, nothing to do with anything I've been smoking), remembering what I knew of Lunokhod from way back when myself, and seeing a link to Wikipedia, where I've made considerable contribution. But dimwits really seem to be getting under my skin as I read on. For what it's worth, Doug, it's not just you that has me sounding so harsh and irate right now.
OK, your vaunted Google search gives 29 results for 'Lunokhod + "11 days"'. Did you bother to find out how many it got for 'Lunokhod + "11 months"'? 39 hits. Duh.
And aside from that, if you follow the links, you'll see that it landed on November 17, 1970, and "operations... officially ceased" on October 4, 1971. It also happens to mention "Lunokhod was intended to operate through three lunar days but actually operated for eleven lunar days."
Yeah, the same dumb luck that had them dropping what are still the only robotic probes to return data from the Venusian surface, starting back in 1970. Can't you give them credit for anything? I remember way back when, around the time the Venera probes were still being sent out, one of the main then-current contrasts between "us and them" was their skill with the probes, while we got people to the Moon.
And, just so the rest of the world doesn't get the idea we're too wrapped up in ourselves, or Americans start to get the idea I'm one of "them", this American remembers learning about Lunokhod around 25 years ago, when I would have been somewhere between the ages of 5 and 10. Don't ask me what the ignorami did with their youths.
The footnote isn't in the electronic edition I linked to, but is in my print edition. I don't know if Watson et al. are real references or purely fictional, but they could count as even more prior art, possibly. Either way, Edgar Allen Poe certainly knew it long before that young Sid Meyer whippersnapper knew it. And he even attributed it to the fungi as well. (Read further for that bit.)
So, then, you support allowing gay marriage, to cut down on that promiscuity, right?
Anyone else remember that old SNL "commercial"? "Einstein Express: When it absolutely, positively has to be there the day before yesterday."