Somewhere on the net recently, I saw this retarded chef's knife some entrepreneur in London was trying to have instituted as the only legal, large knife you could buy in the city. Instead of having a regular sharp point, it had a much smaller point along the regular cutting edge, but instead had a flat segment which would apparently make stabbing someone to death more difficult.
Of course, everyone ignores that a slash attack with a sharp knife can pretty easily make wounds resembling those made on seals by great white sharks. There's also a number of vulnerable arteries near the surface of the skin which can be easily severed by a flick of the knife--as little as a minute or two till you bleed out.
A gun shot would have been preferable to some knife wounds I've seen. Too bad British subjects have been so thoroughly disarmed because some believe inanimate objects are the source of the problems.
So you're saying that instantaneous and peaceful acquiescence is ideal? Sure, I can see it now. If everyone did that, the trains would be the only thing running smoothly.
The only Reasonable thing to do, when someone challenges your rights, is to stand up and fight if you feel you're in the right. The only unfortunate thing about going to court, to protect your rights, is that lawyers are expensive. There's enough of 'em that they should be cheaper.
The day my television starts harassing me, pretending to be someone I give a shit about, and demanding my active attention is the day that motherfucker gets a 0.45" diameter hole or two plowed through it.
The day that a steady stream of door to door salesmen start knocking on my front door (the way telemarketers used to call my phone) will be the day I'll find a pack of the most vicious rottweilers to ever roam the earth, and I'm gonna breed those dogs till they haven't got a fuck left in 'em--and then I'm gonna sell/rent their offspring out as salesmen repellent.
If all else fails, they aught to just stick the whole source and art base on a poorly server somewhere. Somebody will get their paws on it, and torrent it to the whole world.
The thing is, if the container-homes were purpose built for housing on existing, or modified production lines, it wouldn't be terribly difficult, or much more expensive to build them up to 16' wide (or two three walled 8' wide sections which could be bolted together), by the standard 20', or 40' long, and give them some more height. 9' or 10' would allow for plenty of insulation, some recessed lighting fixtures, fans, etc.
With those dimensions, they're approaching the size of a comfortably large double wide mobile home. The containers then could be sent off to be finished with a floor plan, have all the fixtures, windows, even appliances installed--much like they do with prefab & mobile homes... And it's all right there, easy to ship internationally by the tens of thousands, via boat, train or truck to the destination.
You could also build them with all of the materials needed to provide for a pitched roof, for more insulation in an attic, or even a solar system to be put on the roof, to run fans and refrigerators, and what not. Hell, you could even include a fresh water solar distillery for places which suffer in that department. Best of all, with a simple crane, they could be stacked and bolted together into apartment like structures which would be pretty darn resistant to natural forces. If they can hold up to the high seas, it shouldn't be a problem. I think plenty of people live in worse abodes, here in the US.
Stupid? Yes. Ignorant? Yes. Useless? Yes. Evil plot by the government? Not likely. The government is run by people just like you and me.
Any sufficiently advanced malevolence is indistinguishable from idiocy.
As to governments being run by people (using the term loosely), well I can't fault you there... Are they just like you and me and Bob, however? There may have been a time when this was largely true, at least in the US, but I sincerely don't believe that is true today.
How about no. Joining something like that would be a severe strategic error. Yeah, let's give control over our destiny to countries who are, if not currently ambivalent, are completely opposed to our philosophies... Plus, countries like Iran and NK aren't going to give a flying fuck, anyhow. They sure don't now, and I can't see why a few pounds of uranium are going to change that. They're just pushing for nuke stuff, to push our buttons.
It's like trying to eliminate violence by banning guns. Criminals aren't going to care, they'll probably like it in a way. All it does is ensure a potential victim will stay a victim. Plus, they have their illicit sources... And if/when the sources run dry, they'll just start stabbing people in the face and clubbing them over the head, instead.
My cat, Precious, once gave a very convincing rendition of Neil Peart's solo in the song YYZ via a cardboard box and a small stack of dishes. He looked very satellited at the end, and who could blame him!
Spot on. This false Liberal/Conservative duality is the one and only thing responsible for running this country into the crapper. They're two faces of the same stupid and corrupt coin--the efforts of lobbyists most often accurately reflect this. I think the power of the Internet is spreading this view point, but the hurdle will be at the poles.
Even though the idea of parties were distasteful to some of the founding fathers, perhaps it's time for a Constitutionalists party.
I wouldn't want that if, for no other reason, due to the piracy off of Somalia. It would be far too easy for them to simply steal the nuclear fuel if they were nuclear powered.
Heck, there's concern about even arming the crews because they're afraid this would just encourage pirates to steal the weapons.
It wouldn't even have to be nearly so big or robust, and it wouldn't have to use 20mm depleted uranium bullets. A couple smaller, sea-spray hardened 7.62mm NATO miniguns on the strategic points on the ship, tied to a downward looking radar and a fire control system would be more than adequate for any unsophisticated pirate type of threat... And they could be built relatively inexpensively, too.
I put a CFL in an enclosed fixture at my grannies' place, it lasted maybe three months--pretty disappointing. I took it out, and it was clear the circuit enclosure was stressed from the heat--and that's one thing incandescents don't have a problem with:) The one on her front porch, however, has been going strong for 3 years now, and it's lit from sun down to sun up, every day--just the kind of scenario where CFLs really shine, IMO.
But do we know how quickly it drops off in strength or whether the dolphins would swim away before any lasting damage was done?
I'm sure that the real power of sonar systems roughly follow the inverse square law. So, if you know how intense it is at the source, yes, you can calculate with some degree of precision sound intensity at any given distance from the source.
If this useless study turns out to be useful for something (anything), I hope it's for limiting the power of military sonar during peace time. It's almost certainly not needed anyway.
I wasn't talking about a wall. I'm talking about a North Korea/South Korea style buffer zone, without massive walls, but with a ton of barbed wire and a few million landmines, just to make sure that everyone who enters, understands they're NOT WANTED. UAVs will detect those who are both undaunted and extremely lucky, sporadic helicopter gunship patrols and the occasional robotic machine gun tower will take care of the rest.
Or, we could just move our desert combat training maneuvers to the border. I'll be like hunting insurgents down, but right in our own back yard.
The one that really outrages me is flash hiders, though. During the last ban, if you wanted to attach a (legal and registered) firearm suppressor (silencer), to a post ban rifle, for the purpose of hearing protection (even with both plugs and muffs, it's possible to damage your hearing with some rifles), you were barred from doing that--because due to virtue of design, silencers also function as a pretty effective flash suppressor.
That and the 1994 ban also banned rifle (muzzle) mounted grenade launching devices, like the ones used during WWII, which allowed M1 Garands and M1903 bolt rifles to be used as a sort of short range mortar. Like that particular feature is really popular on modern rifles *facepalm*
No they are regularly used in crime in Mexico. In case you haven't noticed there's been a lot of violence down there and they use our guns because they can't be bought in Mexico.
And yet the fact is, only 17% of the guns found at a crime scene in Mexico have originated in the US. The Mexican authorities submit to the BATF only the guns which they suspect have come from the US, and 50% of those 17% were verified to have come from here. The media and some of the US government is distorting the truth (whod'a thunkit), saying that 90% of these guns came from the us.
The rest of the guns (83%) weren't submitted to serial number checks, because it was quite obvious that there's no possible way they could have originated here. They're of the select fire rifles, light infantry machine guns, RPG launchers, LAW rocket launchers, M203 grenade launchers, M2.50 caliber heavy machine guns, thousands of hand grenades, and all sorts of heavy duty, REAL military firepower... That YOU CANNOT READILY GET HERE.
But for the right money, you can get all that stuff from stockpilers in any number of third-world, South American countries, gun runners who smuggle arms in from places like the middle east, China, and Vietnam, Korea, Russia, and south America. Is it any surprise that a good deal of it is the kind of stuff that the US military has left scattered all over the world? Then, you add in the fact that about 16,000 members of Mexico's military desert EVERY year, and it's been verified that quite a few have walked off with their ISSUED RIFLES and gear. You'd have to be stupid if you think a couple of semi-auto AKs and AR-15s smuggled from the US is at all comparable to the kind of stuff they've found.
This is a Mexico problem. There's no reason that OUR government should lean on OUR civil liberties, because our southern neighbor is feeling the pain brought on by an industry that they routinely, if not willfully ignore. Why we should even care is beyond me.
And, if you think we shouldn't secure the border, because you think it's 'impossible', I've got news. It's not impossible, but it won't be cheap. And, although it would slow down legitimate deliveries from Mexican industries, it would keep drugs out of the US, and 17% of the guns out of the hands of Mexican drug lords... But on the plus side, just think of all the people in the US who could be employed digging trenches, building land mines, assembling rifles, installing razor wire, constructing UAVs & helicopters, guard posts and etc. It'd be a real economic boon. Mexico would once again be safe, we'd be less drugged, and it's bound to do something more constructive than letting the richest 5% of the country have direct access to gobs of taxpayer money.
A powerful Novec 1230 (or other similar halon like) gaseous fire suppressing system, with a hair trigger and poor fresh air ventilation might be about as effective, and far less messy. And, best of all, it would appear to actually serve a legitimate use in a data center.
How cute. But you're all wrong. I hold that bread is the ultimate good. 1) it's easy to get tired and fat because of your rich and sweet confections. 2) you can use bread to build a variety of sandwiches which will not bore the taste buds easily. 3) Beer was invented when some Egyptians accidentally dropped their rye bread into a bucket or something (and forgot about it for a while).
So, well, no. The ultimate good is beer. Anyway, as my second favorite president once said "Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy"
Really? If you're talking about http://www.iphonevideorecorder.com/ [iphonevideorecorder.com] it boasts a frame rate of "up to" 15 fps. It supports realtime compression OR mpeg4, not both. It does upload to Youtube. The iPhone's processor isn't powerful enough to do realtime mpeg4 compression.
I swear I've seen 45 fps quoted somewhere (and thought that was a strange framerate), but since you have experience with it, all I can say is: I guess I'm wrong. The couple of example clips I've seen looked reasonable for any silly phone camera, but if you say it sucks, I'll take your word for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Somewhere on the net recently, I saw this retarded chef's knife some entrepreneur in London was trying to have instituted as the only legal, large knife you could buy in the city. Instead of having a regular sharp point, it had a much smaller point along the regular cutting edge, but instead had a flat segment which would apparently make stabbing someone to death more difficult.
Of course, everyone ignores that a slash attack with a sharp knife can pretty easily make wounds resembling those made on seals by great white sharks. There's also a number of vulnerable arteries near the surface of the skin which can be easily severed by a flick of the knife--as little as a minute or two till you bleed out.
A gun shot would have been preferable to some knife wounds I've seen. Too bad British subjects have been so thoroughly disarmed because some believe inanimate objects are the source of the problems.
So you're saying that instantaneous and peaceful acquiescence is ideal? Sure, I can see it now. If everyone did that, the trains would be the only thing running smoothly.
The only Reasonable thing to do, when someone challenges your rights, is to stand up and fight if you feel you're in the right. The only unfortunate thing about going to court, to protect your rights, is that lawyers are expensive. There's enough of 'em that they should be cheaper.
Well, such a sight might attract canine contraceptive salesmen.
Sigh. What have I started?!
The day my television starts harassing me, pretending to be someone I give a shit about, and demanding my active attention is the day that motherfucker gets a 0.45" diameter hole or two plowed through it.
The day that a steady stream of door to door salesmen start knocking on my front door (the way telemarketers used to call my phone) will be the day I'll find a pack of the most vicious rottweilers to ever roam the earth, and I'm gonna breed those dogs till they haven't got a fuck left in 'em--and then I'm gonna sell/rent their offspring out as salesmen repellent.
That's the difference.
Ground apples? Much better than road apples.
If all else fails, they aught to just stick the whole source and art base on a poorly server somewhere. Somebody will get their paws on it, and torrent it to the whole world.
The thing is, if the container-homes were purpose built for housing on existing, or modified production lines, it wouldn't be terribly difficult, or much more expensive to build them up to 16' wide (or two three walled 8' wide sections which could be bolted together), by the standard 20', or 40' long, and give them some more height. 9' or 10' would allow for plenty of insulation, some recessed lighting fixtures, fans, etc.
With those dimensions, they're approaching the size of a comfortably large double wide mobile home. The containers then could be sent off to be finished with a floor plan, have all the fixtures, windows, even appliances installed--much like they do with prefab & mobile homes... And it's all right there, easy to ship internationally by the tens of thousands, via boat, train or truck to the destination.
You could also build them with all of the materials needed to provide for a pitched roof, for more insulation in an attic, or even a solar system to be put on the roof, to run fans and refrigerators, and what not. Hell, you could even include a fresh water solar distillery for places which suffer in that department. Best of all, with a simple crane, they could be stacked and bolted together into apartment like structures which would be pretty darn resistant to natural forces. If they can hold up to the high seas, it shouldn't be a problem. I think plenty of people live in worse abodes, here in the US.
Insulation
Stupid? Yes. Ignorant? Yes. Useless? Yes. Evil plot by the government? Not likely. The government is run by people just like you and me.
Any sufficiently advanced malevolence is indistinguishable from idiocy.
As to governments being run by people (using the term loosely), well I can't fault you there... Are they just like you and me and Bob, however? There may have been a time when this was largely true, at least in the US, but I sincerely don't believe that is true today.
How about no. Joining something like that would be a severe strategic error. Yeah, let's give control over our destiny to countries who are, if not currently ambivalent, are completely opposed to our philosophies... Plus, countries like Iran and NK aren't going to give a flying fuck, anyhow. They sure don't now, and I can't see why a few pounds of uranium are going to change that. They're just pushing for nuke stuff, to push our buttons.
It's like trying to eliminate violence by banning guns. Criminals aren't going to care, they'll probably like it in a way. All it does is ensure a potential victim will stay a victim. Plus, they have their illicit sources... And if/when the sources run dry, they'll just start stabbing people in the face and clubbing them over the head, instead.
I'm wondering about how much it costs to hire a flowchart ninja!
My cat, Precious, once gave a very convincing rendition of Neil Peart's solo in the song YYZ via a cardboard box and a small stack of dishes. He looked very satellited at the end, and who could blame him!
Wind power.
Spot on. This false Liberal/Conservative duality is the one and only thing responsible for running this country into the crapper. They're two faces of the same stupid and corrupt coin--the efforts of lobbyists most often accurately reflect this. I think the power of the Internet is spreading this view point, but the hurdle will be at the poles.
Even though the idea of parties were distasteful to some of the founding fathers, perhaps it's time for a Constitutionalists party.
I wouldn't want that if, for no other reason, due to the piracy off of Somalia. It would be far too easy for them to simply steal the nuclear fuel if they were nuclear powered.
Heck, there's concern about even arming the crews because they're afraid this would just encourage pirates to steal the weapons.
How we put a couple examples of this type of system on our ships? Program the targeting computer/radar/FLIR to inform the crew of small boats in range, which are also on an intercept course with the vessel, and put a big 'ol red button in the control room to activate the weapon. PWRRRRRRR! No more pirates.
It wouldn't even have to be nearly so big or robust, and it wouldn't have to use 20mm depleted uranium bullets. A couple smaller, sea-spray hardened 7.62mm NATO miniguns on the strategic points on the ship, tied to a downward looking radar and a fire control system would be more than adequate for any unsophisticated pirate type of threat... And they could be built relatively inexpensively, too.
I put a CFL in an enclosed fixture at my grannies' place, it lasted maybe three months--pretty disappointing. I took it out, and it was clear the circuit enclosure was stressed from the heat--and that's one thing incandescents don't have a problem with :) The one on her front porch, however, has been going strong for 3 years now, and it's lit from sun down to sun up, every day--just the kind of scenario where CFLs really shine, IMO.
If the fixtures are completely enclosed, yeah, that'll fry 'em real quick... If that's what you mean.
But do we know how quickly it drops off in strength or whether the dolphins would swim away before any lasting damage was done?
I'm sure that the real power of sonar systems roughly follow the inverse square law. So, if you know how intense it is at the source, yes, you can calculate with some degree of precision sound intensity at any given distance from the source.
If this useless study turns out to be useful for something (anything), I hope it's for limiting the power of military sonar during peace time. It's almost certainly not needed anyway.
I wasn't talking about a wall. I'm talking about a North Korea/South Korea style buffer zone, without massive walls, but with a ton of barbed wire and a few million landmines, just to make sure that everyone who enters, understands they're NOT WANTED. UAVs will detect those who are both undaunted and extremely lucky, sporadic helicopter gunship patrols and the occasional robotic machine gun tower will take care of the rest.
Or, we could just move our desert combat training maneuvers to the border. I'll be like hunting insurgents down, but right in our own back yard.
Too right, you're right on all counts.
The one that really outrages me is flash hiders, though. During the last ban, if you wanted to attach a (legal and registered) firearm suppressor (silencer), to a post ban rifle, for the purpose of hearing protection (even with both plugs and muffs, it's possible to damage your hearing with some rifles), you were barred from doing that--because due to virtue of design, silencers also function as a pretty effective flash suppressor.
That and the 1994 ban also banned rifle (muzzle) mounted grenade launching devices, like the ones used during WWII, which allowed M1 Garands and M1903 bolt rifles to be used as a sort of short range mortar. Like that particular feature is really popular on modern rifles *facepalm*
No they are regularly used in crime in Mexico. In case you haven't noticed there's been a lot of violence down there and they use our guns because they can't be bought in Mexico.
And yet the fact is, only 17% of the guns found at a crime scene in Mexico have originated in the US. The Mexican authorities submit to the BATF only the guns which they suspect have come from the US, and 50% of those 17% were verified to have come from here. The media and some of the US government is distorting the truth (whod'a thunkit), saying that 90% of these guns came from the us.
The rest of the guns (83%) weren't submitted to serial number checks, because it was quite obvious that there's no possible way they could have originated here. They're of the select fire rifles, light infantry machine guns, RPG launchers, LAW rocket launchers, M203 grenade launchers, M2 .50 caliber heavy machine guns, thousands of hand grenades, and all sorts of heavy duty, REAL military firepower... That YOU CANNOT READILY GET HERE.
But for the right money, you can get all that stuff from stockpilers in any number of third-world, South American countries, gun runners who smuggle arms in from places like the middle east, China, and Vietnam, Korea, Russia, and south America. Is it any surprise that a good deal of it is the kind of stuff that the US military has left scattered all over the world? Then, you add in the fact that about 16,000 members of Mexico's military desert EVERY year, and it's been verified that quite a few have walked off with their ISSUED RIFLES and gear. You'd have to be stupid if you think a couple of semi-auto AKs and AR-15s smuggled from the US is at all comparable to the kind of stuff they've found.
This is a Mexico problem. There's no reason that OUR government should lean on OUR civil liberties, because our southern neighbor is feeling the pain brought on by an industry that they routinely, if not willfully ignore. Why we should even care is beyond me.
And, if you think we shouldn't secure the border, because you think it's 'impossible', I've got news. It's not impossible, but it won't be cheap. And, although it would slow down legitimate deliveries from Mexican industries, it would keep drugs out of the US, and 17% of the guns out of the hands of Mexican drug lords... But on the plus side, just think of all the people in the US who could be employed digging trenches, building land mines, assembling rifles, installing razor wire, constructing UAVs & helicopters, guard posts and etc. It'd be a real economic boon. Mexico would once again be safe, we'd be less drugged, and it's bound to do something more constructive than letting the richest 5% of the country have direct access to gobs of taxpayer money.
Win. Win. Win.
A powerful Novec 1230 (or other similar halon like) gaseous fire suppressing system, with a hair trigger and poor fresh air ventilation might be about as effective, and far less messy. And, best of all, it would appear to actually serve a legitimate use in a data center.
Princess she-lay-lee and the seven black Irish Dwarves!
(Stumpy, Baldy, Sleazy, Seamy, Kinky, Weirdo, and everyone's favorite dwarf, Erectile Dysfunction.)
How cute. But you're all wrong. I hold that bread is the ultimate good. 1) it's easy to get tired and fat because of your rich and sweet confections. 2) you can use bread to build a variety of sandwiches which will not bore the taste buds easily. 3) Beer was invented when some Egyptians accidentally dropped their rye bread into a bucket or something (and forgot about it for a while).
So, well, no. The ultimate good is beer. Anyway, as my second favorite president once said "Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy"
Really? If you're talking about http://www.iphonevideorecorder.com/ [iphonevideorecorder.com] it boasts a frame rate of "up to" 15 fps. It supports realtime compression OR mpeg4, not both. It does upload to Youtube. The iPhone's processor isn't powerful enough to do realtime mpeg4 compression.
I swear I've seen 45 fps quoted somewhere (and thought that was a strange framerate), but since you have experience with it, all I can say is: I guess I'm wrong. The couple of example clips I've seen looked reasonable for any silly phone camera, but if you say it sucks, I'll take your word for it.