dots nothing - how about camo patterns? How about camo that updates dynamically from input from tiny cameras? (effective invisibility). How about downloading and displaying pr0n on your pious neighbor's car?
You're wrong, the American people DID get the president they voted for.
vote counting and recounting will simply demonstrate itself as a futile excercise in statistics. This was a close race, no doubt about it.
The American public DID vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980, he lawfully appointed the supreme court justices who played the pivotal role in the final decision of the 2000 presidential election. That that decision was purely political was a sad commentary on the state of US politics - but the decision, and what has followed, was a lawful progression, rooted in constitutional practice.
Personally, I will happily watch as the US goes to hell over the next 4 years. I watched a Brookings institute conference on CSPAN a few weeks back, and they said that the #1 lesson Bush should have learned from Clinton was - well, aside from THAT, not to over-extend yourself in the first two years, or you'll suffer a voter backlash in the congressional elections, and be powerless the next two years. Bush apparently didn't see that conference.
Well, the corporations want cheap labor and segmented markets (so they can raise prices on the "reasonable-level" products, and produce substandard crap and sell priced so that average people can afford it - so they aren't accused of price-gouging or driving up inflation).
When your adversary pushes you in a certain direction, you either push back, or you lose.
Publishing companies have traditionally been "left wing" or perhaps "populist" is a better term.
Because they publish books that people like to buy and read. Their market is the masses. In order to cater to those masses, they have to get inside the minds of those masses, and create products that appeals to them. This mindset has traditionally suited the publishing industry, and served them well.
The current wave of corporat facism is affecting them too, and believe me, it will also begin to affect their content, and offerings as well. And when that happens, they'll find themselves in a situation where their customers don't cotton to them very well. There's only so many Ayn Rand books you can print. And nobody gets rich when they're collecting dust on bookstore shelves.
Yeah. That's why I chose vi as my "editor of choice". Those whimpe emacs guys. I just couldn't stand the thought of using the shell represented by a bunch of loser pantywaists.
Seeing as how most of the shooting sprees I've read about over the past several years - the shooters have mostly been driven by revenge; they got fucked over by somebody, and were willing to kill and die to set things right - perhaps if people stopped being assholes, stopped screwing eachother over, other people wouldn't get so upset that their only option in life would be to go on a shooting spree. . .
No wait. That's wrong. lets just ban the guns, video games, books, tv, movies, abberant thought. ..
7.62 mm NATO is a totally different round than 7.62 Russian that the AK-47 fires.
7.62 NATO round is a longer, much more massive bullet, usually fired at higher velocities. It has roughly equivalent stopping power to a 30-06. It's one of those bullets that will splatter someone's head like a melon, even at long ranges. It's an excellent sniper round, and does decent damage to lightly armored vehicles (jeeps and stuff) - but firing this round results in high recoil - and without a bipod, or tripod mount, full auto is totally inaccurate.
The 7.62 Russian is a short, stubby round, not as massive, usually has a relatively low muzzle velocity, which makes it much more stable when fired by a soldier in full-auto mode. It's great for close-range engagements, and jungle fighting. Not very accurate at long ranges (compared to the 7.62 NATO, and 5.56 NATO). The problem with the AK-47, is it does the same job as a submachinegun, while asking the soldier to carry a rifle. This is a pretty harsh assessment though, because in all fairness, 7.62 Russian IS a real rifle round. But only barely.
The 5.56 NATO round used in the M-16 is a smaller, lighter bullet than the 7.62 NATO, but is also fired at relatively high velocities - which gives a potential for much higer accuracy at longer ranges (*not* with the M-16, but in sniper versions of the AR-15, it's pretty decent). The 5.56 NATO round has excellent penetration, plus the bullet is designed to destabilize or tumble, when it enters a substance the consistency of flesh (or ballistic gelatin). This tumbling causes the round to fragment, and otherwise cause a lot more damage than it would otherwise, for such a small round. The reasoning behind choosing a standard round that was 5.56 NATO instead of 7.62 NATO, was to allow a higher muzzle velocity, (which means better accuracy and stopping power at long ranges) but still keep the weapon relatively stable during auto firing. And also, 7.62 Russian (or NATO equivalent) was avoided because more 5.56 NATO rounds could be carried by a soldier, giving them more potential kill opportunities, less resupply burden.
So what kind of ammo does the G3 fire? I'm assuming 7.62mm NATO - in keeping with the standard? or is it going to use something special?
Rail-gun: projectile travels the length of the barrel, in contact with two conductive rails - propelled by elecromagnetic field produced by current from the rails. This would essentially be a high-velocity smoothbore type round, relying either on a spherical shape, or fin stabilization.
Mass Driver: Projectile rides on rails (or is magnetically suspended) - Projectile contains natural magnets. The launching track contains electromagnets which switch polarity, alternately attracting and repelling the projectile as it travels past - tripping photosensors. The projectile is often called a "bucket" and is usually intended to be retrievable, and ejects the payload soon after launch.
Gauss gun: (I believe this weapon first appeared in the "Stainless Steel Rat" Sci Fi book series). Simiilar to a mass-driver, projectile travels the length of the barrel, NOT in contact with anything other than air, the barrel is a wider diameter than the projectile, eliminating sliding friction entirely. Projective force is entirely provided by switched electromagnets along the length of the barrel. Spin is induced by magnetic bias, giving the projectile it's own gyroscopic spin stabilization (UNLIKE a mass-driver or rail-gun). This type of rifle technique would be far superior to the traditional type of gyroscopic spin stabilization induced by spiral "rails" machined into the inner surface of a conventional gun, because there would be no friction, none of the energy that would otherwise be put into forward motion would be lost to spin, so you would achieve smoothbore velocities (and energies) with a long-projectile (therfore, more mass for a given bore), with no worries of losing stability to atmospheric friction. (smoothbore rounds are usually either spheres - musketballs, or fin-stabilized - allowing a more efficient acceleration, with no loss of energy to rifling, but spheres do not allow for a more massive projectile without moving to a higher bore, and fins provide their own mass and storage inefficiencies.)
Then there's Oni's Mercury Bow - which electromagnetically fires a confined "bolt" of liquid mercury at high velocities. I shudder at the environmental implications of such a weapon.
Another advantage is the acceleration curve - you can vary it by varying the amount of power you feed as the projectile travels the length of the barrel. With a bullet, the acceleration curve is loaded very heavily at the front - which means more force is applied to recoil in a shorter amount of time. In an electromagnetic weapon like a rail-gun, mass driver or gauss gun, the recoil is distributed evenly (or any way you choose) along the entire acceleration of the projectile - which has a great potential for increasing accuracy.
There's also the potential that the power-curve could be inversely wired to the reflexive muscle reaction of the firer, to provide dynamic feedback, and prevent over-compensation for recoil.
Actually, it was the underlying engineering that Porsche was wholly responsible for, that was amazing about this car. Not the sheet metal.
The aircooled engine would be reliable in a desert.
The small displacement would provide fuel economy.
The rear-engine placement would aid in the efficient weight distribution of the car (as well as allow rear-wheel drive, for better turn-radius, and simpler manufacturing).
The flat-four engine design allowed for a lower profile and less space required inside the car - allowing for a better aerodynamic profile.
The torsion-bar suspension allowed for excellent handling and weight capacity, and could also be very cheaply manufactured - as an added bonus, torsion-bars are adapted most well to offroad applications (thus the amphibious kubelwagen, or VW Thing, which was Germany's equivalent to the US Jeep - and the same scheme has been applied in countless dune-buggy-adapted beetles).
These same principles were applied to the legendary Porsche 356, and 550, which kicked-ass all over the sports car and racing scene of the 1950's. Porsche added two cylinders onto the end of the flat four, for the 911 (leaving the traditional flat four in the 912), and continued the legacy of creating the "Sports car for the rest of us" (true. . Porsche's are too expensive for your average American, but they're FAR more affordable, traditionally, than your Ferrari's, Jaguars, and Lambourghinis).
So, while Hitler gave a rough outline for the sheetmetal, it was based off of the nascent science of aerodynamics, mainly pursued by Porsche and his collegues in the 20's. Hitler was a layman follower of that school of automotive engineering, so it was no mistake that his design was fairly compatible with the ideas Porsche already had pioneered. The main principles shown in the Beetle, are still part of today's most advanced Porsche cars; the rear-engine (despite Porsche's ill-advised Audi-inspired foray into the front-engined 944 and 928; pieces of crap designed to appeal to Americans who were afraid to learn how to deal with the handling characteristics of rear-engined cars), flat-six design. The suspension is more modern, as are the engine cooling systems, etc - but the basic design is still the same, tried and true from the 1930's. Truly, the Porsche is the Unix of the car-world. Front engine, front-wheel drive cars are obviously the MS Windows cars.
Ferdinand Porsche was a man who cared little for politics, and was not a fan of Hitler or his ideas, and strongly resisted, at first, the idea of actually producing this car for him - until Hitler told him that he was right, it was probably impossible; and that challenge took advantage of Porsche's pride.
Henry Ford, on the other hand, was a well-known racist, and supported the Nazi party from America.
After the war, the French asked Porsche to come to France to help design a French version of the Beetle (which was not really in production yet, because they were still trying to rebuild the factory). When he arrived, they arrested him as a war criminal, and he was put to work repairing tractors.
It was personal - against a member of my clique who had broken her ankle tripping over a tree root.
We cut down a small tree (5" thick trunk) in a vacant lot, drove it to my house, near campus, hid it in the back yard. The next day, we hand-carried it through 6 suburban blocks to the college parking lot, and placed it next to her car.
While carrying this tree down the street, we realized how it was the exact same species and approximate age as the other trees lining the street, and worried that a passing police officer would think we cut it down from someone's front yard. In fact, a cop did drive by minutes after we realized this, and he looked at us, with this look on his face: "three young males carrying a tree down the sidewalk. . . that's normal" - and he drove on, leaving us to complete the prank in peace.
And of course, there's the typical cheesy - go into the drama club's display case, and rearrange the action figures they have set up in a mock performace, to resemble hardcore porn - we had to break Barbie's knees, and JB Weld them back into a bent position, because she wouldn't get on her knees. Yes, one of us just happened to have JB Weld - this fucker was one of those guys who always wore a big winter parka, pockets filled with everything he might need for the coming apocolypse, including a small socket-set.
I've always thought that a great way to paralyze the US for a day would be to coordinate about two dozen people in major cities across the US to buy $100 junkers, drive them down the freeways during morning rush hour, and park them at strategic locations, pop the hood, toss in a smoke-bomb, and drive off in a freind's car.
The rubberneckers would keep the roads clogged for hours.
Okay, lets be realistic - how much damage would a collision between a stripped-down VW beetle body, hanging from a cable, and a ship moving at the most, 15 knots. Maybe some scratched paint.
Well, then you gotta worry about the wannabes who will imitate the prank, possibly not listening to the implicit "don't try this at home kids".
Then there's the issue with San Francisco - possibly the VW beetle capitol of the US. No small number of vintage aircooled VW fans were deeply offended today at a destruction of a piece of automotive history. You can take that to the bank.
At least HALF the fault lies with the utilities, who lobbied the brain-dead politicians for exactly the situation they got. They knew that as long as commodity prices for Gas stayed low, they would make huge profits, and if they got out of hand, there would really be no choice other than a Government bailout. Both ways, consumers get fucked.
I am a My Yahoo person. It's my portal of choice. My web-habits bring me to several common sites, including/., on a daily basis. I gave my info to My Yahoo - because their service is not available at any other price - and it's the best I've found so far. Would I pay for identical services if it meant that my personal data were safe? Yes, but I'm not sure how much I would pay. $5/mo?
Anyway, their posession of my personal data led to a targeted ad, a Yahoo platinum Visa, at 9.9%. I was sick of being screwed by credit card companies with 18% interest, so I dumped my other cards and got the Yahoo Visa, and I've used that card for over two years now.
Sometimes, Yahoo deliberately allows obvious bulk email advertising find it's way into my email inbox, instead of the bulk email folder. Of course, they're probably getting a cut. I don't like that, I deal with it, I delete it, but I think it is - unethical, considering that I paid my "personal info" to them, and responded to a rather lucrative ad for them. I have reached my limit of 100 blocked addresses.
On the other hand, one email that DID find it's way into yahoo mail's bulk mail folder, was an ad from a car parts shop. I had ordered their catalog about a year ago, they emailed me to inform me of a 20% off sale. That was FAR MORE desirable an ad than "Get rich at home in your spare time" or "hot sexy high school girls want to strip for you". In fact, I responded to THAT ad, and ordered about $900 worth of parts for my project car. I was VERY happy to have saved about $170 on this sale. I was VERY happy to have been notified.
Would I be as happy if that Car Parts sales company sold my address to the "hot sexy high school girls want to give you head in your convertible" people? No, I'd be fucking pissed. It would be unethical. Companies should not do that, and this kind of thing really ought to be explicitly Opt In, with a yearly expiration.
I don't think that use of this information should stop - but I think the unethical practices of selective spam filtering by email providers, and the unsolicited selling of personal data to third parties, need to stop.
my 7 year old son plays on a basketball team. Doesn't matter who wins or loses - they don't keep track of the score.
Supposedly this is to encourage the kids to pass the ball to all of the players and give them a chance at shooting a basket.
but the kids keep track of the score, and they always pass the ball to the kid they know can make the shot.
Also, they don't call fouls. At least that's what they told me when they asked me to ref. Other team's coach bitched me out for not calling a foul. Next game, someone else reffed, and they were VERY strict about double-dribbles and such. At this age, some of the kids can't even dribble the ball. On the other hand, the good players could beat me hands down.
The whole thing is kind of ridiculous.
At first, Ogre seems like a zero-sum game (one side is a massive heavily armored AI tank, and the other is humans in various tanks jeeps and howitzers).
Either side could win or lose - I, for one always felt that the Ogre side often simply represented a stronger force. (it's a slightly imbalanced game, but you can modify the handicaps on the scenarios).
But in the end, everyone dies, because we're talking about the twilight of civilization, so it's really a zero-sum game anyway. (unless you subscribe to the sequel game, (I can't for the life of me remember what the name was - pre Steve Jackson game, from when they were Metagames) where the two sides were automated combat robot factories, you built and programmed these little robots to go out and kill eachother and attack the enemy factory - supposedly the successors to the Ogres).
If I think about it, I could run my entire system from 7 years ago solely in RAM. I had a 200 meg hd, ran DOS/Win3.1 and WP DOS. On today's system, that would totally kick ass.
Though the software to enable the things he's talking about would still not fit in the 256 meg of RAM I have today.
Slashdot Mirror
dots nothing - how about camo patterns? How about camo that updates dynamically from input from tiny cameras? (effective invisibility). How about downloading and displaying pr0n on your pious neighbor's car?
You're wrong, the American people DID get the president they voted for.
vote counting and recounting will simply demonstrate itself as a futile excercise in statistics. This was a close race, no doubt about it.
The American public DID vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980, he lawfully appointed the supreme court justices who played the pivotal role in the final decision of the 2000 presidential election. That that decision was purely political was a sad commentary on the state of US politics - but the decision, and what has followed, was a lawful progression, rooted in constitutional practice.
Personally, I will happily watch as the US goes to hell over the next 4 years. I watched a Brookings institute conference on CSPAN a few weeks back, and they said that the #1 lesson Bush should have learned from Clinton was - well, aside from THAT, not to over-extend yourself in the first two years, or you'll suffer a voter backlash in the congressional elections, and be powerless the next two years. Bush apparently didn't see that conference.
I'm not for censorship; political correctness driven or otherwise, but 3rd Reich mousepads are not historical artifacts.
what the fuck is an SDMA?
Well, the corporations want cheap labor and segmented markets (so they can raise prices on the "reasonable-level" products, and produce substandard crap and sell priced so that average people can afford it - so they aren't accused of price-gouging or driving up inflation).
When your adversary pushes you in a certain direction, you either push back, or you lose.
careful, or next thing you know, all of our great US bridges will be adorned with hanging VW's!
Publishing companies have traditionally been "left wing" or perhaps "populist" is a better term.
Because they publish books that people like to buy and read. Their market is the masses. In order to cater to those masses, they have to get inside the minds of those masses, and create products that appeals to them. This mindset has traditionally suited the publishing industry, and served them well.
The current wave of corporat facism is affecting them too, and believe me, it will also begin to affect their content, and offerings as well. And when that happens, they'll find themselves in a situation where their customers don't cotton to them very well. There's only so many Ayn Rand books you can print. And nobody gets rich when they're collecting dust on bookstore shelves.
Yeah. That's why I chose vi as my "editor of choice". Those whimpe emacs guys. I just couldn't stand the thought of using the shell represented by a bunch of loser pantywaists.
Anyway, "vi" is the heart of "evil".
copy con
Seeing as how most of the shooting sprees I've read about over the past several years - the shooters have mostly been driven by revenge; they got fucked over by somebody, and were willing to kill and die to set things right - perhaps if people stopped being assholes, stopped screwing eachother over, other people wouldn't get so upset that their only option in life would be to go on a shooting spree. . .
.
No wait. That's wrong. lets just ban the guns, video games, books, tv, movies, abberant thought. .
7.62 mm NATO is a totally different round than 7.62 Russian that the AK-47 fires.
7.62 NATO round is a longer, much more massive bullet, usually fired at higher velocities. It has roughly equivalent stopping power to a 30-06. It's one of those bullets that will splatter someone's head like a melon, even at long ranges. It's an excellent sniper round, and does decent damage to lightly armored vehicles (jeeps and stuff) - but firing this round results in high recoil - and without a bipod, or tripod mount, full auto is totally inaccurate.
The 7.62 Russian is a short, stubby round, not as massive, usually has a relatively low muzzle velocity, which makes it much more stable when fired by a soldier in full-auto mode. It's great for close-range engagements, and jungle fighting. Not very accurate at long ranges (compared to the 7.62 NATO, and 5.56 NATO). The problem with the AK-47, is it does the same job as a submachinegun, while asking the soldier to carry a rifle. This is a pretty harsh assessment though, because in all fairness, 7.62 Russian IS a real rifle round. But only barely.
The 5.56 NATO round used in the M-16 is a smaller, lighter bullet than the 7.62 NATO, but is also fired at relatively high velocities - which gives a potential for much higer accuracy at longer ranges (*not* with the M-16, but in sniper versions of the AR-15, it's pretty decent). The 5.56 NATO round has excellent penetration, plus the bullet is designed to destabilize or tumble, when it enters a substance the consistency of flesh (or ballistic gelatin). This tumbling causes the round to fragment, and otherwise cause a lot more damage than it would otherwise, for such a small round. The reasoning behind choosing a standard round that was 5.56 NATO instead of 7.62 NATO, was to allow a higher muzzle velocity, (which means better accuracy and stopping power at long ranges) but still keep the weapon relatively stable during auto firing. And also, 7.62 Russian (or NATO equivalent) was avoided because more 5.56 NATO rounds could be carried by a soldier, giving them more potential kill opportunities, less resupply burden.
So what kind of ammo does the G3 fire? I'm assuming 7.62mm NATO - in keeping with the standard? or is it going to use something special?
Rail-gun: projectile travels the length of the barrel, in contact with two conductive rails - propelled by elecromagnetic field produced by current from the rails. This would essentially be a high-velocity smoothbore type round, relying either on a spherical shape, or fin stabilization.
Mass Driver: Projectile rides on rails (or is magnetically suspended) - Projectile contains natural magnets. The launching track contains electromagnets which switch polarity, alternately attracting and repelling the projectile as it travels past - tripping photosensors. The projectile is often called a "bucket" and is usually intended to be retrievable, and ejects the payload soon after launch.
Gauss gun: (I believe this weapon first appeared in the "Stainless Steel Rat" Sci Fi book series). Simiilar to a mass-driver, projectile travels the length of the barrel, NOT in contact with anything other than air, the barrel is a wider diameter than the projectile, eliminating sliding friction entirely. Projective force is entirely provided by switched electromagnets along the length of the barrel. Spin is induced by magnetic bias, giving the projectile it's own gyroscopic spin stabilization (UNLIKE a mass-driver or rail-gun). This type of rifle technique would be far superior to the traditional type of gyroscopic spin stabilization induced by spiral "rails" machined into the inner surface of a conventional gun, because there would be no friction, none of the energy that would otherwise be put into forward motion would be lost to spin, so you would achieve smoothbore velocities (and energies) with a long-projectile (therfore, more mass for a given bore), with no worries of losing stability to atmospheric friction. (smoothbore rounds are usually either spheres - musketballs, or fin-stabilized - allowing a more efficient acceleration, with no loss of energy to rifling, but spheres do not allow for a more massive projectile without moving to a higher bore, and fins provide their own mass and storage inefficiencies.)
Then there's Oni's Mercury Bow - which electromagnetically fires a confined "bolt" of liquid mercury at high velocities. I shudder at the environmental implications of such a weapon.
Another advantage is the acceleration curve - you can vary it by varying the amount of power you feed as the projectile travels the length of the barrel. With a bullet, the acceleration curve is loaded very heavily at the front - which means more force is applied to recoil in a shorter amount of time. In an electromagnetic weapon like a rail-gun, mass driver or gauss gun, the recoil is distributed evenly (or any way you choose) along the entire acceleration of the projectile - which has a great potential for increasing accuracy.
There's also the potential that the power-curve could be inversely wired to the reflexive muscle reaction of the firer, to provide dynamic feedback, and prevent over-compensation for recoil.
THAT'S why they look like little Nazi helmets!
Actually, it was the underlying engineering that Porsche was wholly responsible for, that was amazing about this car. Not the sheet metal.
The aircooled engine would be reliable in a desert.
The small displacement would provide fuel economy.
The rear-engine placement would aid in the efficient weight distribution of the car (as well as allow rear-wheel drive, for better turn-radius, and simpler manufacturing).
The flat-four engine design allowed for a lower profile and less space required inside the car - allowing for a better aerodynamic profile.
The torsion-bar suspension allowed for excellent handling and weight capacity, and could also be very cheaply manufactured - as an added bonus, torsion-bars are adapted most well to offroad applications (thus the amphibious kubelwagen, or VW Thing, which was Germany's equivalent to the US Jeep - and the same scheme has been applied in countless dune-buggy-adapted beetles).
These same principles were applied to the legendary Porsche 356, and 550, which kicked-ass all over the sports car and racing scene of the 1950's. Porsche added two cylinders onto the end of the flat four, for the 911 (leaving the traditional flat four in the 912), and continued the legacy of creating the "Sports car for the rest of us" (true. . Porsche's are too expensive for your average American, but they're FAR more affordable, traditionally, than your Ferrari's, Jaguars, and Lambourghinis).
So, while Hitler gave a rough outline for the sheetmetal, it was based off of the nascent science of aerodynamics, mainly pursued by Porsche and his collegues in the 20's. Hitler was a layman follower of that school of automotive engineering, so it was no mistake that his design was fairly compatible with the ideas Porsche already had pioneered. The main principles shown in the Beetle, are still part of today's most advanced Porsche cars; the rear-engine (despite Porsche's ill-advised Audi-inspired foray into the front-engined 944 and 928; pieces of crap designed to appeal to Americans who were afraid to learn how to deal with the handling characteristics of rear-engined cars), flat-six design. The suspension is more modern, as are the engine cooling systems, etc - but the basic design is still the same, tried and true from the 1930's. Truly, the Porsche is the Unix of the car-world. Front engine, front-wheel drive cars are obviously the MS Windows cars.
Ferdinand Porsche was a man who cared little for politics, and was not a fan of Hitler or his ideas, and strongly resisted, at first, the idea of actually producing this car for him - until Hitler told him that he was right, it was probably impossible; and that challenge took advantage of Porsche's pride.
Henry Ford, on the other hand, was a well-known racist, and supported the Nazi party from America.
After the war, the French asked Porsche to come to France to help design a French version of the Beetle (which was not really in production yet, because they were still trying to rebuild the factory). When he arrived, they arrested him as a war criminal, and he was put to work repairing tractors.
The engine alone weighs 275 lbs.
This, I know, from experience.
Without the engine, two strong men could lift the body of a beetle over their heads. With the engine, three, maybe four are required.
I remember a prank from my college days.
It was personal - against a member of my clique who had broken her ankle tripping over a tree root.
We cut down a small tree (5" thick trunk) in a vacant lot, drove it to my house, near campus, hid it in the back yard. The next day, we hand-carried it through 6 suburban blocks to the college parking lot, and placed it next to her car.
While carrying this tree down the street, we realized how it was the exact same species and approximate age as the other trees lining the street, and worried that a passing police officer would think we cut it down from someone's front yard. In fact, a cop did drive by minutes after we realized this, and he looked at us, with this look on his face: "three young males carrying a tree down the sidewalk. . . that's normal" - and he drove on, leaving us to complete the prank in peace.
And of course, there's the typical cheesy - go into the drama club's display case, and rearrange the action figures they have set up in a mock performace, to resemble hardcore porn - we had to break Barbie's knees, and JB Weld them back into a bent position, because she wouldn't get on her knees. Yes, one of us just happened to have JB Weld - this fucker was one of those guys who always wore a big winter parka, pockets filled with everything he might need for the coming apocolypse, including a small socket-set.
I've always thought that a great way to paralyze the US for a day would be to coordinate about two dozen people in major cities across the US to buy $100 junkers, drive them down the freeways during morning rush hour, and park them at strategic locations, pop the hood, toss in a smoke-bomb, and drive off in a freind's car.
The rubberneckers would keep the roads clogged for hours.
Okay, lets be realistic - how much damage would a collision between a stripped-down VW beetle body, hanging from a cable, and a ship moving at the most, 15 knots. Maybe some scratched paint.
Well, then you gotta worry about the wannabes who will imitate the prank, possibly not listening to the implicit "don't try this at home kids".
Then there's the issue with San Francisco - possibly the VW beetle capitol of the US. No small number of vintage aircooled VW fans were deeply offended today at a destruction of a piece of automotive history. You can take that to the bank.
At least HALF the fault lies with the utilities, who lobbied the brain-dead politicians for exactly the situation they got. They knew that as long as commodity prices for Gas stayed low, they would make huge profits, and if they got out of hand, there would really be no choice other than a Government bailout. Both ways, consumers get fucked.
I have two examples of "good spam"
/., on a daily basis. I gave my info to My Yahoo - because their service is not available at any other price - and it's the best I've found so far. Would I pay for identical services if it meant that my personal data were safe? Yes, but I'm not sure how much I would pay. $5/mo?
I am a My Yahoo person. It's my portal of choice. My web-habits bring me to several common sites, including
Anyway, their posession of my personal data led to a targeted ad, a Yahoo platinum Visa, at 9.9%. I was sick of being screwed by credit card companies with 18% interest, so I dumped my other cards and got the Yahoo Visa, and I've used that card for over two years now.
Sometimes, Yahoo deliberately allows obvious bulk email advertising find it's way into my email inbox, instead of the bulk email folder. Of course, they're probably getting a cut. I don't like that, I deal with it, I delete it, but I think it is - unethical, considering that I paid my "personal info" to them, and responded to a rather lucrative ad for them. I have reached my limit of 100 blocked addresses.
On the other hand, one email that DID find it's way into yahoo mail's bulk mail folder, was an ad from a car parts shop. I had ordered their catalog about a year ago, they emailed me to inform me of a 20% off sale. That was FAR MORE desirable an ad than "Get rich at home in your spare time" or "hot sexy high school girls want to strip for you". In fact, I responded to THAT ad, and ordered about $900 worth of parts for my project car. I was VERY happy to have saved about $170 on this sale. I was VERY happy to have been notified.
Would I be as happy if that Car Parts sales company sold my address to the "hot sexy high school girls want to give you head in your convertible" people? No, I'd be fucking pissed. It would be unethical. Companies should not do that, and this kind of thing really ought to be explicitly Opt In, with a yearly expiration.
I don't think that use of this information should stop - but I think the unethical practices of selective spam filtering by email providers, and the unsolicited selling of personal data to third parties, need to stop.
yeah, you're right. Why don't we all just kill ourselves now, so we can save future generations from having to pay for our current extravagence.
So, everybody pick up the gun, place the muzzle in your mouth . . . on the count of three. . . one. . . two. . . three. . .
. . . hey, you still here?
my 7 year old son plays on a basketball team. Doesn't matter who wins or loses - they don't keep track of the score.
Supposedly this is to encourage the kids to pass the ball to all of the players and give them a chance at shooting a basket.
but the kids keep track of the score, and they always pass the ball to the kid they know can make the shot.
Also, they don't call fouls. At least that's what they told me when they asked me to ref. Other team's coach bitched me out for not calling a foul. Next game, someone else reffed, and they were VERY strict about double-dribbles and such. At this age, some of the kids can't even dribble the ball. On the other hand, the good players could beat me hands down.
The whole thing is kind of ridiculous.
At first, Ogre seems like a zero-sum game (one side is a massive heavily armored AI tank, and the other is humans in various tanks jeeps and howitzers).
Either side could win or lose - I, for one always felt that the Ogre side often simply represented a stronger force. (it's a slightly imbalanced game, but you can modify the handicaps on the scenarios).
But in the end, everyone dies, because we're talking about the twilight of civilization, so it's really a zero-sum game anyway. (unless you subscribe to the sequel game, (I can't for the life of me remember what the name was - pre Steve Jackson game, from when they were Metagames) where the two sides were automated combat robot factories, you built and programmed these little robots to go out and kill eachother and attack the enemy factory - supposedly the successors to the Ogres).
That IS an excellent point.
If I think about it, I could run my entire system from 7 years ago solely in RAM. I had a 200 meg hd, ran DOS/Win3.1 and WP DOS. On today's system, that would totally kick ass.
Though the software to enable the things he's talking about would still not fit in the 256 meg of RAM I have today.