That's very mild terminology. I can think of a few things I'd describe our local car "audiophiles" as, and none are as pleasant as "pretentious wankers." These arseholes come in at 2 in the morning blasting their stereos. Their rice-buring piece of crap with a 14.20 qualifying time (hah, my '70 mustang is in the low 13s, stock engine, and weighs 1000 pounds more) written on the side window. They hit the gas, and it sounds like my dad revving his lawn mower, only put out through a big-concert PA system.
You hear the BOOOM BOOOM of their barely-qualifies-as music, and listen to the trunk rattle, they sit ther for a few minutes, revving that whopping 2.0L engine up to 6000 RPM, and I'm sitting in my apartment praying the engine throws a rod.
To top it all off, it's 2 A.M., I've got insomnia, and I've already taken my medication, and can't have another dose for 20 hours.
Complaints to the police department, and aparment management do nothing, because the state has an $800 million budget shortfall, and the landlord is hurting for tenants.
These are the same people that go 50 in a parking lot where kids play, and the guy in the next building passed me at over twice my speed (I was going 60) on a highway that had a hit-and-run accident a few weeks earlier. I notice he's got a funny dent on his bumper, too. I'm tempted to call the police to report him as a drunk driver, but the local police don't take it seriously, even if the guy is driving at 120 miles/hour.
And yes, I've seen the amp and caps and speakers in his car. A true "audiophile," when the only quality you are looking for is loud and obnoxious.
Was anyone else slightly disturbed by the fact that on his website he occasionally lapses into the habit of referring to himself in the third person? "Brian build rocket! Brian go BOOOOMM!"
Umm, that's because Brian is not the person doing most of the authoring on his website. It's a friend of Brian's that is doing it. Normally, someone does not claim to be the person one is writing about, therefore the third person is appropriate. Gee, makes sense, huh?
I've met Brian, and he's legit. He DOES do his homework. When he claims not to know much about engineering, he's really being modest. Anything he doesn't understand, he learns. Anything he thinks he needs to make his project successful, he does. Example: Cosmonaut Training.
I have a friend who helps him from time to time, and my friend is a veteran of aerospace design, from his father being an aircraft mechanic, to him working for companies like Aerovironment, and working on experimental NASA craft.
I have also personally seen Brian's equipment, designs, engines, and facilities, and am quite confident in his ability to make his project succeed.
What about firearms that are made from ceramics? Ceramics have similar properties, and even some barrels have been made from ceramics (and are not easily detected in X-ray devices or metal detectors)
This is what happens when people get their firearm knowledge from video games.
Or from the liberal media, public education, or any other source that doesn't have a clue about firearms.
Oh, some mortars (60 mm and smaller) are generally considered "small arms" by the military. (I was an armorer in the U.S. Army). Mortars, of course, have smooth bores as well.
No man-portable howitzers, though. A shame, really. Well, the M2.50 cal. machine gun has firing tables and can be indirectly fired, so maybe that could count.:)
I don't think it's flexible enough for most parts of the aircraft, nor is it heat-resistant enough for the engines.
It would maybe be useful in seat mounts, or cockpit construction (levers and stuff.) The real savings would be if you could make the fuselage and wings out of lighter material, but I bet this material doesn't have the right elastic properties to take up the role.
The website claims (via graphs) that it can, though.
I'll point out that the sources you just gave describe just a handful of our founding fathers, when in fact, there were many more than those few, and many of them were Christians.
To quote the Constitution, Article VI: "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution as under the Confederation."
The Declaration of Independence falls under the category of "Engagement entered into."
As always when this subject comes up, major props to Chrysler for making the codes easy to get. At least, in the past. Looks like it's not so easy on newer models. (Must be the Daimler folks that are influencing it.) Too bad.
Of course client side Java works flawlessly on the JVM that is installed on 80% of desktops, it is written to target that JVM. If you did any Java development you would realise what a pain in the arse it is having to support these old JVMs when the API has improved so drastically since then.
Personally, I just don't bother to write Java code anymore, if it will be exposed to M$ VM users. Especially since I've gotten used to Swing and other API improvements. Why lower the standard of my code?
So, Intel has patented an arrangement of transistors and other components
It is important to note that the physical layout falls under copyright law, not patent law, in most cases. The electrical arrangement however, can be patented. Thus with chip design, you are dealing with two IP laws.
Imagine if gene sequences could be copyrighted, too.
In a way, that could be good.:)
'Your gene sequence includes a significant amount of my gene sequence, and is therefore a derived work. Under the GGPL (GNU Genetic Public License), you MUST give out the source!"
According to my newspaper, it's going to be a partial eclipse with 54% coverage of the solar surface. That's enough to make it "mainly" viewable here in Eugene, OR.
I imagine it will be interesting, even in Seattle. (Provided it isn't raining)
at Lane Community College, we started off Computer Science doing UML modelling and use-case diagrams, among other things.
When I am really programming, I write code, not use-case diagrams or class models. The book we base most of our OO design on is Satzinger and Orvik's "The Object Oriented Approach."
You can also install the Linux kernel, write your own init that only makes use of the Kernel API to do what you need it to do, and still have a "working, useful system."
To parody Bill Clinton: "It all depends on what the definition of 'useful' is" Hell, if you just want to serve a few static web pages, use khttpd and make an init that just calls sleep().
I argue that, depending on what you define as "use," you can remove everything but the kernel and init, and have a "working, useful system"
Well, IMHO, "Linux" isn't actually a very good name for the operating system that the majority of the readership of this site uses
Well, I recently started using Solaris on my Sparc system. Nothing like having speed and good hardware support.
As far as my (now only) Linux machine, I would have never started using any GNU tools without the Linux kernel. I know plenty of people who are the same way. GNU tools wouldn't be nearly as popular without Linux there.
Either GNU is using Linux as a crutch, ("until the HURD is finished" next millenium), or GNU is thriving because of Linux.
I am thinking it's the latter.
I have a lot of non-GNU free sofware that I use far more than the GNU software. KDE, Perl, Apache, Samba... those are what I use the most.
I'd almost agree with giving GNU credit there, except I can compile those in Solaris just fine, so the fact that GNU tools are the most common build tools, doesn't mean they get credit for the actual product that is compiled.
I suppose that, in reality, I treat the word "Linux" not just to mean a kernel, but to mean "a hodgepodge of various software that tends to be freely available." When I talk about the Linux kernel, I say "the Linux kernel." When I say "Linux" I am not just talking about the Linux kernel and the GNU tools, I am really talking about the Linux kernel, the GNU tools, KDE, Samba, Apache, etc.
Maybe I should start calling it GNU/Linux/KDE/Samba/Apache/XChat/Perl/ad nauseum. That way, everyone in MY Linux setup gets some credit.
Or maybe I can just say Linux.
in conversation, I'll usually use "Linux" because it's a convenient shorthand, when most (if not all) of my peers know exactly what I am referring to.
According to RMS, they don't think about GNU when you say "Linux."
Slashdot Mirror
I remember doing my own (simple) DOOM mods. Then came Quake and I loved the mods, expecially CTF, even played semi-professionally for a little bit.
However, after hardware advanced too fast for me to be able to afford upgrades, I have pretty much left the gaming scene entirely.
It was damn fun, though.
And most car audiophiles are pretentious wankers.
That's very mild terminology. I can think of a few things I'd describe our local car "audiophiles" as, and none are as pleasant as "pretentious wankers."
These arseholes come in at 2 in the morning blasting their stereos. Their rice-buring piece of crap with a 14.20 qualifying time (hah, my '70 mustang is in the low 13s, stock engine, and weighs 1000 pounds more) written on the side window. They hit the gas, and it sounds like my dad revving his lawn mower, only put out through a big-concert PA system.
You hear the BOOOM BOOOM of their barely-qualifies-as music, and listen to the trunk rattle, they sit ther for a few minutes, revving that whopping 2.0L engine up to 6000 RPM, and I'm sitting in my apartment praying the engine throws a rod.
To top it all off, it's 2 A.M., I've got insomnia, and I've already taken my medication, and can't have another dose for 20 hours.
Complaints to the police department, and aparment management do nothing, because the state has an $800 million budget shortfall, and the landlord is hurting for tenants.
These are the same people that go 50 in a parking lot where kids play, and the guy in the next building passed me at over twice my speed (I was going 60) on a highway that had a hit-and-run accident a few weeks earlier. I notice he's got a funny dent on his bumper, too. I'm tempted to call the police to report him as a drunk driver, but the local police don't take it seriously, even if the guy is driving at 120 miles/hour.
And yes, I've seen the amp and caps and speakers in his car. A true "audiophile," when the only quality you are looking for is loud and obnoxious.
Was anyone else slightly disturbed by the fact that on his website he occasionally lapses into the habit of referring to himself in the third person? "Brian build rocket! Brian go BOOOOMM!"
Umm, that's because Brian is not the person doing most of the authoring on his website. It's a friend of Brian's that is doing it. Normally, someone does not claim to be the person one is writing about, therefore the third person is appropriate.
Gee, makes sense, huh?
Sigh...
I've met Brian, and he's legit. He DOES do his homework. When he claims not to know much about engineering, he's really being modest. Anything he doesn't understand, he learns. Anything he thinks he needs to make his project successful, he does. Example: Cosmonaut Training.
I have a friend who helps him from time to time, and my friend is a veteran of aerospace design, from his father being an aircraft mechanic, to him working for companies like Aerovironment, and working on experimental NASA craft.
I have also personally seen Brian's equipment, designs, engines, and facilities, and am quite confident in his ability to make his project succeed.
What about firearms that are made from ceramics? Ceramics have similar properties, and even some barrels have been made from ceramics (and are not easily detected in X-ray devices or metal detectors)
I meant to add: It takes at least two people to carry a full M2 setup (with tripod) around, though.
This is what happens when people get their firearm knowledge from video games.
.50 cal. machine gun has firing tables and can be indirectly fired, so maybe that could count. :)
Or from the liberal media, public education, or any other source that doesn't have a clue about firearms.
Oh, some mortars (60 mm and smaller) are generally considered "small arms" by the military. (I was an armorer in the U.S. Army). Mortars, of course, have smooth bores as well.
No man-portable howitzers, though. A shame, really. Well, the M2
I don't think it's flexible enough for most parts of the aircraft, nor is it heat-resistant enough for the engines.
It would maybe be useful in seat mounts, or cockpit construction (levers and stuff.)
The real savings would be if you could make the fuselage and wings out of lighter material, but I bet this material doesn't have the right elastic properties to take up the role.
The website claims (via graphs) that it can, though.
It's way expensive if it can.
No, I suggest the Janet Reno method. Run in with H&K MP5's and shove a barrel up the defendant's nostril.
Then he'll let the poor moon rock go back to it's father.
I'm just making the restless natives react.
Worked, didn't it?
Nice unbiased sources you have there.
I'll point out that the sources you just gave describe just a handful of our founding fathers, when in fact, there were many more than those few, and many of them were Christians.
Wrong.
To quote the Constitution, Article VI: "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution as under the Confederation."
The Declaration of Independence falls under the category of "Engagement entered into."
As an atheist, all I can say about this ruling is "Thank God!"
And, as a typical hypocrite, you use the word "God" anyway, whenever it suits you, even to score +5 funny.
You see, you just said you were an athiest, yet you used God to gain something.
Interesting.
As always when this subject comes up, major props to Chrysler for making the codes easy to get. At least, in the past. Looks like it's not so easy on newer models. (Must be the Daimler folks that are influencing it.) Too bad.
Of course client side Java works flawlessly on the JVM that is installed on 80% of desktops, it is written to target that JVM. If you did any Java development you would realise what a pain in the arse it is having to support these old JVMs when the API has improved so drastically since then.
Personally, I just don't bother to write Java code anymore, if it will be exposed to M$ VM users. Especially since I've gotten used to Swing and other API improvements. Why lower the standard of my code?
So, Intel has patented an arrangement of transistors and other components
:)
It is important to note that the physical layout falls under copyright law, not patent law, in most cases. The electrical arrangement however, can be patented. Thus with chip design, you are dealing with two IP laws.
Imagine if gene sequences could be copyrighted, too.
In a way, that could be good.
'Your gene sequence includes a significant amount of my gene sequence, and is therefore a derived work. Under the GGPL (GNU Genetic Public License), you MUST give out the source!"
Maybe not, though.
According to my newspaper, it's going to be a partial eclipse with 54% coverage of the solar surface. That's enough to make it "mainly" viewable here in Eugene, OR.
I imagine it will be interesting, even in Seattle. (Provided it isn't raining)
Umm... just look at it through at T-15 arc welding filter... sheesh.
It must have been in the early '90s I saw the article about Cyc. Lenat's been doing this for a long time.
Actually, in that article, it had already asked if it was human.
The Discover article was titled "At Last: A Computer as Smart as a Four-Year Old," possibly without the "At Last:" part.
at Lane Community College, we started off Computer Science doing UML modelling and use-case diagrams, among other things.
When I am really programming, I write code, not use-case diagrams or class models.
The book we base most of our OO design on is Satzinger and Orvik's "The Object Oriented Approach."
Are you sure you know which palm you are talking about, and what you are really wooing with it?
Maybe it's true: you get all the love you need right from your palm.
What happened to paper maps and a compass? What about dead reckoning? Can't anyone do terrain association anymore?
Orienteering isn't that hard, and a lot cheaper than buying a GPS + iPaq + software, and is a lot less tempting to theives.
You can also install the Linux kernel, write your own init that only makes use of the Kernel API to do what you need it to do, and still have a "working, useful system."
To parody Bill Clinton: "It all depends on what the definition of 'useful' is"
Hell, if you just want to serve a few static web pages, use khttpd and make an init that just calls sleep().
I argue that, depending on what you define as "use," you can remove everything but the kernel and init, and have a "working, useful system"
Therefore, the GNU tools are not necessary.
Well, IMHO, "Linux" isn't actually a very good name for the operating system that the majority of the readership of this site uses
Well, I recently started using Solaris on my Sparc system. Nothing like having speed and good hardware support.
As far as my (now only) Linux machine, I would have never started using any GNU tools without the Linux kernel. I know plenty of people who are the same way. GNU tools wouldn't be nearly as popular without Linux there.
Either GNU is using Linux as a crutch, ("until the HURD is finished" next millenium), or GNU is thriving because of Linux.
I am thinking it's the latter.
I have a lot of non-GNU free sofware that I use far more than the GNU software. KDE, Perl, Apache, Samba... those are what I use the most.
I'd almost agree with giving GNU credit there, except I can compile those in Solaris just fine, so the fact that GNU tools are the most common build tools, doesn't mean they get credit for the actual product that is compiled.
I suppose that, in reality, I treat the word "Linux" not just to mean a kernel, but to mean "a hodgepodge of various software that tends to be freely available." When I talk about the Linux kernel, I say "the Linux kernel."
When I say "Linux" I am not just talking about the Linux kernel and the GNU tools, I am really talking about the Linux kernel, the GNU tools, KDE, Samba, Apache, etc.
Maybe I should start calling it GNU/Linux/KDE/Samba/Apache/XChat/Perl/ad nauseum. That way, everyone in MY Linux setup gets some credit.
Or maybe I can just say Linux.
in conversation, I'll usually use "Linux" because it's a convenient shorthand, when most (if not all) of my peers know exactly what I am referring to.
According to RMS, they don't think about GNU when you say "Linux."
Interesting.
I know exactly what you mean.
Good luck.