Uhhh, I know it's two weeks late, but I read an article on Jennifer Aniston (ultra-super-mega-hottie getting ready to leave Brad for me, she just doesn't know it yet) where she confessed that her eyes are too close to one another.
Lucky for her, that didn't quite ruin her for me... I'll probably take her back if she asks nicely and brings peppered jerky.
I do not think you know what are you talking about. I was quoting the article. If you have a problem with my rounding errors in 1/8 inch and 115 km/h, I'll be happy to correct those to "0.196850394 inches" and "112.65408 km/h" for you. Please forgive my mental math.
If you're challenging the figures' journalistic integrity, consult with the author.
I have hit a stream running across a road in a tropical rainstorm which was just about quarter of an inch deap at 32 mph. I'm impressed; my estimations on how "deap" the water is are generally inaccurate, especially if I'm busy consulting my speedometer to ascertain my velocity down to the nearest integral mph.
Was more then enough for the car to completely lose grip. "Than" maybe it wasn't the best decision to be out driving. Or at least not at the reckless speed of thirty-two mph.
There was an 800m sheer cliff going down into the Atlantic on the left and 800m sheer cliff going up towards Cumbre Viejo on the right. I'll correct myself. You're quite the dope for driving so fast under those conditions. However, I feel compelled to ask you where the water ("running across a road") was coming from if both sides of the road were 800m lower than the driving surface...
The next 2 seconds I was busy avoiding either one of these ...but you're not going to tell us which?
Barely avoided either at least 3 times each. so you traversed the breadth of the road a minimum of six times within a timeframe of two seconds. At 32 mph, that would make the road at most 15.6444444 feet wide (excuse the inaccuracy). And that doesn't allow you any deceleration time as you swerve from left to right and back.
I'll correct myself again. You're an incredible idiot for
driving over 15 mph
in a tropical rainstorm
on a road that bridges the difference between a 800m drop into the ocean and an 800m drop onto rocks
a road that comes complete with its own river (still no batteries included)
and not slowing down
though the cliffs were both sheer, so it was just like the scene about 75% through LOTR: FOTR, right after the fight scene with the troll.
let me make that "driving over 5 mph" in those conditions
Are you sure you're not really Evel Knievel? Then let me restate my assertion that you're an idiot.
And believe me if you have ever aquaplaned you would not have ever tried to joke about it. Oh, I believe you. There are just two things wrong with that:
I have hydroplaned (sorry, we ignorant Americans call it hydro-) probably a dozen times; in Colorado it's quite common for rain to build up suddenly. Flash floods aren't rare either.
My most recent hydroplaning adventure was on a busy rush-hour-traffic highway travelling at about 60 mph, I fishtailed around a curve driving through southern Denver. I decelerated from the 75 I had been traveling, because I had to suddenly change lanes when a three-car accident happened right in front of me, and it's customary, courteous, and generally smart to slow down when hazards occur. Then, around the corner, there was standing water on the road, which I didn't see through the cars that were wrecking around me. We've all been there. Relax.
If you would read for content, you'd realize that my comment was poking fun at the inconsistency demonstrated by using two separate systems of measurement in the same sentence, not the hazards of water on the road nor the peril it can introduce into the act of driving.
Re:Aqua-planing ? (Score:2, Informative) by arivanov (12034)
Informative? So the mods are joking today too, right? Or does this mean the next time I "inform" the entirety of/. about the time I got real scared because I watched "The Exorcist" in the dark, I'll get modded up too?
and bringing back the car under control.
Whew. The gene pool would certainly have been incomplete without you.
Focus your frustrations on whatever's causing them.
What makes me chuckle more than my semi-funny original smartass comment is that it sparked a debate on physics terms that's as heated as some Lindows/Winix wars I've seen.;)
"we would use far less fuel nudging it faster as it left past Earth (and hence into a larger orbit) than trying to decelerate and/or modify the orbit of a huge rock heading our way."
Maybe I've misunderstood what you really meant, but isn't acceleration still acceleration, whether it's applied in the forward direction or the reverse? In other words, wouldn't trying to nudge it "just shy" of Earth be the same as trying to nudge it "just past" Earth (assuming the unaltered impact would hit dead-center, of course)? We'd still be changing the trajectory of the same mass, whether it's back or forward.
""The concentration was so high that, whatever the source, it represented the most significant impact hazard for spacecraft operating at those altitudes... and still does today," Kessler said."
Boy, I'm sure glad I gave up that career in space flight and instead opted for becoming a laid-off IT guy. And my guidance counselor said I couldn't make a good decision...
To continue in this direction, I recently watched (History Channel, I'm pretty sure) a blurb that stated Carter (forever marked by millions for the Olympics, hostages, etc) actually did nearly all the negotiating--personally, I seem to recall--to get the hostages released, but since it didn't actually happen until Reagan took office, Reagan got the credit.
"...but things don't become noticable until Guy B is in office, and gets blamed..."
I don't know how true that is, but I'm willing to bet it's a lot more than most of us realize.
[further]I was pleased when Reagan was elected because I didn't like Carter, based solely on the anger I felt when he beat Ford in the '76 election. Ignorant? Yes, but I was five, so neener neener.[/tangent]
Hopefully, everyone noticed the subsequent posts on click-throughs and impressions, two things about which I know virtually nil. After reading them all, I'm still not sure I did such a good thing, intent or not.
Oh well. The nerd power is still very sweet/fuzzy/humorous. *chortle*
I hope not. From the article, "ripping off his site design, content and even his copyright notice. It was then using his hard work to sell advertising of its own."
I'm hoping that means they're selling ads on their own. If I'm wrong, and blorg below is correct, then MOD GRANDPARENT WAY DOWN!
Also, from the article (*gasp* he reads the articles?!?):
"While Microsoft's intentions may be benign..."
Ermmmmmm, okay... I'm sure that [hypothetical] once the Caller ID (c)Microsoft is implemented and in widespread use, [/hypothetical] licensing for the "technology" will remain free forever.
Slashdot Mirror
Lucky for her, that didn't quite ruin her for me... I'll probably take her back if she asks nicely and brings peppered jerky.
I stand erected. Thanks, uberdave. Yes, I did miss that.
I was quoting the article. If you have a problem with my rounding errors in 1/8 inch and 115 km/h, I'll be happy to correct those to "0.196850394 inches" and "112.65408 km/h" for you. Please forgive my mental math.
If you're challenging the figures' journalistic integrity, consult with the author.
I have hit a stream running across a road in a tropical rainstorm which was just about quarter of an inch deap at 32 mph.
I'm impressed; my estimations on how "deap" the water is are generally inaccurate, especially if I'm busy consulting my speedometer to ascertain my velocity down to the nearest integral mph.
Was more then enough for the car to completely lose grip.
"Than" maybe it wasn't the best decision to be out driving. Or at least not at the reckless speed of thirty-two mph.
There was an 800m sheer cliff going down into the Atlantic on the left and 800m sheer cliff going up towards Cumbre Viejo on the right.
I'll correct myself. You're quite the dope for driving so fast under those conditions. However, I feel compelled to ask you where the water ("running across a road") was coming from if both sides of the road were 800m lower than the driving surface...
The next 2 seconds I was busy avoiding either one of these
...but you're not going to tell us which?
Barely avoided either at least 3 times each.
so you traversed the breadth of the road a minimum of six times within a timeframe of two seconds. At 32 mph, that would make the road at most 15.6444444 feet wide (excuse the inaccuracy). And that doesn't allow you any deceleration time as you swerve from left to right and back.
I'll correct myself again. You're an incredible idiot for
- driving over 15 mph
- in a tropical rainstorm
- on a road that bridges the difference between a 800m drop into the ocean and an 800m drop onto rocks
- a road that comes complete with its own river (still no batteries included)
- and not slowing down
- though the cliffs were both sheer, so it was just like the scene about 75% through LOTR: FOTR, right after the fight scene with the troll.
- let me make that "driving over 5 mph" in those conditions
Are you sure you're not really Evel Knievel? Then let me restate my assertion that you're an idiot.And believe me if you have ever aquaplaned you would not have ever tried to joke about it.
Oh, I believe you. There are just two things wrong with that:
My most recent hydroplaning adventure was on a busy rush-hour-traffic highway travelling at about 60 mph, I fishtailed around a curve driving through southern Denver. I decelerated from the 75 I had been traveling, because I had to suddenly change lanes when a three-car accident happened right in front of me, and it's customary, courteous, and generally smart to slow down when hazards occur. Then, around the corner, there was standing water on the road, which I didn't see through the cars that were wrecking around me. We've all been there. Relax.
Re:Aqua-planing ? (Score:2, Informative) by arivanov (12034) /. about the time I got real scared because I watched "The Exorcist" in the dark, I'll get modded up too?
Informative? So the mods are joking today too, right? Or does this mean the next time I "inform" the entirety of
and bringing back the car under control.
Whew. The gene pool would certainly have been incomplete without you.
Focus your frustrations on whatever's causing them.
What makes me chuckle more than my semi-funny original smartass comment is that it sparked a debate on physics terms that's as heated as some Lindows/Winix wars I've seen. ;)
5mm? 70mph? What if I'm driving in a quarter inch of water at 115kph?
And isn't english capitalized in any "proper" post?
Maybe I've misunderstood what you really meant
:(
You're 100% right. I mistook what he said for "Nudge it past the stern; that'll be easier than force it over the bow." Thanks.
You're overreacting. Nostradamus was actually referring to this.
Maybe I've misunderstood what you really meant, but isn't acceleration still acceleration, whether it's applied in the forward direction or the reverse? In other words, wouldn't trying to nudge it "just shy" of Earth be the same as trying to nudge it "just past" Earth (assuming the unaltered impact would hit dead-center, of course)? We'd still be changing the trajectory of the same mass, whether it's back or forward.
I'd never be able to sleep with the noise of clients hitting the server all night. And it would be even worse if it was a chat server!
If I had been listening to Mozart.
You're Welcome.
heh... because I knew I wouldn't come up with a line as good as the nuclear winter one.
Somewhere in this article is the potential for a "Soviet Russia" line that's actually funny, and yet no one's posted it.
Boy, I'm sure glad I gave up that career in space flight and instead opted for becoming a laid-off IT guy. And my guidance counselor said I couldn't make a good decision...
I'll see you in court, buddy!
"...but things don't become noticable until Guy B is in office, and gets blamed..."
I don't know how true that is, but I'm willing to bet it's a lot more than most of us realize.
[further]I was pleased when Reagan was elected because I didn't like Carter, based solely on the anger I felt when he beat Ford in the '76 election. Ignorant? Yes, but I was five, so neener neener.[/tangent]
Hopefully, everyone noticed the subsequent posts on click-throughs and impressions, two things about which I know virtually nil. After reading them all, I'm still not sure I did such a good thing, intent or not.
Oh well. The nerd power is still very sweet/fuzzy/humorous. *chortle*
I'm glad--nay, flattered--that I was able to inspire you. That'll be 500 bucks, and you don't know me once they catch you.
"Flamebait?" Wouldn't "Overrated" be good enough?
I first saw this and thought, "what? it's not a captial 'R' is it? *bonk*" :\
So don't hit it. It looks the same as the http://www.carorcar.com weenors anyway.
I'm hoping that means they're selling ads on their own. If I'm wrong, and blorg below is correct, then MOD GRANDPARENT WAY DOWN!
Good point, thanks.
http://www.carorcar.com
solo
another page
and another page
Or maybe just a thousand of us firing off wget -r in their direction. Redirect it to /dev/null...
Will this get me a "-1 Instigator" mod? ;)
Good LORD, geeks can argue about anything. ;)
Also, from the article (*gasp* he reads the articles?!?):
"While Microsoft's intentions may be benign..."
Ermmmmmm, okay... I'm sure that [hypothetical] once the Caller ID (c)Microsoft is implemented and in widespread use, [/hypothetical] licensing for the "technology" will remain free forever.