If dinosaurs are birds that means dinosaurs are not reptiles. Sorry dude reptiles and birds share as much in common as mammals and birds. The statement above is total nonsense.
I think it's more like:
Birds come from dinosaurs, and dinosaurs are reptiles.
Thus the "first non-bird species of reptile".
That is the first real reptile as we usually classify them.
And here, we have the root of the matter. You don't like the lifestyle enjoyed in the US. Fine. Pardon if other people would like to continue the lifestyles that they currently enjoy. The cost of oil, driven up by increasing demand, is doing the job that you seem to want politicians to do. Residents of the US are already driving less without significantly altering their lifestyles. Don't be so bitter about it all, particularly when it's already getting better.[my emphasis]
What a refreshing optimism !
Hum... wait. How much fuel residents "driving less" can save? How much fuel residents use compared to the global US consumption?
Trucks, planes, industry also need a lot of fuel to run and US lifestyle is based on them; this is not just about driving around in a car.
Most people wanting to continue the lifestyles that they currently enjoy (or just have enjoyed a few years ago) won't be able to.
It was based on cheap oil (bellow $70 a barrel), and cheap oil time is definitely over now.
The number of people living this lifestyle is steadily being eroded.
Bio-fuels won't compensate but I hope they will mitigate the problem
Re:Movie fair and technically accurate ?
on
Ask Kevin Mitnick
·
· Score: 1
(Please correct above: Mitnik => Mitnick)
Movie fair and technically accurate ?
on
Ask Kevin Mitnick
·
· Score: 1
I've read the answers you made here in 2003. And I read some more information about what was true and what wasn't, in Takedown book and movie.
It seems to me that the movie is quite fair with you:
In a scene we can see "Kevin" ashamed by how they treat him in the press (like a dangerous criminal) and looking a computer screen, saying that "I could take millions of dollars right here, but I don't do that!". This scene describe a Mitnik rather honest but treated unfairly.
The Raleigh episode (with the Cellscope 2000 and FBI arrival) seems technically accurate.
Also the movie clearly depict a Kevin who use both social engineering and great technical skills.
I know they made up the "Contempt" program and your encounter with Shimomura, this was to make the movie "look good".
There are also a few silly things I guess.
However the movie seems not that far from reality.
Could you share your feelings about how they depicted you and the technical and social engineering parts ?
Re:Mandriva isn't trusted by the community
on
Mandriva 2011 Out
·
· Score: 1
Thank you for sharing this info. (mod parent up!)
I myself planning to upgrade my Mandriva gateway & laptop (but not my file server, it's Mandriva 2008 with EVMS...).
I still wonder what to do... My last thought : backup docs and config files of my laptop and make a fresh install of Mageia , check if hardware management is 100% ok and use it a bit before replacing it with a Mandriva 2011 fresh install... check and practice again.
Then I will decide which distro to run. I hope there will be a significant difference from a user experience and admin maintainer point of view.
I will be sorry to ditch Mandriva, I'm with it since the beginning, Mandrake 5.
Now that you are gone, I can try again my suggestion with the new/. staff : rise the friends/foes limit
We once have discussed this question by email and you didn't want to do anything about it...
I've reached the maximum friends one can define... and I've queued many/. users as potential friends in a journal entry, waiting for such a limit raise.
Actually I'm not happy with you leaving/. , especially if you say you have no plan. I hope we'll have some news here about your next job or hobby. You will be back as a submitter, right?
I feel this is quite a special moment for the/. community.
I wish you a new brilliant idea to start over a new adventure like this. Or if you don't feel like starting such adventure, just email me the idea:P
Maybe they also managed to get [,],` and | characters printed on their keyboard ? Or at least have their shortcut mentioned in the system help.
Use the Keyboard Viewer. BTW: I guess you meant ' or ‘? ` is a diacritic (grave accent) and is usually not used on it's own.
Yeah... that's a nice game, the Keyboard Viewer !
Launch the Keyboard Viewer, then try different combinations of modifier keys, and watch out where your beloved missing character is appearing on the layout !
Having a list of characters with the right key and modifiers explicited would have been too fast and too easy, right ? Well I didn't play much with the Keyboard Viewer and I cheated and looked for such a list on the Internet...
Let me guess... are you a Mac OS user ? Every time I tell them about my needs they end up asking why do I need to do such a thing... Believe me: I do need to type square brackets, pipe, and back-quote characters from time to time.
The next revolution would be an application menu bar closer to the document itself : 9" screens of mac classic are over now, the mouse has quite a long way to go across the 22" screen to reach the file menu...
Ever heard about the concept of keyboard shortcuts? If necessary you can define your own, you know...
Ok, you're definitely a Mac OS user:D... anytime I mention an easy operation on Win/Linux made painful by design on Mac OS, they end up saying "You know, there are keyboard shortcuts". Well I had once another answer "Well, I use this $15 add-on app which is very useful..." to resize and organize windows. What a joke.
I won't learn a zillion shortcuts for every app operations I use once in a while, when a quick mouse click and hover works on properly designed interfaces.
Please provide a link, as I don't see the news anywhere...
Maybe they also managed to get [,],` and | characters printed on their keyboard ? Or at least have their shortcut mentioned in the system help.
The next revolution would be an application menu bar closer to the document itself : 9" screens of mac classic are over now, the mouse has quite a long way to go across the 22" screen to reach the file menu...
The slashdot crowd should definitly read "Limits to Growth" !
Twice a month there is a/. topic for which the most insightfull answer would be a key point from this book, but I barely see any reference to it.
Yes... it is sometimes called Club of Rome report and usually one think he knows what it is about after having read some random rant about it, written by people who haven't read the study either... Please, trust me: people really need to understand what it is about.
I do have read "Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update", the 3rd edition of this report written by Meadows' team.
The point is that they were remarkably right in their first report (1972).
Contrary to popular belief, The Limits to Growth scenarios by the team of analysts from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology did not predict world collapse by the end of the 20th century.
The whole book is very interesting, it has many facts about humanity Earth "burn rate".
What you should keep in mind: even with VERY optimistic discoveries, a good deal of technical breakthroughs, wise politics... in the very next decades we will face a growth halt and a decrease of average well being, production, etc. We could have maintained the well being and the population if we had done the right thing in 1990, but it is too late now to avoid this decrease.
We're in overdrive since the 90's, has many over studies show, often stated as "1,5 Earth needed".
And no matter how optimistic you are, how strong your faith is in technical advances, this won't make ocean fish replenish as we fish more and more with advanced techniques, this won't make available oil fields expand as we discover less than we pump out (even with more advanced techs), this won't make damaged farmlands heal as we over-exploit more and more lands, etc.
The analysis shows that 30 years of historical data compare favorably with key features of a business-as-usual scenario called the "standard run" scenario, which results in collapse of the global system midway through the 21st century.
So where the point here ? This discussion is about Earth population but without any reference to this Earth simulation where all scenarios show that we're heading to a population decrease in the next decades.
I think the point is worth enough to be mentioned, to the least.
Have you ever met someone who plays wow? I had a friend who definitely played much more than 6 hours a day while he was unemployed.
I've met a WoW player, employed in an IT office, playing a least 6 hours a day - at home...
He comes back at home, eat a quick lunch, and then plays from 8 pm to 4 am... Uh uh... that's 8 hours !! For a typical day. Lets make it an average 6 hours a day for week days. During week-end it could be twice as long... He has some summer hollydays, two weeks. Guess what ? He stayed at home for a massive WoW play time...
On the Internet 99% of posters talking about "club of Rome" haven't read "Limits to Growth" !
They think they know what it is about after having read some random rant about it, written by people who haven't read the study either...
I do have read "Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update", the 3rd edition of this report written by Meadows' team.
The point is that they were remarkably right in their first report (1972). Of course they didn't anticipate specific crisis such as the subprime crisis, this isn't the report goal.
Contrary to popular belief, The Limits to Growth scenarios by the team of analysts from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology did not predict world collapse by the end of the 20th century.
The whole book is very interesting, it has many facts about humanity Earth "burn rate".
What you should keep in mind: even with VERY optimistic discoveries, a good deal of technical breakthroughs, wise politics... in the very next decades we will face a growth halt and a decrease of average well being, production, etc. We could have maintained the well being and the population if we had done the right thing in 1990, but it is two late now to avoid this decrease.
We're in overdrive since the 90's, has many over studies show, often stated as "1,5 Earth needed". And no matter how optimistic you are, how strong your faith is in technical advances, this won't make ocean fish replenish as we fish more and more with advanced techniques, this won't make available oil fields expand as we discover less than we pump out (even with more advanced techs), this won't make damaged farmlands heal as we over-exploit more and more lands, etc.
The analysis shows that 30 years of historical data compare favorably with key features of a business-as-usual scenario called the "standard run" scenario, which results in collapse of the global system midway through the 21st century.
No matter what we do, all available fossil fuels will be burnt. The world is so hungry of them.
They haven't slowed extraction but try to get more and more. All the oil pumped, all the coal mined, all the tar sands processed, all the gas collected will be burned. (well, a small part goes to chemical transformation, plastics...)
If you don't want to add some more CO2 in the atmosphere, you shouldn't have extracted more fossil fuels first... (and forget this CO2 offset indulgences scam)
This xkcd n123 is one of my favorites since a long time !:D
By the way : why do you imagine that I said there's nothing like a "centrifugal force" in a rotating system coordinates ?
I kept it short but the long story is that:
- The "centrifugal force" is not a force due to interaction of objects or fields but a correction term introduced to compensate the non-inertial frame choosen.
- The author didn't mention any frame, he uses a non-inertial frame without thinking about it, and I'm not sure he knows what a non-inertial frame is and what using it implies.
- Using the terrestrial reference frame for rocketry is terrible, not only you need the centrifugal pseudo-force but also the Coriolis effect. Instead of making things simple you dive in a nightmare.
But this specific point isn't that much important, I think several other comments have pointed out what's wrong in his perspective, right from the begining of this/. story...
The problem is Top Gun was a chick flick where the leading man happened to be a pilot. I think your "sky fighters" sounds more like an action flick.
Chick flick - boy meets girl, boy looses his emotional crutch (his RIO copilot died) and questions if he's right or wrong. In the end, boy and girl live happily ever after. They fly around and stuff but it's just to give him something manly to do between romantic moments.
I'm guessing the action flick is just endless chase scenes and explosions like any other action flick.
Well... you guessed it wrong, Les Chevaliers du ciel (aka Sky Fighters) also has romance, espionage, love scenes, and beautiful landscape.
Talking about landscapes: a woman discovers how wonderful they are, she is sitting behind the pilot - just before he shows her how a real chase looks like (soft chase however, otherwise she would have fainted).
There aren't many explosions, only three I think.
The main point is that you can see in this movie real flight scenes you never saw before, because they invented some new devices. On board cameras with special stabilization, well there are not that many details about it but it was quite a challenge and army suppliers helped a lot here.
So Sky Fighters isn't "like any other action flick" (maybe my previous post was misleading)
This movie really stands out and set a new reference.
PS. BTW, regarding such movies - Les Chevaliers du ciel (aka Sky Fighters), while obviously also with completely redundant plot, is much more enjoyable all-flash-no-substance kind of deal - it has much more spectacular cinematography, nvm lots more minutes of actual flying. Unlike Top Gun (where most flight sequences filming was done from the ground) - in Les Chevaliers du ciel the majority of filming was done from the air, largely via cameras hidden in modified fuel tanks of fighters, to great effect.
Anyone who like technology, fighters, sonic boom at ground level, real footage from fighters, post-combustion by night,... in widescreen should see this awesome movie.
A meta study shows that the more you're educated, the less prone to religious beliefs you are, see how Richard Dawkins in the The God Delusion explains this.
A meta study is a qualitative compilation of different studies about a similar subject.
This new research result reinforces the conclusion of the meta-study, since religion mitigates the fear of death.
I've watched the video of "exploding" toys.
Quite often, if you look closely, you will see a strange glow on one side when magnets jumps. The glow is slightly purple and lasts something like 0.3s.
Does anyone know what's happening ? Where does this light comes from ?
I've been messing with home virtualisation since early 2001, rolling trials versions of VMWare Workstation.
MS Windows guest for internet browsing in a MS Windows host, for safety reasons, fear of Internet viruses and hacks, special set up for dial-up connection, need to be stable.
Linux guest sometimes, but usualy not virtualized (dual boot).
I switched to VMWare Player, tired of begging trial licences for Workstation every month or so. Player needs text editing to create a VM, but that's ok. Some extra features are missing but for standard use that's no big deal.
Then I went for Virtual Box, mature enough, easier to build a vm, still nothing to pay.
My VM Home Usage:
- Internet surfing , with strong isolation, when you're not so sure to have secured your system or when you hadn't time to do it.
- Software evaluation ( rollback to previous VM state in case the software blows your OS, or when the trial expires and you still need to evaluate)
- Get rid of dual booting Linux (for some cases)
- Keep ready a stable system with specific apps you need to run with reliability.
- some other usages maybe an AC would think of...
Slashdot Mirror
In TFA I haven't seen any actual picture (photo of magnified sample) made by this microscope.
Did I missed something ?
If dinosaurs are birds that means dinosaurs are not reptiles. Sorry dude reptiles and birds share as much in common as mammals and birds. The statement above is total nonsense.
I think it's more like :
Birds come from dinosaurs, and dinosaurs are reptiles.
Thus the "first non-bird species of reptile".
That is the first real reptile as we usually classify them.
My 2ct...
And here, we have the root of the matter. You don't like the lifestyle enjoyed in the US. Fine. Pardon if other people would like to continue the lifestyles that they currently enjoy. The cost of oil, driven up by increasing demand, is doing the job that you seem to want politicians to do. Residents of the US are already driving less without significantly altering their lifestyles.
Don't be so bitter about it all, particularly when it's already getting better.[my emphasis]
What a refreshing optimism !
Hum... wait. How much fuel residents "driving less" can save? How much fuel residents use compared to the global US consumption?
Trucks, planes, industry also need a lot of fuel to run and US lifestyle is based on them; this is not just about driving around in a car.
Most people wanting to continue the lifestyles that they currently enjoy (or just have enjoyed a few years ago) won't be able to.
It was based on cheap oil (bellow $70 a barrel), and cheap oil time is definitely over now.
The number of people living this lifestyle is steadily being eroded.
Bio-fuels won't compensate but I hope they will mitigate the problem
(Please correct above: Mitnik => Mitnick)
It seems to me that the movie is quite fair with you :
In a scene we can see "Kevin" ashamed by how they treat him in the press (like a dangerous criminal) and looking a computer screen, saying that "I could take millions of dollars right here, but I don't do that!". This scene describe a Mitnik rather honest but treated unfairly.
The Raleigh episode (with the Cellscope 2000 and FBI arrival) seems technically accurate.
Also the movie clearly depict a Kevin who use both social engineering and great technical skills.
I know they made up the "Contempt" program and your encounter with Shimomura, this was to make the movie "look good".
There are also a few silly things I guess.
However the movie seems not that far from reality.
Could you share your feelings about how they depicted you and the technical and social engineering parts ?
I myself planning to upgrade my Mandriva gateway & laptop (but not my file server, it's Mandriva 2008 with EVMS...).
I still wonder what to do... My last thought : backup docs and config files of my laptop and make a fresh install of Mageia , check if hardware management is 100% ok and use it a bit before replacing it with a Mandriva 2011 fresh install... check and practice again.
Then I will decide which distro to run. I hope there will be a significant difference from a user experience and admin maintainer point of view.
I will be sorry to ditch Mandriva, I'm with it since the beginning, Mandrake 5.
We once have discussed this question by email and you didn't want to do anything about it... /. users as potential friends in a journal entry, waiting for such a limit raise.
I've reached the maximum friends one can define... and I've queued many
Actually I'm not happy with you leaving /. , especially if you say you have no plan. I hope we'll have some news here about your next job or hobby. You will be back as a submitter, right?
I feel this is quite a special moment for the /. community.
I wish you a new brilliant idea to start over a new adventure like this. Or if you don't feel like starting such adventure, just email me the idea :P
Why is this on /. again?
We've got no chance , no matter how much theory we know.
Just because on /. we have so much faith in science...
And watch out the obligatory xkcd reference coming soon !
Maybe they also managed to get [,],` and | characters printed on their keyboard ? Or at least have their shortcut mentioned in the system help.
Use the Keyboard Viewer. BTW: I guess you meant ' or ‘? ` is a diacritic (grave accent) and is usually not used on it's own.
Yeah... that's a nice game, the Keyboard Viewer !
Launch the Keyboard Viewer, then try different combinations of modifier keys, and watch out where your beloved missing character is appearing on the layout !
Having a list of characters with the right key and modifiers explicited would have been too fast and too easy, right ? Well I didn't play much with the Keyboard Viewer and I cheated and looked for such a list on the Internet...
Let me guess... are you a Mac OS user ? Every time I tell them about my needs they end up asking why do I need to do such a thing... Believe me: I do need to type square brackets, pipe, and back-quote characters from time to time.
The next revolution would be an application menu bar closer to the document itself : 9" screens of mac classic are over now, the mouse has quite a long way to go across the 22" screen to reach the file menu ...
Ever heard about the concept of keyboard shortcuts? If necessary you can define your own, you know ...
Ok, you're definitely a Mac OS user :D ... anytime I mention an easy operation on Win/Linux made painful by design on Mac OS, they end up saying "You know, there are keyboard shortcuts". Well I had once another answer "Well, I use this $15 add-on app which is very useful..." to resize and organize windows. What a joke.
I won't learn a zillion shortcuts for every app operations I use once in a while, when a quick mouse click and hover works on properly designed interfaces.
MDI is a terrible UI. All modern software is moving away from it.
I wasn't sure about this, and finally I agree...
MDI vs SDI
Especially when we think about multiple monitor and desktops. And now window managers handle the grouping quite well in the task bar.
Please provide a link, as I don't see the news anywhere ...
Maybe they also managed to get [,],` and | characters printed on their keyboard ? Or at least have their shortcut mentioned in the system help.
The next revolution would be an application menu bar closer to the document itself : 9" screens of mac classic are over now, the mouse has quite a long way to go across the 22" screen to reach the file menu ...
The slashdot crowd should definitly read "Limits to Growth" ! /. topic for which the most insightfull answer would be a key point from this book, but I barely see any reference to it.
Twice a month there is a
Yes... it is sometimes called Club of Rome report and usually one think he knows what it is about after having read some random rant about it, written by people who haven't read the study either... Please, trust me: people really need to understand what it is about.
I do have read "Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update", the 3rd edition of this report written by Meadows' team.
The point is that they were remarkably right in their first report (1972).
If you don't have much time, at least read the book introduction and/or the abstract of this short study: A Comparison of `The Limits to Growth` with Thirty Years of Reality.
Contrary to popular belief, The Limits to Growth scenarios by the team of analysts from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology did not predict world collapse by the end of the 20th century.
The whole book is very interesting, it has many facts about humanity Earth "burn rate".
What you should keep in mind: even with VERY optimistic discoveries, a good deal of technical breakthroughs, wise politics... in the very next decades we will face a growth halt and a decrease of average well being, production, etc. We could have maintained the well being and the population if we had done the right thing in 1990, but it is too late now to avoid this decrease.
We're in overdrive since the 90's, has many over studies show, often stated as "1,5 Earth needed". And no matter how optimistic you are, how strong your faith is in technical advances, this won't make ocean fish replenish as we fish more and more with advanced techniques, this won't make available oil fields expand as we discover less than we pump out (even with more advanced techs), this won't make damaged farmlands heal as we over-exploit more and more lands, etc.
The analysis shows that 30 years of historical data compare favorably with key features of a business-as-usual scenario called the "standard run" scenario, which results in collapse of the global system midway through the 21st century.
So where the point here ? This discussion is about Earth population but without any reference to this Earth simulation where all scenarios show that we're heading to a population decrease in the next decades.
I think the point is worth enough to be mentioned, to the least.
1).One that goes for the really important stuff. IE Financial related stuff and my family. No one else gets it.
Ahem... the problem is that eventually some family members will send an e-mail with multiple recipient : you and a bunch of folks they knows.
Your address ends up in a list that propagate through replies to all, follow up, etc, to people you really don't know anything about.
Then once in a while some of their PC gets infected and all their email contacts are collected by a bot for spam and fishing.
Your e-mail address is no longer private...
Have you ever met someone who plays wow? I had a friend who definitely played much more than 6 hours a day while he was unemployed.
I've met a WoW player, employed in an IT office, playing a least 6 hours a day - at home...
He comes back at home, eat a quick lunch, and then plays from 8 pm to 4 am... Uh uh... that's 8 hours !! For a typical day. Lets make it an average 6 hours a day for week days. During week-end it could be twice as long... He has some summer hollydays, two weeks. Guess what ? He stayed at home for a massive WoW play time...
This is old news : I remember having read this news at least some 20 years ago !
( in a scientific magazine, not on /. )
On the Internet 99% of posters talking about "club of Rome" haven't read " Limits to Growth " !
They think they know what it is about after having read some random rant about it, written by people who haven't read the study either...
I do have read "Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update", the 3rd edition of this report written by Meadows' team.
The point is that they were remarkably right in their first report (1972). Of course they didn't anticipate specific crisis such as the subprime crisis, this isn't the report goal.
If you don't have much time, at least read the book introduction and/or the abstract of this short study: A Comparison of `The Limits to Growth` with Thirty Years of Reality.
Contrary to popular belief, The Limits to Growth scenarios by the team of analysts from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology did not predict world collapse by the end of the 20th century.
The whole book is very interesting, it has many facts about humanity Earth "burn rate".
What you should keep in mind: even with VERY optimistic discoveries, a good deal of technical breakthroughs, wise politics... in the very next decades we will face a growth halt and a decrease of average well being, production, etc. We could have maintained the well being and the population if we had done the right thing in 1990, but it is two late now to avoid this decrease.
We're in overdrive since the 90's, has many over studies show, often stated as "1,5 Earth needed".
And no matter how optimistic you are, how strong your faith is in technical advances, this won't make ocean fish replenish as we fish more and more with advanced techniques, this won't make available oil fields expand as we discover less than we pump out (even with more advanced techs), this won't make damaged farmlands heal as we over-exploit more and more lands, etc.
The analysis shows that 30 years of historical data compare favorably with key features of a business-as-usual scenario called the "standard run" scenario, which results in collapse of the global system midway through the 21st century.
No matter what we do, all available fossil fuels will be burnt. The world is so hungry of them.
They haven't slowed extraction but try to get more and more. All the oil pumped, all the coal mined, all the tar sands processed, all the gas collected will be burned. (well, a small part goes to chemical transformation, plastics...)
If you don't want to add some more CO2 in the atmosphere, you shouldn't have extracted more fossil fuels first...
(and forget this CO2 offset indulgences scam)
... is coming.
This is a realistic description of what could happen the day the dollar dies. I like this preview but it's frightening, at least for american people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N8gJSMoOJc
I was going to write a snarky comment myself, but I decided to just do an obligatory snarky reference to a comic instead:
http://xkcd.com/123/
This xkcd n123 is one of my favorites since a long time ! :D
By the way : why do you imagine that I said there's nothing like a "centrifugal force" in a rotating system coordinates ?
I kept it short but the long story is that :
- The "centrifugal force" is not a force due to interaction of objects or fields but a correction term introduced to compensate the non-inertial frame choosen.
- The author didn't mention any frame, he uses a non-inertial frame without thinking about it, and I'm not sure he knows what a non-inertial frame is and what using it implies.
- Using the terrestrial reference frame for rocketry is terrible, not only you need the centrifugal pseudo-force but also the Coriolis effect. Instead of making things simple you dive in a nightmare.
But this specific point isn't that much important, I think several other comments have pointed out what's wrong in his perspective, right from the begining of this /. story...
I think he should stick to sci-fi instead of writing bad journalism with a poor story of rocketry.
He has many points wrong, he thinks he has guessed how it went and why but failed to it.
At least he should have read Von Braun book about rocket science, but obviously he didn't.
I stoped reading his "perspective" here :
centrifugal force counteracts gravity
The problem is Top Gun was a chick flick where the leading man happened to be a pilot. I think your "sky fighters" sounds more like an action flick.
Chick flick - boy meets girl, boy looses his emotional crutch (his RIO copilot died) and questions if he's right or wrong. In the end, boy and girl live happily ever after. They fly around and stuff but it's just to give him something manly to do between romantic moments.
I'm guessing the action flick is just endless chase scenes and explosions like any other action flick.
Well... you guessed it wrong, Les Chevaliers du ciel (aka Sky Fighters) also has romance, espionage, love scenes, and beautiful landscape.
Talking about landscapes: a woman discovers how wonderful they are, she is sitting behind the pilot - just before he shows her how a real chase looks like (soft chase however, otherwise she would have fainted).
There aren't many explosions, only three I think.
The main point is that you can see in this movie real flight scenes you never saw before, because they invented some new devices. On board cameras with special stabilization, well there are not that many details about it but it was quite a challenge and army suppliers helped a lot here.
So Sky Fighters isn't "like any other action flick" (maybe my previous post was misleading) This movie really stands out and set a new reference.
PS. BTW, regarding such movies - Les Chevaliers du ciel (aka Sky Fighters), while obviously also with completely redundant plot, is much more enjoyable all-flash-no-substance kind of deal - it has much more spectacular cinematography, nvm lots more minutes of actual flying. Unlike Top Gun (where most flight sequences filming was done from the ground) - in Les Chevaliers du ciel the majority of filming was done from the air, largely via cameras hidden in modified fuel tanks of fighters, to great effect.
Anyone who like technology, fighters, sonic boom at ground level, real footage from fighters, post-combustion by night, ... in widescreen should see this awesome movie.
A meta study shows that the more you're educated, the less prone to religious beliefs you are, see how Richard Dawkins in the The God Delusion explains this.
A meta study is a qualitative compilation of different studies about a similar subject.
This new research result reinforces the conclusion of the meta-study, since religion mitigates the fear of death.
I've watched the video of "exploding" toys. .
Quite often, if you look closely, you will see a strange glow on one side when magnets jumps. The glow is slightly purple and lasts something like 0.3s
Does anyone know what's happening ? Where does this light comes from ?
I've been messing with home virtualisation since early 2001, rolling trials versions of VMWare Workstation.
MS Windows guest for internet browsing in a MS Windows host, for safety reasons, fear of Internet viruses and hacks, special set up for dial-up connection, need to be stable.
Linux guest sometimes, but usualy not virtualized (dual boot).
I switched to VMWare Player, tired of begging trial licences for Workstation every month or so. Player needs text editing to create a VM, but that's ok. Some extra features are missing but for standard use that's no big deal.
Then I went for Virtual Box, mature enough, easier to build a vm, still nothing to pay.
My VM Home Usage :
- Internet surfing , with strong isolation, when you're not so sure to have secured your system or when you hadn't time to do it.
- Software evaluation ( rollback to previous VM state in case the software blows your OS, or when the trial expires and you still need to evaluate)
- Get rid of dual booting Linux (for some cases)
- Keep ready a stable system with specific apps you need to run with reliability.
- some other usages maybe an AC would think of...