Was "ghod forbid" a typo? I like it. There are so many sayings in general use that use the 'g' word that it's to inconvenient to refrain from using. If we use ghod (or Ghod?) then we can use it and release any tie to the big G, who I don't want to attribute any credit to when I say things like "Good Ghod that thing is HUGE!".
Thing is, in Munich, it's legal so the density of fireworks above the city it immense. Also, there are no skyscrapers there which just adds to the effect.
Are there any hills in LA that would tower over even the highest skyscraper there?
It wold be for my newish laptop, so Win7. Previously it would have been some flavour of Linux but I got back into gaming again with this new laptop so haven't uninstalled Win7 yet. I don't plan on using virtual memory - I haven't got anywhere near full memory utilisation yet (It has 8GB).
I guess I will either be looking at a current Intel or OCZ, probably in the ~128GB range. It would be tight, so maybe need to go to ~256GB
It is still the right word. It is still modulating and demodulating between digital signals and analogue signals (the carrier on digital cable is still analogue).
Got any more info on this? I am looking at getting one some time in the coming months. From what I can gather, some of the 'lesser' products with older tech suffer from reliability problems, but the higher end stuff does not?
As a field that I have not researched enough yet, I find that there is a terrible amount of choice as to which ones are available. Hard to know which ones you should/should not get, which ones are faster/slower etc.
And it's changing fast, so every time I *google* it, I find older comparisons and not much up-to-date info.
I think that was just my bad wording, what I was trying to say was that he was basically telling the judges to ignore what was written down. Do you know the part I am talking about? I cba looking for it and typing it all out word for word. I was just pointing out that it seemed quite telling (to me, as an IANAL).
IANAL. I am about half way through the audio now and a few things strike me...
1. The RIAA lawyer is constantly talking about re-interpreting the written law in different ways. At one point he said to the judge, something along the lines of "Your honour should not read that exerpt of the law literally". Really? Don't interpret written law literally? Just make it up as you go along?
2. A little later, the judge was talking to the defendants lawyer about redoing the first trial and said "You rolled your dice with the first trial and lost". Really? This whole trial is, metaphorically speaking, a big old dice rolling experiment? Sounds about right.
So there are a lot of new names and jargon in the summary that I am not yet familiar with, but could you not just do this before using virtual machines?
I am sure I am missing the bigger picture here somehow...
Sure, it's better than nothing, I grant you that. But better than upping the driving TEST standards so that half the population become carless, up the driving EDUCATION standards, so that rather than lose their licence, they learn how to drive better.
I often think I'd like to start down a path of evangelising better driver education, but not being a 'significant political person' I would not be able to make a dent, not to mention the huge amount of resistance from the masses who just don't think they need to learn to drive any better.
So I just sit here, complain about it to myself and, occasionally, rant about it online when I am in a bad mood:)
Sorry to hear about your parents misfortune, but seriously, if someone can't see them on the junction before rolling through, they are either not paying attention or cannot see (or if the visibility is poor, sure, stop and be extra cautious). I think people are confusing 'rolling through a stop sign and causing risk' with 'fuckwitt drivers who are not paying attention to the task at hand, probably reading a text message, and causing risk'.
And before you say it, yes, we all make mistakes and 'miss' seeing things from time to time. This could just as easily happen at 0mph as it could at 2mph.
For some reason I am in a ranty mood this morning and don't care about my karma, sorry:)
Maybe this is where I was confused, I don't know the jargon. Yes, I was referring to a rolling stop, not blasting through at 10,20,30+.
I am one of the few people that comes to a full stop (Can't afford points on my licence), most other people I see at 4-way stop signs do rolling stops. Then it becomes an annoying waiting game of is the other person going to be overly rude and go before me even though I stopped and they didn't (They rolled, so therefore I stopped 'first'), or are they going to be overly polite and wave me even though they blatantly stopped first as I rolled, only stopping after they did as to avoid 'stopped at the same time' confusion (hint, YOU STOPPED FIRST, GO FFS!!).
Oh man, please please just give me roundabouts:( I miss my roundabouts, they just work so well.
For some reason I am in a ranty mood this morning and don't care about my karma, sorry:)
If I don't see it at 2mph, I'm not going to see it at 0mph. How is this 2mph difference going to magically improve my eyesight?
If you can't see and be aware of everything around you, you should not be driving, period. The amount of drivers I see driving as if they have blinkers on is quite simply shocking. For people driving like this (95+% of drivers I see on the road), I fully agree that a stop sign is worthy. But the solution is to make people more aware of their surroundings (i.e better driver education), not ruining the flow for people who do have good awareness.
If that woman nearly t-boned you, you were RIGHT IN FRONT OF HER when she rolled though the stop sign. It sounds like she should not have a license if she cannot see in front of her. She should not be on the road.
The only wisdom I see in a 4-way stop is that it's a quick, dirty inefficient fix for a continent of (mostly) bad drivers. Like I said, put in roundabouts (where suitable) and EDUCATE DRIVERS.
For some reason I am in a ranty mood this morning and don't care about my karma, sorry:)
Sorry, I just need to go off on a tangent here. For the record, I begrudgingly obey all stop signs.
But tell me, where is this 'endangering people' coming from in the situation where you roll through a 4-way stop when there are no cars even remotely visible on any of the adjoining roads? I can think of one danger vector - the guy speeding at 100mph without any intent of stopping who plows into the side of you, but he is coming whether you stopped or not.
I really really hate stop signs and wish they would get with the times and put in more roundabouts or at least 'give way/yield' signage, but I have to live with them for now. I just don't see how not stopping at an empty stop intersection is in the least bit dangerous.
"Approximately how many minutes would a theoretical 'gravity train' take to get from A to B on an earth-sized planet assuming that frictional losses can be completely overcome?"
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting, then it could work I suppose.
The mountain thing would not work though, tooo far away and too high! With the Munich idea, Olympiaberg is right in the thick of it :)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089114/plotsummary
They made an inertia free passenger type vehicle. This stuff always reminds me of that :)
Was "ghod forbid" a typo? I like it. There are so many sayings in general use that use the 'g' word that it's to inconvenient to refrain from using. If we use ghod (or Ghod?) then we can use it and release any tie to the big G, who I don't want to attribute any credit to when I say things like "Good Ghod that thing is HUGE!".
Thing is, in Munich, it's legal so the density of fireworks above the city it immense. Also, there are no skyscrapers there which just adds to the effect.
Are there any hills in LA that would tower over even the highest skyscraper there?
Stand at the top of Olympiaberg in Munich at midnight on NYE.
The *entire* city is lit up with fireworks from pretty much every street, and it goes on for almost an hour.
Beats *any* display I have ever seen or heard of, it's truly awesome.
It wold be for my newish laptop, so Win7. Previously it would have been some flavour of Linux but I got back into gaming again with this new laptop so haven't uninstalled Win7 yet. I don't plan on using virtual memory - I haven't got anywhere near full memory utilisation yet (It has 8GB).
I guess I will either be looking at a current Intel or OCZ, probably in the ~128GB range. It would be tight, so maybe need to go to ~256GB
I was actually about to ask about OCZ. Seems that they are in the limelight in my local computer shop. Samsung too.
I guess I should pretty much ignore any other brands...?
It is still the right word. It is still modulating and demodulating between digital signals and analogue signals (the carrier on digital cable is still analogue).
Got any more info on this? I am looking at getting one some time in the coming months. From what I can gather, some of the 'lesser' products with older tech suffer from reliability problems, but the higher end stuff does not?
As a field that I have not researched enough yet, I find that there is a terrible amount of choice as to which ones are available. Hard to know which ones you should/should not get, which ones are faster/slower etc.
And it's changing fast, so every time I *google* it, I find older comparisons and not much up-to-date info.
I like what you have to say. Where do I sign?
That is exactly the part I was referring to. Thanks :)
I think that was just my bad wording, what I was trying to say was that he was basically telling the judges to ignore what was written down. Do you know the part I am talking about? I cba looking for it and typing it all out word for word. I was just pointing out that it seemed quite telling (to me, as an IANAL).
I was advocating nothing, I was questioning it.
IANAL. I am about half way through the audio now and a few things strike me...
1. The RIAA lawyer is constantly talking about re-interpreting the written law in different ways. At one point he said to the judge, something along the lines of "Your honour should not read that exerpt of the law literally". Really? Don't interpret written law literally? Just make it up as you go along?
2. A little later, the judge was talking to the defendants lawyer about redoing the first trial and said "You rolled your dice with the first trial and lost". Really? This whole trial is, metaphorically speaking, a big old dice rolling experiment? Sounds about right.
You forgot to give your insightful predictions on the appeals court decisions even though you didn't RTFA
So there are a lot of new names and jargon in the summary that I am not yet familiar with, but could you not just do this before using virtual machines?
I am sure I am missing the bigger picture here somehow...
And some fairy cake!
Or Fintlewoodlewix.
Sure, it's better than nothing, I grant you that. But better than upping the driving TEST standards so that half the population become carless, up the driving EDUCATION standards, so that rather than lose their licence, they learn how to drive better.
I often think I'd like to start down a path of evangelising better driver education, but not being a 'significant political person' I would not be able to make a dent, not to mention the huge amount of resistance from the masses who just don't think they need to learn to drive any better.
So I just sit here, complain about it to myself and, occasionally, rant about it online when I am in a bad mood :)
I am in a better mood today :)
Then you will get even more confused when it becomes a new internet meme and you just sit there in confusion every time you see it.
That, or vagina.
Sorry to hear about your parents misfortune, but seriously, if someone can't see them on the junction before rolling through, they are either not paying attention or cannot see (or if the visibility is poor, sure, stop and be extra cautious). I think people are confusing 'rolling through a stop sign and causing risk' with 'fuckwitt drivers who are not paying attention to the task at hand, probably reading a text message, and causing risk'.
And before you say it, yes, we all make mistakes and 'miss' seeing things from time to time. This could just as easily happen at 0mph as it could at 2mph.
For some reason I am in a ranty mood this morning and don't care about my karma, sorry :)
Maybe this is where I was confused, I don't know the jargon. Yes, I was referring to a rolling stop, not blasting through at 10,20,30+.
I am one of the few people that comes to a full stop (Can't afford points on my licence), most other people I see at 4-way stop signs do rolling stops. Then it becomes an annoying waiting game of is the other person going to be overly rude and go before me even though I stopped and they didn't (They rolled, so therefore I stopped 'first'), or are they going to be overly polite and wave me even though they blatantly stopped first as I rolled, only stopping after they did as to avoid 'stopped at the same time' confusion (hint, YOU STOPPED FIRST, GO FFS!!).
Oh man, please please just give me roundabouts :( I miss my roundabouts, they just work so well.
For some reason I am in a ranty mood this morning and don't care about my karma, sorry :)
If I don't see it at 2mph, I'm not going to see it at 0mph. How is this 2mph difference going to magically improve my eyesight?
If you can't see and be aware of everything around you, you should not be driving, period. The amount of drivers I see driving as if they have blinkers on is quite simply shocking. For people driving like this (95+% of drivers I see on the road), I fully agree that a stop sign is worthy. But the solution is to make people more aware of their surroundings (i.e better driver education), not ruining the flow for people who do have good awareness.
If that woman nearly t-boned you, you were RIGHT IN FRONT OF HER when she rolled though the stop sign. It sounds like she should not have a license if she cannot see in front of her. She should not be on the road.
The only wisdom I see in a 4-way stop is that it's a quick, dirty inefficient fix for a continent of (mostly) bad drivers. Like I said, put in roundabouts (where suitable) and EDUCATE DRIVERS.
For some reason I am in a ranty mood this morning and don't care about my karma, sorry :)
Sorry, I just need to go off on a tangent here. For the record, I begrudgingly obey all stop signs.
But tell me, where is this 'endangering people' coming from in the situation where you roll through a 4-way stop when there are no cars even remotely visible on any of the adjoining roads? I can think of one danger vector - the guy speeding at 100mph without any intent of stopping who plows into the side of you, but he is coming whether you stopped or not.
I really really hate stop signs and wish they would get with the times and put in more roundabouts or at least 'give way/yield' signage, but I have to live with them for now. I just don't see how not stopping at an empty stop intersection is in the least bit dangerous.
"Approximately how many minutes would a theoretical 'gravity train' take to get from A to B on an earth-sized planet assuming that frictional losses can be completely overcome?"