When I was ten, to reboot the computer you held it upside down over your head and shook it. Oh wait, that was 'Etch-a-Sketch'. Holy crap, how times have changed!
...because China's and India's needs are growing so quickly... And how would you propose to implement your proposals, anyway? It would take oppressive and violent acts of governments around the world...
This might be the only use of nuclear power that would ensure that India and China would not over polute the rest of the world
And it won't happen. Sorry. Unless they do it to themselves. And the more third world countries get nuclear power, the more likely something like this becomes.
And act smug and tell other countries how to do things but not want to get involved. And know that massacres in Rawanda are going to happen because their top general is there and keeps trying to tell the government but they don't do anything about it. Or think that they ought to get out of Afganistan because it's not 'our' business if Taliban shoot women in the head for showing their face or trying to learn to read.
Oh wait, that's Canada I'm talking about...
Dude, the War of 1812 ended almost 200 years ago. Get the fuck over it already.
I was wondering about Electro Magnetic Pulses. Can something like this be hardened for military use? If the military can't use it, I wonder how much money the government would throw into this. I know they aren't the only drivers of technology, but you have to recognize that the military has historically been pretty much one of the largest (if not the largets outright).
I'm glad you mentioned the better tonal range the larger format you go. A lot of folks don't have experience with these kinds of things. The tone in large and medium format prints is so much better than 35mm (resolution be damned!:-) .
One thing you haven't noted is the difference in latitude between digital and film. Positive film *might* have around the same latitude as digital, but I would warrant that even it is probably better. Most certainly black and white film has way more latitude than digital... at any film size.
For Windows users who are tired of the RealPlayer and Quicktime spyware crap, if you go here (Free-Codecs.com), you can get "Media Player Classic" and codecs that will view realplayer codecs without all the bullshit generally associated with the 'real' realplayer (or quicktime B.S. too). I was avoiding those spyware apps and media formats until I found this. I think the player comes with the codecs, but if not, also get the k-lite codec pack and it will install codecs for real and quicktime.
There is a free download for real player for Linux that works pretty good.
Didn't say I never heard of glycerol. I was replying to your comment:
Its called transesterification. It seperates the glycerine out of the fat... So biodiesel actually creates MORE glycerine that not making biodiesel, which will result in cheaper soap, not more expensive.
By removing the fatty acid to make bio-diesel, there will be less fatty acid to make soap, as the long chain fatty acid is what is hydrolized into the R-CO2-Na soap molecules. I don't doubt that glycerol is worth a lot of money. I just like to be able to wash my clothes, and myself, and the dishes, etc.:-)
I don't want to have to pay $50.00 to take a batch.;-D But I also would like to see less greenhouse gases. Thanks for the info on transesterification. I didn't know much about it. Cheers.
This immediately made me think about how airport security is only now (after 911) starting to let people carry nail clippers and such on board planes. I wonder what they'll think of the many business travellers wanting to board aeroplanes, potentially each with a small flask of very flamible methanol. They'll think of something to make it work, but it will probably cost the consumer a lot more.
However, that CO2 was trapped by plants in the last year or two. Any large extent to which we switch to biodiesel will dramatically reduce net CO2 emissions. Petroleum based diesel emits CO2 that was trapped by plants tens of thousands of years ago (or more). This causes a shift in greenhouse gases. By and large, B100 biodiesel does not.
Just curious... does this then mean that with bio-diesal, we are releasing C02, some of which is just recycled back to the atmosphere, but some of which might otherwise have been bound up for tens of thousands of years (or more), so that we really are increasing it in the atmosphere? Just a point to ponder. But I agree, better than just wholesale release of CO2 that is already bound.
One other thing... right now in the meat industry, more money is made from the parts of the cow that you can't eat than from the parts you can. The fats are used to make soaps, glycerine based products, etc. The "inedible" protein is extracted to make gelatins, glue, etc. We know about the protein meal and parts people don't normally eat that will go into dog food etc. The calcium is used whatever you need calcium for. The hide for leather products. The only thing from a cow that is not used right now is the 'moo'. And this goes pretty much for all other animal processing activities. If we tap into that supply, we might end up paying $100.00 just to do the laundry.:-)
If I wasn't expecting something like this (due to the nature of this thread) I would have probably laughed my ass off at this too! I liked the original site about 'French Victories' as this isn't the first time I have heard people poke fun at French military prowess. Even Billy Connolly about 10 years ago made a joke something like (and I paraphrase), "the French have planted trees along the Champs Elysees... now the next time the Germans come, they can march in the shade." Heck, one of the Foreign Legion's biggest celebrations is about when they got their asses kicked by the Mexicans in 1863 called "Camerone Day". They march around a wooden hand. Mind you, they fought pretty damned hard. Hard enough to kind of freak out the Mexican commander.
Anyway, no matter who you are, it is pretty hard to be up for ever. Eventually you are going to lose some battle and come back down to earth. It happened from Babylon, through Egypt, Greece, Rome, on up through the ages. There aren't too many who just decided to quit while on a winning streak. Even the Mongols eventually gave everything back up (why would you move back to Mongolia willingly:-)... and they pretty much had the most successful military leader ever: Ghengis Khan, who captured most of Eurasia (that's like 13 extra pieces per turn isn't it?). I guess in the end, history shows that those at the top will eventually lose and slide down... maybe not all in big spectacular losses, but sure enough none the less. So the fact that France lost a lot of wars... just means they've been around a lot longer than some countries. But it is still fun to poke fun at others' misfortunes isn't it. Why else would we laugh at a film of someone stepping on a rake? As a bit of comparison, I notice Britain is not currently run by the Picts, or Druid preists, or the later arriving Celts (originally from central and east Europe), or the Romans, or the Angles, or the Saxons, or the Normans... well... maybe them... but they were from France...;-) Every society will eventually be humbled.
Truthfully, I didn't like that one bit. To me marriage _is_ a religious institution and was defined as the union of one man and one woman. Period. I don't mind people creating civil unions between same sex partners, and allowing them a similar legal standing as a marriage. After all, we can't change who people are, so why try. We're not tasked with judging them either. For those who believe, that's God's job, not mine or yours. But I am whole-heartedly against the idea of re-defining marriage. I consider that stepping on freedom of religion.
I wouldn't call it luck.:-) I really was getting gun shy about these kinds of conversations there. The number cars I saw there with those 'Jesus fish' on the back is pretty telling... and yes there were those with 'Darwin Fish' too, thank goodness (including mine after a while). But like I said, I still generally like St. Louis. I definitely wouldn't if everyone had an anti-evolution mindset. But there were definitely *way* more people who didn't believe in evolution than I have seen anywhere else (I saw it in K.C. but only travelling there to work a week or two at a time didn't give me enough exposure to make any reasonable conclusions... except for the fact the papers there have been full of the creationism/ID arguments for some time now).
Of interest is that the first place I ever heard the term 'intellegent design' was from one of the best programmers I have had the pleasure to work with, in Overland Park, Kansas (part of metro K.C.). It blew me away that a guy that smart didn't believe in evolution. He was a really nice guy, but very into his religion.
In this case the people in question are simply trying to muddy the waters...
Don't redefine words (like science) to try to get around the problem
Exactly what I am saying... having lived in Missouri for the last 5 years I ran into a lot of people who don't believe in evolution at all. (I am back north again but actually liked St. Louis... mostly for the blues music... unbelievably good.) These people, believe it or not, included engineers and scientists. For example, I ran into a guy who was a senior scientist/engineer at Monsanto (their head office is in St. Louis) for a good number of years. I figure that this was highly ironic since Monsanto is one of the biggest companies involved in genetically modified foods... to me, genetics is a direct descendant of evolutionary theories.
To be honest I am quite exasperated with the dogmatic thinking of these people. They are what is referred to as 'legalists'. People who believe that 100% of what is said in the bible is hard fact. The idea that the text might include parables or allegories is not allowed... it is 100% fact (I wish they would explain to me who Cain and Abel married). This type of thinking is so prevalent in the mid-west that you start asking people if they believe in evolution before even beginning a conversation with them... to know if you can have an intelligent conversation or not. I find that now, I have lost patience with that kind of 'legalist' thinking. No apologies for my comment. And thank God not everyone thinks like that (note that yes, I do capitalize 'God').
You are absolutely correct. So correct in fact that I think I'll re-define 'genius' to mean: "a rube who doesn't understand that you can't just redefine words that the rest of the world has agreed as to the meaning of, just to suit your own agenda."
It would be nice if someone quoting a post in an article to sensationalize, at least made sure the quote was not misleading or wrong... there were no satellites in space during World War One, so of course the Halifax Explosion (which really was the largest non-nuclear explosion recorded) was not the largest non-nuclear explosion seen from space.
From the post:
The resulting event is reportedly the largest non-nuclear explosion in the planet's history.
The actual quote from a hyperlink in the article mentioned in the post:
"The result was the most monumental non-nuclear explosion and fire ever seen from space"
The actual largest non-nuclear explosion occured during World War One in Halifax Harbour when an munitions ship collided with another ship and exploded. It is known as the Halifax Explosion. It was picked up on seismographs and created an 18 metre tsunami.
Just don't tell the astronauts about (nor provide acess to) condoms. In fact, just teach them about the beauty of abstinence before they leave. They won't even think about sex then! It's simple really.
Last time I checked, both Canada and the US did trade with countries other than each other.
Canada does about 80% or more of its trade with the U.S. (which does about 25% of its trade with Canada). The largest share of that is from Ontario. I don't blame them one bit for trying to keep in sync' and believe it is in their best self interest. Economically, Canada relies much more on America than America relies on Canada.
If Canada doesn't want to rely as much on America, then it should develop more trading partners... but the U.S. will always be the major trading partner just due to its proximity. Another thing Canada could do is like what they do in Quebec and Israel: pay people a bunch of money whenever they have kids. That would help encourage Canadians to increase the population. With more people would come more economic leverage as they would be able to create a larger economic output.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems MMO admins want everybody to spend lots of time playing their game, rather than have any sort of skill
Maybe you should get the skill by actually playing the game yourself.
When I was ten, to reboot the computer you held it upside down over your head and shook it. Oh wait, that was 'Etch-a-Sketch'. Holy crap, how times have changed!
This might be the only use of nuclear power that would ensure that India and China would not over polute the rest of the world
And it won't happen. Sorry. Unless they do it to themselves. And the more third world countries get nuclear power, the more likely something like this becomes.
The left?
Oh wait, that's Canada I'm talking about...
Dude, the War of 1812 ended almost 200 years ago. Get the fuck over it already.
I was wondering about Electro Magnetic Pulses. Can something like this be hardened for military use? If the military can't use it, I wonder how much money the government would throw into this. I know they aren't the only drivers of technology, but you have to recognize that the military has historically been pretty much one of the largest (if not the largets outright).
From the original post... "...but I have no idea clue how to code or program. Due to my demanding job, I also have no time to learn how to code. "
One thing you haven't noted is the difference in latitude between digital and film. Positive film *might* have around the same latitude as digital, but I would warrant that even it is probably better. Most certainly black and white film has way more latitude than digital... at any film size.
There is a free download for real player for Linux that works pretty good.
Its called transesterification. It seperates the glycerine out of the fat... So biodiesel actually creates MORE glycerine that not making biodiesel, which will result in cheaper soap, not more expensive.
By removing the fatty acid to make bio-diesel, there will be less fatty acid to make soap, as the long chain fatty acid is what is hydrolized into the R-CO2-Na soap molecules. I don't doubt that glycerol is worth a lot of money. I just like to be able to wash my clothes, and myself, and the dishes, etc. :-)
I don't want to have to pay $50.00 to take a batch. ;-D But I also would like to see less greenhouse gases. Thanks for the info on transesterification. I didn't know much about it. Cheers.
This immediately made me think about how airport security is only now (after 911) starting to let people carry nail clippers and such on board planes. I wonder what they'll think of the many business travellers wanting to board aeroplanes, potentially each with a small flask of very flamible methanol. They'll think of something to make it work, but it will probably cost the consumer a lot more.
But it is the fatty acid that they use to make the soap during saponification, not the glycerol.
Just curious... does this then mean that with bio-diesal, we are releasing C02, some of which is just recycled back to the atmosphere, but some of which might otherwise have been bound up for tens of thousands of years (or more), so that we really are increasing it in the atmosphere? Just a point to ponder. But I agree, better than just wholesale release of CO2 that is already bound.
One other thing... right now in the meat industry, more money is made from the parts of the cow that you can't eat than from the parts you can. The fats are used to make soaps, glycerine based products, etc. The "inedible" protein is extracted to make gelatins, glue, etc. We know about the protein meal and parts people don't normally eat that will go into dog food etc. The calcium is used whatever you need calcium for. The hide for leather products. The only thing from a cow that is not used right now is the 'moo'. And this goes pretty much for all other animal processing activities. If we tap into that supply, we might end up paying $100.00 just to do the laundry. :-)
Anyway, no matter who you are, it is pretty hard to be up for ever. Eventually you are going to lose some battle and come back down to earth. It happened from Babylon, through Egypt, Greece, Rome, on up through the ages. There aren't too many who just decided to quit while on a winning streak. Even the Mongols eventually gave everything back up (why would you move back to Mongolia willingly :-)... and they pretty much had the most successful military leader ever: Ghengis Khan, who captured most of Eurasia (that's like 13 extra pieces per turn isn't it?). I guess in the end, history shows that those at the top will eventually lose and slide down... maybe not all in big spectacular losses, but sure enough none the less. So the fact that France lost a lot of wars... just means they've been around a lot longer than some countries. But it is still fun to poke fun at others' misfortunes isn't it. Why else would we laugh at a film of someone stepping on a rake? As a bit of comparison, I notice Britain is not currently run by the Picts, or Druid preists, or the later arriving Celts (originally from central and east Europe), or the Romans, or the Angles, or the Saxons, or the Normans... well... maybe them... but they were from France... ;-) Every society will eventually be humbled.
That is beyond funny.
Now I can have a long hot shower in 30 seconds.
Truthfully, I didn't like that one bit. To me marriage _is_ a religious institution and was defined as the union of one man and one woman. Period. I don't mind people creating civil unions between same sex partners, and allowing them a similar legal standing as a marriage. After all, we can't change who people are, so why try. We're not tasked with judging them either. For those who believe, that's God's job, not mine or yours. But I am whole-heartedly against the idea of re-defining marriage. I consider that stepping on freedom of religion.
Of interest is that the first place I ever heard the term 'intellegent design' was from one of the best programmers I have had the pleasure to work with, in Overland Park, Kansas (part of metro K.C.). It blew me away that a guy that smart didn't believe in evolution. He was a really nice guy, but very into his religion.
Don't redefine words (like science) to try to get around the problem
Exactly what I am saying... having lived in Missouri for the last 5 years I ran into a lot of people who don't believe in evolution at all. (I am back north again but actually liked St. Louis... mostly for the blues music... unbelievably good.) These people, believe it or not, included engineers and scientists. For example, I ran into a guy who was a senior scientist/engineer at Monsanto (their head office is in St. Louis) for a good number of years. I figure that this was highly ironic since Monsanto is one of the biggest companies involved in genetically modified foods... to me, genetics is a direct descendant of evolutionary theories.
To be honest I am quite exasperated with the dogmatic thinking of these people. They are what is referred to as 'legalists'. People who believe that 100% of what is said in the bible is hard fact. The idea that the text might include parables or allegories is not allowed... it is 100% fact (I wish they would explain to me who Cain and Abel married). This type of thinking is so prevalent in the mid-west that you start asking people if they believe in evolution before even beginning a conversation with them... to know if you can have an intelligent conversation or not. I find that now, I have lost patience with that kind of 'legalist' thinking. No apologies for my comment. And thank God not everyone thinks like that (note that yes, I do capitalize 'God').
You sir, are a genius.
From the post:
The resulting event is reportedly the largest non-nuclear explosion in the planet's history.
The actual quote from a hyperlink in the article mentioned in the post:
"The result was the most monumental non-nuclear explosion and fire ever seen from space"
The actual largest non-nuclear explosion occured during World War One in Halifax Harbour when an munitions ship collided with another ship and exploded. It is known as the Halifax Explosion. It was picked up on seismographs and created an 18 metre tsunami.
The interview was conducted mainly with the senior Song since Yoo-geun is lacking in his ability to communicate with adults.
Damn... I forgot. That doesn't work.
Canada does about 80% or more of its trade with the U.S. (which does about 25% of its trade with Canada). The largest share of that is from Ontario. I don't blame them one bit for trying to keep in sync' and believe it is in their best self interest. Economically, Canada relies much more on America than America relies on Canada.
If Canada doesn't want to rely as much on America, then it should develop more trading partners... but the U.S. will always be the major trading partner just due to its proximity. Another thing Canada could do is like what they do in Quebec and Israel: pay people a bunch of money whenever they have kids. That would help encourage Canadians to increase the population. With more people would come more economic leverage as they would be able to create a larger economic output.
And it's on the left coast.