For fear of being eaten by a Nazgul I figure. At the end of the movie they would all be gone, so clear skies. I am only speculating. It also makes for a more epic 12 hour movie if you have to walk and can't take Giant Eagle Airlines.
Mr Anderson: Welcome to Rivendell Frodo! Frodo: Oh Hai! Can Eagles fly me to Mt Doom? Mr. Anderson: (shrug) Sure... Eagle: Squaack! Frodo: Weeee! Frodo: Hai Mt Doom! (drop) One Ring: (Plink, Hisss) (Roll Credits) The End.
I suppose that is natural selection for generals though. When you dispose of those that don't agree with you, what you are left with are "yes men". Of course perhaps some just got caught up with the idea after having so much success everywhere else. Of course they should be able to tell the difference between invading Poland or France and a place like Russia.
May have helped, but I don't think a month would have made that much difference in the big picture.
Ya the show had stuff on the Russian tanks as well, and as I recall they were big fans. It was typical Russian design, simplicity to the point of spartan, but designed well. The only thing that stuck out for me was they had a nickname (which eludes me now) about the T34 because the manufacturing process in Russia wasn't exactly very precise. Apparently after first using them off the assembly line, you had to clean out a couple of pounds of metal shavings that would come off the tank in various places particularly the gearbox I believe.
I remember seeing a special on TV about tanks and WW2.
Basically: Germans ones were WAY better, but had fewer and more expensive, USA ones were crap, but they had boatloads of them (ha a pun!)
I think the stat was something like the Germans had about 7100 tanks (combined Tigers and Panthers) and the USA sent over about 60,000 Sherman. It was simply numbers.
They went on to say that the US tanks were pretty useless against German tanks, and a German tank had little fear of damage unless hit by a lucky shot. The US tanks however could be everywhere and were effective against infantry. A single German tank could take out 20 or 30 US tanks if they were engaged, however after awhile the US figured this out and didn't engage them, tank on tank. From what it went on to say that most German tanks were disabled, by lack or material, repairs, fuel, munitions, or in battle by other means from air forces, artillery, and the like.
I don't think this bill has anything to do with its stated purposes.
I smell RIAA, and various other copyright lobbyists.
This is a "SAVE THE CHILDREN" attempt to get around Canadian privacy laws to get at, and identify people for civil legal purposes. Not criminal.
Gangsters, Pedos, and Terrorists oh my! My ass. Lions, Tigers, and Bears! Oh No!
I cannot believe how thinly veiled this attempt is to do an end run around our privacy rights simply so some industries can start suing Canadian media downloaders.
Right now the ONLY reason we in Canada are not getting our grandmothers getting the bejesus sued out of them is our privacy laws. In the US they get a John Doe warrant in some wishy washy State for force the ISP to release the identity of the individual. They then drop the charges against John Doe, and place new ones against the named individual somewhere else. In Canada they can't do this. You can change an unnamed individual. You have to have an identity first. Our privacy laws here are stronger. So far they have tried to get our telecoms to capitulate, but thus far have been told to bugger off. In fact with our privacy laws one could argue they they might be held libel for releasing the information in the first place.
Case in point the police regularly get information from ISP, and Telecoms all the time. They have a right to it. All they have to do is present enough evidence to get a warrant. For offenses like the above, you would think they would have a lot of evidence before they move anyway. Getting at private information without just cause has abuse written all over it. Anyway I hope this bill doesn't go through, it would be a black mark on all Canadians.
I think the solution is pretty easy. The fact of the matter is due to some monopolistic tendencies they are rather inflexible and trying to force consumers to their will and business model.
What I find funny is that the problem those industries are having is actually being slowed or moderated by the monopolistic tendencies of the telecommunications industry, which if there was competition would likely have greater speeds and penetration, meaning an even bigger problem for them.
Regardless, the problem will get worse. The actions they have taken (suing the bejesus out of people) hasn't exactly worked well. The future marches on. iTunes is the only initiative that has made any inroads, and they have the model more less correct. Their problem is that Apple is pretty much one of the worst companies for protectionist practices, which while protecting their stuff, also limits the amount of public acceptance.
The model I am talking of is the EASY acquisition (search and download) of QUALITY media over the internet. Sounds pretty common sense eh? The key is ease of use. Currently pretty much anyone can without too much trouble find whatever they want and download it. Competing with that is hard. So what you do, is make it even easier for Joe public to say go to your site, which will have EVERYTHING. On this site you would have many means to find what you are looking for. You would also have something on there to suggest to the user, things they might like. Then you make it a seamless download experience, and charge a small fee. The key here is not to charge a lot of money. You want people to use it often and make money from many sales. This will also help grow the brand. Do NOT use any DRM BS, or make it hard to use media, or degrade quality, as that is counter productive. Do not try and use streaming or protectionist BS, people do not want. The key here is people generally speaking are lazy. I like lazy. I prefer to call it "efficient". If I have the opportunity to go to one place to do all my online internet one stop shopping, where it is easy, the media is of high quality, and doesn't really cost all that much, it is a no brainer. I mean I think most would be there in a second. They have to stop trying to protect their business models, and start reacting to what the market currently is. If they do not, it will change anyway, but they will simply not be part of it. This all happening in the next decade I don't think is that big a stretch.
Anyway it will obviously take some coordination of the various players out there, and that might be the hardest part, but its not like they don't have a central association that might facilitate this sort of thing. However they are too busy alienating their consumers to be of much help sadly.
OK I know this is a more complex issue, but I sure wish this would happen in Canada. We have the exact same problem, but I would say it is worse, as there is even less competition.
I would like to see caps gone. I think really what we are talking about here has little about caps or how the service is delivered. The bottom line is that there is no competition and these companies are raping their customers, as they have NO alternative. The premis of the bill is that, like utilities the internet has reached the stage of importance that they need to be regulated better, much like utilities. This would reign in (maybe) the shenanigans that the Phone and Cable companies have been doing for the last decade. The cost of these services has steadily gone up, while service improvements have been negligible.
A good example of this is where I live in Ontario, Canada. Cogeco Cable my ISP provider recently changed my agreement to say that if I go over my cap, I will be charged for it. Which on principle, makes sense. However what doesn't is that they wish to change me 6 times the going rate to do so. It should cost somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-50 cents per GB. Teksavvy last I checked charged 25 cents a GB over and beyond their limited cap account (they also have an unlimited account with no caps). You could even think ahead and pre-pay for 100 extra GB for 10$ or about 10 cents a GB. Shit like that makes sense to me. Now what does Cogeco want? 1.50$ per GB!
I got to thinking why they would make it so high, other than they are just greedy bastards of course. Then it came to me, it is because they are greedy bastards, and they also wish to make it unattractive to do so. The thing is both Phone and Cable companies have varies packages which various caps, and speeds etc... all at different prices. I bet they don't want to eat into their sales of other services due to cap related issues, so they just overcharge the heck out of it, making or forcing consumers to pick their packages.
This is exactly the point of this bill. You can't have you cake and eat it to. This is also why all the above analogies about Gas or electric service does not work. Sure just because I get 20A at the line doesn't mean that I can sure 20A all day every day. However I also don't pay for an base electrical package as well. So either you are a pay for service or you charge for the rate, not both, particularly if you like to arbitrary raise the prices of one both whenever you please. This is where regulation would come in.
Anyway I really do hope something like this comes to Canada, it only to bring awareness that there is significant work that needs to be done in our telecommunication industry, it has been a long time coming, and been ignored by most, and there are serious ramifications if we do not do something about it soon. It would also show the shortfalls of the CRTC and their inability to regulate this industry as it has developed.
Well I remember in Quebec my sister went to University there. She was not allowed to vote for the separatist referendum back in '95.
I believe the excuse was that she was not a resident, despite actually living in Quebec for years.
I always thought that was odd, and had more to do with the fact she was English speaking and originally from Nova Scotia.
Not to mention the phrasing of the ballot.
Anyway there are plenty of ways you can mess with results without having any funny business counting ballots. These and more in both the US and Canada, supposedly more democratic countries. Not to mention the the term "gerrymandering" was invented by the English!
So Iran rigged an election. Big deal, democracies do it all the time. The fact that the Clerics run the place anyway and are all appointed by a "Supreme Leader" (which I have trouble even saying with a straight face) who is basically a dictator, because only one person has ever been Supreme Leader, and funny enough it is the same person who created the position of Supreme Leader in the first place! Their military is in direct control of Mr "Supreme Leader" not the "President", I mean how much real power does he have. As I write this it seems more like if I was the leader of a revolution and say wanted to be a "Supreme Leader", as dictator had been given a bad name, why not set up a complicated system of government where I get to be the defacto power, but have token elections to keep the plebs, surfs, and gray masses happy. Seems like a sweet setup if you ask me (unless of course you are a pleb, surf, or part of the gray masses). Of course one could probably argue this of all modern democracies.
Monetary systems haven't been tied to gold for a long time now. Governments are just printing money. Gold is worthless other than some electronic applications (it makes a good conductor and has a low melting point), people just haven't realized that. Either system totally depends on the holders belief on value. Paper money has value because people believe it does. Initially this was because it was based on gold standard. These days the government has to depend on people believing that the money they print has value. As the USA buys more and more debt and prints more and more money, I think it is understandable that some people may choose gold as the safe bet. However who knows if it will be the currency of the future.
So due to the present econoclypse I choose to turn all my cash into guns. Now I just have to move up to Canada where there is abundant freshwater and I will be all set! I have to protect my precious bodily fluids!
3000 tones equivalent of TNT. 3000 short tons = 6 000 000 pounds.
6 000 000 pounds = 3000 Bunker Buster Bombs.
That's more like it!
In other big bangs of note, The US did make two conventional explosions that were bigger (4 kilotons) to try and simulate a small yield nuclear device. Also the British tried to blow up an island (3.2 kilotons).
The US ones were basically Nitrate Fuel bombs, the British one was various old WW2 munitions, Canadian was WW1 munitions. Be interesting to see what you could do with some more high tech stuff.
I seem to remember that the Chinese or some other nationality already did this? If I remember correctly they made a spacecraft or probe that was specially designed to smash into surface of the moon, penetrate as deep as possible and eject material so that it could be analyzed for content...specifically for ice.
So what is NASA's twist? Just a big rocket?
I say, go to the next level, the US has plenty of high tech conventional explosive ordinance just hanging around, lets try something special. Heck for extra points, launch a mini-nuke, and set it off on impact.
I guess the concern here would be if the rocket failed you may have it go down over something important on earth like a city or something, which could cause some complications.
I will admit I am not sure what would make the best IT metric of service. However I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt what does NOT make a good metric, and how many tickets you close is one of them.
I think my organization must use that metric for evaluation. When I call, I get a ticket. Then they generate a ticket, that they created a ticket, and send me a ticket. Then nothing happens for a long time. Then after I get tired of waiting, I call. Another ticket is generated about the first ticket. Eventually someone will look at it, and say oh we are not responsible for that, would you like use to make a ticket to flag this problem? Great. In the end months later someone may or may not call you about the final ticket that is essentially about not being able to help you at all, ask if you wish the ticket removed. Otherwise it is assumed that it has been taken care of after awhile, and thus satisfying all the rest of the tickets in some sort of orgasmic cascading ticket extravaganza. Then at year end they see they have close 8 Billion tickets, congratulate each other on a job well done, pats on back and bonuses for everyone. Hazzah!
Clearly he is some sort of Cylon or Terminator as the magnetic rock was attracted to him...
Curiously it his his hand, which means either Luke Skywalker or a certain state alchemist...
So I am a bit torn as to if we should mob him or not. Better burn him just to be sure. Probably a witch anyway.
Also if he was like Magneto, he would probably make the meteor not hit him I would guess. Which would make him sort sort of Anti-Magneto, his arch nemesis. Which ironically are quite common and Magneto doesn't really like them either. Unless you are in a alternative universe, in which case the opposite would be true.
First thing that I came to mind... She just happened to have a sample of her own intestinal tissue just hanging around.
Also I guess this was the class where teacher is like "OK everyone, grab some tissue samples from you self and grab a microscope! Who said school isn't fun?"
Maybe her lab partner got to extract a sample, they certainly got the fun part of the lesson that's for sure!
Considering it is another one of these silly artificially created elements that only exist under certain lab conditions and only then for fractions of a second before they decay and are gone. Tp or Te I think.
People get too hung up on this or that language. A programmer is a programmer, either you know the fundamentals or you do not. Knowing the particular syntax of one over the other is pretty limited in the grand scheme of things really I think.
When I started University the standard was Pascal of all things. My second year they changed the Standard to C. Go figure. We also did VB, and in my 3rd year did some Cobol and Assembly. I actually found Cobol a pretty simple and interesting language, though somewhat limited. Practice and theory changed between instructors as well. Some (most) were all horny about programming recursively for efficiency, on my final Cobol project I did just that, and nearly gave the prof a heart attack and he actually took marks off me for doing so... shrug. Assembly was horrible as you can well imagine from it being such a low level language, but it was sort of novel as it is the closest I have come to typing ones and zeros in machine language. Stuff like that also helps tie into other courses like architecture and binary algebra etc...
Anyway long story short a new language comes out every couple of years. A few stick around in one form or another for a long time, but may have limited use. If you want to program you are pretty much committing to learning new languages for the rest of you life as demands change.
Having said that, I don't really program much anymore. Mostly I script in specialized languages to simply make my life easier by automating certain processes, and VB of all things, because that is what is commonly integrated in some off the shelf software. As for application design and development I mostly just find out where something is going wrong and say "fix that" to a vendor. 9 times out of 10 it has nothing to do with syntax or the abilities of a language, but more a misunderstanding of the specifications or requirements or perhaps the process. In any case I am pretty confident that I can take whatever modern language I want out there and in a pretty short span of time be able to use it functionally.
Its just like there are a number of specialty languages out there that will never be taught at any school, so you will either have to have your workplace bankroll the ridiculous training fees from a private training company, or learn it on the job (to buy the software is usually out of the reach to do it personally because of the cost).
Hell I had a friend (mind you he was pretty bright) who bid on a job that required a language he had never used (Pearl I believe). He learned it over a weekend and did just fine. He now works pretty high up in a corporate IT structure. Anyway so far as I am concerned I think I would rather hire someone who has a broad base of knowlege, than someone who knows one language really well. Unless I am getting someone for one contract, and that is the language it is to be written in, then and only then would I take the mono language guy.
Slashdot Mirror
For fear of being eaten by a Nazgul I figure. At the end of the movie they would all be gone, so clear skies. I am only speculating. It also makes for a more epic 12 hour movie if you have to walk and can't take Giant Eagle Airlines.
Mr Anderson: Welcome to Rivendell Frodo!
Frodo: Oh Hai! Can Eagles fly me to Mt Doom?
Mr. Anderson: (shrug) Sure...
Eagle: Squaack!
Frodo: Weeee!
Frodo: Hai Mt Doom! (drop)
One Ring: (Plink, Hisss)
(Roll Credits)
The End.
Est. Runtime 23 seconds.
I suppose that is natural selection for generals though. When you dispose of those that don't agree with you, what you are left with are "yes men". Of course perhaps some just got caught up with the idea after having so much success everywhere else. Of course they should be able to tell the difference between invading Poland or France and a place like Russia.
May have helped, but I don't think a month would have made that much difference in the big picture.
Ya the show had stuff on the Russian tanks as well, and as I recall they were big fans. It was typical Russian design, simplicity to the point of spartan, but designed well. The only thing that stuck out for me was they had a nickname (which eludes me now) about the T34 because the manufacturing process in Russia wasn't exactly very precise. Apparently after first using them off the assembly line, you had to clean out a couple of pounds of metal shavings that would come off the tank in various places particularly the gearbox I believe.
I remember seeing a special on TV about tanks and WW2.
Basically: Germans ones were WAY better, but had fewer and more expensive, USA ones were crap, but they had boatloads of them (ha a pun!)
I think the stat was something like the Germans had about 7100 tanks (combined Tigers and Panthers) and the USA sent over about 60,000 Sherman. It was simply numbers.
They went on to say that the US tanks were pretty useless against German tanks, and a German tank had little fear of damage unless hit by a lucky shot. The US tanks however could be everywhere and were effective against infantry. A single German tank could take out 20 or 30 US tanks if they were engaged, however after awhile the US figured this out and didn't engage them, tank on tank. From what it went on to say that most German tanks were disabled, by lack or material, repairs, fuel, munitions, or in battle by other means from air forces, artillery, and the like.
Pretty sure Hitler's problem was that he was a idiot (strategically at least anyway).
Trying to take over the Soviet Union. Ha! That really worked out well.
People point to D-Day and this and the other thing as his downfall.
Cold War BS aside, it was Russia that brought them to their knees, and Hitler's unending pursuit in Russia.
I am sure all his aides were like "Dude this is such a bad idea!" and "Man this is so not working out!" at least in their heads anyway...
For the grunt on the ground, hearing he was being sent to the Russian front must have been like a death sentence.
A) Trying to avoid an election
or
B) Trying to cozy up to voters before an election.
and
C) If they win the election they will try and ram the stuff through again.
oh wait...
What a sad joke the judicial system is.
Is that supposed to be "justice"? I think by anyone's definition that is just plain stupid.
Not to mention pointless. The fine might as well be for a Gajillion dollars, 'cause she ain't got that either.
I don't think this bill has anything to do with its stated purposes.
I smell RIAA, and various other copyright lobbyists.
This is a "SAVE THE CHILDREN" attempt to get around Canadian privacy laws to get at, and identify people for civil legal purposes. Not criminal.
Gangsters, Pedos, and Terrorists oh my! My ass. Lions, Tigers, and Bears! Oh No!
I cannot believe how thinly veiled this attempt is to do an end run around our privacy rights simply so some industries can start suing Canadian media downloaders.
Right now the ONLY reason we in Canada are not getting our grandmothers getting the bejesus sued out of them is our privacy laws. In the US they get a John Doe warrant in some wishy washy State for force the ISP to release the identity of the individual. They then drop the charges against John Doe, and place new ones against the named individual somewhere else. In Canada they can't do this. You can change an unnamed individual. You have to have an identity first. Our privacy laws here are stronger. So far they have tried to get our telecoms to capitulate, but thus far have been told to bugger off. In fact with our privacy laws one could argue they they might be held libel for releasing the information in the first place.
Case in point the police regularly get information from ISP, and Telecoms all the time. They have a right to it. All they have to do is present enough evidence to get a warrant. For offenses like the above, you would think they would have a lot of evidence before they move anyway. Getting at private information without just cause has abuse written all over it. Anyway I hope this bill doesn't go through, it would be a black mark on all Canadians.
I think the solution is pretty easy. The fact of the matter is due to some monopolistic tendencies they are rather inflexible and trying to force consumers to their will and business model.
What I find funny is that the problem those industries are having is actually being slowed or moderated by the monopolistic tendencies of the telecommunications industry, which if there was competition would likely have greater speeds and penetration, meaning an even bigger problem for them.
Regardless, the problem will get worse. The actions they have taken (suing the bejesus out of people) hasn't exactly worked well. The future marches on. iTunes is the only initiative that has made any inroads, and they have the model more less correct. Their problem is that Apple is pretty much one of the worst companies for protectionist practices, which while protecting their stuff, also limits the amount of public acceptance.
The model I am talking of is the EASY acquisition (search and download) of QUALITY media over the internet. Sounds pretty common sense eh? The key is ease of use. Currently pretty much anyone can without too much trouble find whatever they want and download it. Competing with that is hard. So what you do, is make it even easier for Joe public to say go to your site, which will have EVERYTHING. On this site you would have many means to find what you are looking for. You would also have something on there to suggest to the user, things they might like. Then you make it a seamless download experience, and charge a small fee. The key here is not to charge a lot of money. You want people to use it often and make money from many sales. This will also help grow the brand. Do NOT use any DRM BS, or make it hard to use media, or degrade quality, as that is counter productive. Do not try and use streaming or protectionist BS, people do not want. The key here is people generally speaking are lazy. I like lazy. I prefer to call it "efficient". If I have the opportunity to go to one place to do all my online internet one stop shopping, where it is easy, the media is of high quality, and doesn't really cost all that much, it is a no brainer. I mean I think most would be there in a second. They have to stop trying to protect their business models, and start reacting to what the market currently is. If they do not, it will change anyway, but they will simply not be part of it. This all happening in the next decade I don't think is that big a stretch.
Anyway it will obviously take some coordination of the various players out there, and that might be the hardest part, but its not like they don't have a central association that might facilitate this sort of thing. However they are too busy alienating their consumers to be of much help sadly.
OK I know this is a more complex issue, but I sure wish this would happen in Canada. We have the exact same problem, but I would say it is worse, as there is even less competition.
I would like to see caps gone. I think really what we are talking about here has little about caps or how the service is delivered. The bottom line is that there is no competition and these companies are raping their customers, as they have NO alternative. The premis of the bill is that, like utilities the internet has reached the stage of importance that they need to be regulated better, much like utilities. This would reign in (maybe) the shenanigans that the Phone and Cable companies have been doing for the last decade. The cost of these services has steadily gone up, while service improvements have been negligible.
A good example of this is where I live in Ontario, Canada. Cogeco Cable my ISP provider recently changed my agreement to say that if I go over my cap, I will be charged for it. Which on principle, makes sense. However what doesn't is that they wish to change me 6 times the going rate to do so. It should cost somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-50 cents per GB. Teksavvy last I checked charged 25 cents a GB over and beyond their limited cap account (they also have an unlimited account with no caps). You could even think ahead and pre-pay for 100 extra GB for 10$ or about 10 cents a GB. Shit like that makes sense to me. Now what does Cogeco want? 1.50$ per GB!
I got to thinking why they would make it so high, other than they are just greedy bastards of course. Then it came to me, it is because they are greedy bastards, and they also wish to make it unattractive to do so. The thing is both Phone and Cable companies have varies packages which various caps, and speeds etc... all at different prices. I bet they don't want to eat into their sales of other services due to cap related issues, so they just overcharge the heck out of it, making or forcing consumers to pick their packages.
This is exactly the point of this bill. You can't have you cake and eat it to. This is also why all the above analogies about Gas or electric service does not work. Sure just because I get 20A at the line doesn't mean that I can sure 20A all day every day. However I also don't pay for an base electrical package as well. So either you are a pay for service or you charge for the rate, not both, particularly if you like to arbitrary raise the prices of one both whenever you please. This is where regulation would come in.
Anyway I really do hope something like this comes to Canada, it only to bring awareness that there is significant work that needs to be done in our telecommunication industry, it has been a long time coming, and been ignored by most, and there are serious ramifications if we do not do something about it soon. It would also show the shortfalls of the CRTC and their inability to regulate this industry as it has developed.
Well I remember in Quebec my sister went to University there. She was not allowed to vote for the separatist referendum back in '95.
I believe the excuse was that she was not a resident, despite actually living in Quebec for years.
I always thought that was odd, and had more to do with the fact she was English speaking and originally from Nova Scotia.
Not to mention the phrasing of the ballot.
Anyway there are plenty of ways you can mess with results without having any funny business counting ballots. These and more in both the US and Canada, supposedly more democratic countries. Not to mention the the term "gerrymandering" was invented by the English!
So Iran rigged an election. Big deal, democracies do it all the time. The fact that the Clerics run the place anyway and are all appointed by a "Supreme Leader" (which I have trouble even saying with a straight face) who is basically a dictator, because only one person has ever been Supreme Leader, and funny enough it is the same person who created the position of Supreme Leader in the first place! Their military is in direct control of Mr "Supreme Leader" not the "President", I mean how much real power does he have. As I write this it seems more like if I was the leader of a revolution and say wanted to be a "Supreme Leader", as dictator had been given a bad name, why not set up a complicated system of government where I get to be the defacto power, but have token elections to keep the plebs, surfs, and gray masses happy. Seems like a sweet setup if you ask me (unless of course you are a pleb, surf, or part of the gray masses). Of course one could probably argue this of all modern democracies.
Monetary systems haven't been tied to gold for a long time now. Governments are just printing money. Gold is worthless other than some electronic applications (it makes a good conductor and has a low melting point), people just haven't realized that. Either system totally depends on the holders belief on value. Paper money has value because people believe it does. Initially this was because it was based on gold standard. These days the government has to depend on people believing that the money they print has value. As the USA buys more and more debt and prints more and more money, I think it is understandable that some people may choose gold as the safe bet. However who knows if it will be the currency of the future.
So due to the present econoclypse I choose to turn all my cash into guns. Now I just have to move up to Canada where there is abundant freshwater and I will be all set! I have to protect my precious bodily fluids!
SCO has products?
Who knew?
I thought they main product was the ability to hire lawyers and try (emphasis on "try") to sue yourself some profit.
One of Largest conventional explosion on earth was a single ship:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Explosion
3000 tones equivalent of TNT. 3000 short tons = 6 000 000 pounds.
6 000 000 pounds = 3000 Bunker Buster Bombs.
That's more like it!
In other big bangs of note, The US did make two conventional explosions that were bigger (4 kilotons) to try and simulate a small yield nuclear device. Also the British tried to blow up an island (3.2 kilotons).
The US ones were basically Nitrate Fuel bombs, the British one was various old WW2 munitions, Canadian was WW1 munitions. Be interesting to see what you could do with some more high tech stuff.
I seem to remember that the Chinese or some other nationality already did this? If I remember correctly they made a spacecraft or probe that was specially designed to smash into surface of the moon, penetrate as deep as possible and eject material so that it could be analyzed for content...specifically for ice.
So what is NASA's twist? Just a big rocket?
I say, go to the next level, the US has plenty of high tech conventional explosive ordinance just hanging around, lets try something special. Heck for extra points, launch a mini-nuke, and set it off on impact.
I guess the concern here would be if the rocket failed you may have it go down over something important on earth like a city or something, which could cause some complications.
I will admit I am not sure what would make the best IT metric of service. However I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt what does NOT make a good metric, and how many tickets you close is one of them.
I think my organization must use that metric for evaluation. When I call, I get a ticket. Then they generate a ticket, that they created a ticket, and send me a ticket. Then nothing happens for a long time. Then after I get tired of waiting, I call. Another ticket is generated about the first ticket. Eventually someone will look at it, and say oh we are not responsible for that, would you like use to make a ticket to flag this problem? Great. In the end months later someone may or may not call you about the final ticket that is essentially about not being able to help you at all, ask if you wish the ticket removed. Otherwise it is assumed that it has been taken care of after awhile, and thus satisfying all the rest of the tickets in some sort of orgasmic cascading ticket extravaganza. Then at year end they see they have close 8 Billion tickets, congratulate each other on a job well done, pats on back and bonuses for everyone. Hazzah!
That has been my experience so far anyway.
Clearly he is some sort of Cylon or Terminator as the magnetic rock was attracted to him...
Curiously it his his hand, which means either Luke Skywalker or a certain state alchemist...
So I am a bit torn as to if we should mob him or not. Better burn him just to be sure. Probably a witch anyway.
Also if he was like Magneto, he would probably make the meteor not hit him I would guess. Which would make him sort sort of Anti-Magneto, his arch nemesis. Which ironically are quite common and Magneto doesn't really like them either. Unless you are in a alternative universe, in which case the opposite would be true.
Its Friday and I am ready to go home now... :)
Don't you need some kind of license to practice medicine? I smell lawsuit!
HA! You must be new here!
Your doing it wrong.
Your not supposed to read anything but the headline, and then make wild assumptions and accusations.
Get with the program, sheesh!
First thing that I came to mind... She just happened to have a sample of her own intestinal tissue just hanging around.
Also I guess this was the class where teacher is like "OK everyone, grab some tissue samples from you self and grab a microscope! Who said school isn't fun?"
Maybe her lab partner got to extract a sample, they certainly got the fun part of the lesson that's for sure!
Well glad that is over!
Considering it is another one of these silly artificially created elements that only exist under certain lab conditions and only then for fractions of a second before they decay and are gone. Tp or Te I think.
...if it is instructive or not.
Disclaimer I graduated in 2000.
People get too hung up on this or that language. A programmer is a programmer, either you know the fundamentals or you do not. Knowing the particular syntax of one over the other is pretty limited in the grand scheme of things really I think.
When I started University the standard was Pascal of all things. My second year they changed the Standard to C. Go figure. We also did VB, and in my 3rd year did some Cobol and Assembly. I actually found Cobol a pretty simple and interesting language, though somewhat limited. Practice and theory changed between instructors as well. Some (most) were all horny about programming recursively for efficiency, on my final Cobol project I did just that, and nearly gave the prof a heart attack and he actually took marks off me for doing so... shrug. Assembly was horrible as you can well imagine from it being such a low level language, but it was sort of novel as it is the closest I have come to typing ones and zeros in machine language. Stuff like that also helps tie into other courses like architecture and binary algebra etc...
Anyway long story short a new language comes out every couple of years. A few stick around in one form or another for a long time, but may have limited use. If you want to program you are pretty much committing to learning new languages for the rest of you life as demands change.
Having said that, I don't really program much anymore. Mostly I script in specialized languages to simply make my life easier by automating certain processes, and VB of all things, because that is what is commonly integrated in some off the shelf software. As for application design and development I mostly just find out where something is going wrong and say "fix that" to a vendor. 9 times out of 10 it has nothing to do with syntax or the abilities of a language, but more a misunderstanding of the specifications or requirements or perhaps the process. In any case I am pretty confident that I can take whatever modern language I want out there and in a pretty short span of time be able to use it functionally.
Its just like there are a number of specialty languages out there that will never be taught at any school, so you will either have to have your workplace bankroll the ridiculous training fees from a private training company, or learn it on the job (to buy the software is usually out of the reach to do it personally because of the cost).
Hell I had a friend (mind you he was pretty bright) who bid on a job that required a language he had never used (Pearl I believe). He learned it over a weekend and did just fine. He now works pretty high up in a corporate IT structure. Anyway so far as I am concerned I think I would rather hire someone who has a broad base of knowlege, than someone who knows one language really well. Unless I am getting someone for one contract, and that is the language it is to be written in, then and only then would I take the mono language guy.
I for one... oh nevermind.