It was no more fire prone than any other car at the time.
The Pinto also had lower Fatality rates than similar cars of the era.
Overall it was comparable to other sub-compacts. Looking at rear end impacts though, it had a much higher fatality rate due to a strong propensity of rupturing the gas tank.
There's a strong propensity for most vehicles to rupture the gas tank when driving in reverse on a limited-access highway
Christopher Columbus - A wonderful national hero - Hawked his widely discredited and since proven wrong theory (short route to China) around all the people with money to fund his project for years until he found someone gullible enough to fund it, found a small island in mid ocean, and claimed he was right, even in face of the evidence, failed to find the whole rest of the continent, and still gets all the credit...
He knew he wasn't right - he had a map of the Americas when he set sail in 1492. Also, 1492 wasn't his first voyage of "discovery".
Does anyone else think that for handling liquid nitrogen and liquid fucking helium that these "experts" seem to be throwing caution to the wind? Seems more like a rave than a science experiment.
I was handling liquid nitrogen straight out of high school (16-17), and used liquid helium in a limited fashion at the same employer
I don't think it's the sweat that doing it. You (like most people) tie their shoes using a granny knot instead of a reef (or square) knot, resulting in your shoes coming untied easier. Check this for a refresher. Stuff you should know, news for runners (and other people who tie their shoes).
I've seen this article before a few years back -- either I was doing it wrong or it wasn't working as advertised. Either way, there shouldn't be an "art" to ensuring that my shoes stay on. I should be able to put my shoes on with minimal hassle and forget about them.
And everyone should know how to tie their shoes - it's pretty simple, and yet myriad people have their knots coming open all the time
It's high time we move on from the useless and medieval shoelace. Living in the humid US Southeast, my sweat opens shoelaces on my running shoes faster than Houdini unlacing a straitjacket. They already make cycling shoes with velcro straps and plastic fasteners that would work great in running shoes, but for some reason athletic shoes have a focus on form rather than function.
Dude, you're doing it wrong - "sweat opens shoelaces on my running shoes"? How in the bloddy heck are you tying them?
My wife and I have been extraordinarily disappointed to hear other parents admitting that their children (through third grade) don't know how to tie shoes, simply because the kids have never been given anything but slip-ons and velcro-type shoes of various kinds. A few parents have admitted that they almost never wear anything but crocs and flip-flops. Yeesh.
And what's wrong with that? Until you need hiking shoes or lace-up dress shoes, why not wear slip-ons? I do for dress purposes all the time. Are you also averse to parents whose children only know how to wear sandals?
If it does go to the Supreme Court in Canada, oral arguments will be watchable. In the US, the Supreme Court does not allow cameras in the Courtroom (although you can still hear the audio).
You watch oral arguments? Funny. I listen to them.
Actually, tubes weren't that common even as far back as 30 years ago. I started college in 1980 and almost nobody had any tube gear (except my roommate, who had a McIntosh pre-amp). Interestingly, my old Carver amp from that era sounds better than most of the stuff I hear today too.
Most of what I've seen pre-1985 is all tube-based, but that could just be the folks whose old gear I'm seeing were into that kind of stuff over solid state.
Seriously, though - I think part of it, too, is the use of tubes 30 years ago vs now. My dad's old Teac stereo he bought in 1970 still sounds better than 95% of what I see in stores nowadays:-\
They should just have added an extra octet to IPv4. IPv6 is overly complicated, who wants to remember the internal IPv6 address range? sure, let's ping::::::3e:1f:00:7a - oh wait, I have one colon too many.
Sadly, this does bring up a very valid point. A lot of 'peripheral' network equipment tends to get addressed by address directly (more out of habit and laziness on the IT admin part than anything, but one shouldn't underestimate that!). I work as a software developer in the MFP (think: networked office printer/scanner/fax/copier devices) industry. By customer request, all the software I create tends to show your list of devices by IP address first. Of course, both my software and the devices it works with fully support both DNS and IPv6, so typing a hostname or IPv6 address will work, but if the customers don't set the devices up to USE these functions, we can't exactly force them.
Of course, the 'local network' world can probably stick to IPv4 for a fair bit longer (or theoretically indefinitely) while the connections out then make use of IPv6; however as more people hear buzzwords like 'cloud', more and more previously 'internal' things are going to start having connections to the outside and there's a big potential for mess.
Now, why don't people just happily type in IPv6 addresses? They're too hard to remember as the parent points out. Well, why don't they use DNS? Because doing so requires a DNS server (fine in bigger offices, but a bit overkill for a 10 person shop with only a couple of devices)
Adding octets to the IPv4 format as the parent suggests would've been a much 'easier' transition for most people. Sure there's a lot that would need to have been considered, but it's probably not dissimilar to the amount required for consideration with the current IPv6 way of doing things.
And yes, I'm aware one could theoretically write a complete IPv6 address with dotted quad style notation, but if no-one else does and the majority of software didn't support it, then doing so would be a bit dumb.
And lots of software (for originally-valid reasons) wants IP addresses, and only aliases them internally to different host names. DNS cannot be relied-on./etc/hosts *may* not be reliable. But if you have an IP address and can't hit it, you *KNOW* you have a networking/routing issue.
There are lots of big companies with hardly any servers. I work for a multibillion dollar company that has about 150 physical servers. We don't sell bits, so the servers are there to keep the factories and administrative stuff running.
The quote above is a so retarded point of view I'm embarrassed if not shocked. Social Security is nothing you SPEND money on, you INVEST it. The NASA on the other hand is a money sink, regardless what benefits you might se in it.
Social Security benefits payments (the $620 Billion) is distinctly NOT an "investment" - it is an expense.
If you want to think NASA is a "money sink", you are free to do so - I can't and won't stop you. But if you can see no benefit in NASA over the last 50+ years, you are ignorant (willfully or otherwise).
I cannot believe the idoiocrity - why not sell the International Space Station to the highest bidder!
Oh jeez, I cannot believe the "idoiocrity" of this statement. And when the company inevitably goes out of business after racking up billions of debts, who will pay for the safe de-orbit of the ISS? Oh, right. The people who "sold" it.
Then again, if you make a few billion on the sale, deorbiting becomes less worrisome - at least the cash is available, safe in a trust fund... am I right or am I right?
Slashdot Mirror
I gotta say I've been enjoying watching people have fun with the headlines. My favorite was :"Romney squeezes out Santorum"
Probably that headline author knew full well what Santorum means, and did it on purpose! Ew, still gross.
And you'll find "santorum" means precisely bupkis. "sanitorium", on the other hand, does have a meaning, and one that is distinctly not "gross".
Ahh, funny you mention the Pinto.
It was no more fire prone than any other car at the time. The Pinto also had lower Fatality rates than similar cars of the era.
Overall it was comparable to other sub-compacts. Looking at rear end impacts though, it had a much higher fatality rate due to a strong propensity of rupturing the gas tank.
There's a strong propensity for most vehicles to rupture the gas tank when driving in reverse on a limited-access highway
Philips Unveils Sexy Urban Beehive Concept
I'll admit... it's entirely possible that I don't understand the meaning of that word.
Just in case you're mind's going where I think it is, on no account should you stick your dick in a beehive..... At least without smoking it first.
Without SMOKING it first?!?
And you're worried about the beehive being a sexy fetish ....
Download debian testing netboot iso if you live in 3rd world country with data caps.
Who says you have to live in a Third World country for there to be data caps?
Granny Smiths suck!
That's more than I think we needed to know
Why would a billionaire stand in line all night long to get a cellphone that his company sells?
Umm.. Steve Wozniak doesn't own Apple.
Christopher Columbus - A wonderful national hero - Hawked his widely discredited and since proven wrong theory (short route to China) around all the people with money to fund his project for years until he found someone gullible enough to fund it, found a small island in mid ocean, and claimed he was right, even in face of the evidence, failed to find the whole rest of the continent, and still gets all the credit ...
He knew he wasn't right - he had a map of the Americas when he set sail in 1492. Also, 1492 wasn't his first voyage of "discovery".
What I want to know is how lowering corporate tax helps anyone at all when such a huge percentage of corporations pay 0%.
If you lower it and remove all "loopholes" and exclusions, then everybody pays it. It's pretty simple, really.
Does anyone else think that for handling liquid nitrogen and liquid fucking helium that these "experts" seem to be throwing caution to the wind? Seems more like a rave than a science experiment.
I was handling liquid nitrogen straight out of high school (16-17), and used liquid helium in a limited fashion at the same employer
I don't think it's the sweat that doing it. You (like most people) tie their shoes using a granny knot instead of a reef (or square) knot, resulting in your shoes coming untied easier. Check this for a refresher. Stuff you should know, news for runners (and other people who tie their shoes).
I've seen this article before a few years back -- either I was doing it wrong or it wasn't working as advertised. Either way, there shouldn't be an "art" to ensuring that my shoes stay on. I should be able to put my shoes on with minimal hassle and forget about them.
And everyone should know how to tie their shoes - it's pretty simple, and yet myriad people have their knots coming open all the time
It's high time we move on from the useless and medieval shoelace. Living in the humid US Southeast, my sweat opens shoelaces on my running shoes faster than Houdini unlacing a straitjacket. They already make cycling shoes with velcro straps and plastic fasteners that would work great in running shoes, but for some reason athletic shoes have a focus on form rather than function.
Dude, you're doing it wrong - "sweat opens shoelaces on my running shoes"? How in the bloddy heck are you tying them?
My wife and I have been extraordinarily disappointed to hear other parents admitting that their children (through third grade) don't know how to tie shoes, simply because the kids have never been given anything but slip-ons and velcro-type shoes of various kinds. A few parents have admitted that they almost never wear anything but crocs and flip-flops. Yeesh.
And what's wrong with that? Until you need hiking shoes or lace-up dress shoes, why not wear slip-ons? I do for dress purposes all the time. Are you also averse to parents whose children only know how to wear sandals?
Except the hoverboard worked in 1955, where there were definitely no mag-lev roads.
And in the 1880s
If it does go to the Supreme Court in Canada, oral arguments will be watchable. In the US, the Supreme Court does not allow cameras in the Courtroom (although you can still hear the audio).
You watch oral arguments? Funny. I listen to them.
Actually, tubes weren't that common even as far back as 30 years ago. I started college in 1980 and almost nobody had any tube gear (except my roommate, who had a McIntosh pre-amp). Interestingly, my old Carver amp from that era sounds better than most of the stuff I hear today too.
Most of what I've seen pre-1985 is all tube-based, but that could just be the folks whose old gear I'm seeing were into that kind of stuff over solid state.
Seriously, though - I think part of it, too, is the use of tubes 30 years ago vs now. My dad's old Teac stereo he bought in 1970 still sounds better than 95% of what I see in stores nowadays :-\
They should just have added an extra octet to IPv4. IPv6 is overly complicated, who wants to remember the internal IPv6 address range? sure, let's ping ::::::3e:1f:00:7a - oh wait, I have one colon too many.
Sadly, this does bring up a very valid point. A lot of 'peripheral' network equipment tends to get addressed by address directly (more out of habit and laziness on the IT admin part than anything, but one shouldn't underestimate that!). I work as a software developer in the MFP (think: networked office printer/scanner/fax/copier devices) industry. By customer request, all the software I create tends to show your list of devices by IP address first. Of course, both my software and the devices it works with fully support both DNS and IPv6, so typing a hostname or IPv6 address will work, but if the customers don't set the devices up to USE these functions, we can't exactly force them.
Of course, the 'local network' world can probably stick to IPv4 for a fair bit longer (or theoretically indefinitely) while the connections out then make use of IPv6; however as more people hear buzzwords like 'cloud', more and more previously 'internal' things are going to start having connections to the outside and there's a big potential for mess.
Now, why don't people just happily type in IPv6 addresses? They're too hard to remember as the parent points out. Well, why don't they use DNS? Because doing so requires a DNS server (fine in bigger offices, but a bit overkill for a 10 person shop with only a couple of devices)
Adding octets to the IPv4 format as the parent suggests would've been a much 'easier' transition for most people. Sure there's a lot that would need to have been considered, but it's probably not dissimilar to the amount required for consideration with the current IPv6 way of doing things.
And yes, I'm aware one could theoretically write a complete IPv6 address with dotted quad style notation, but if no-one else does and the majority of software didn't support it, then doing so would be a bit dumb.
And lots of software (for originally-valid reasons) wants IP addresses, and only aliases them internally to different host names. DNS cannot be relied-on. /etc/hosts *may* not be reliable. But if you have an IP address and can't hit it, you *KNOW* you have a networking/routing issue.
On /. users have both numeric and symbolic IDs, and, as far as users concerned, it is the second which is primary.
ICQ had (has?) symbolic IDs as well
JFK? Yeah, well - there's a craptastic airport for you (as is DCA).
There are lots of big companies with hardly any servers. I work for a multibillion dollar company that has about 150 physical servers. We don't sell bits, so the servers are there to keep the factories and administrative stuff running.
How many virtual servers do y'all have?
...Social Security is funded by employees as part of their paychecks...
NASA is funded by employees as part of their paychecks, too - it's called "taxation".
The quote above is a so retarded point of view I'm embarrassed if not shocked. Social Security is nothing you SPEND money on, you INVEST it. The NASA on the other hand is a money sink, regardless what benefits you might se in it.
Social Security benefits payments (the $620 Billion) is distinctly NOT an "investment" - it is an expense.
If you want to think NASA is a "money sink", you are free to do so - I can't and won't stop you. But if you can see no benefit in NASA over the last 50+ years, you are ignorant (willfully or otherwise).
In a word? Vectors.
Whoosshh..
how do we know it's "leading by 60 degrees"? Maybe it's trailing by 300!
I cannot believe the idoiocrity - why not sell the International Space Station to the highest bidder!
Oh jeez, I cannot believe the "idoiocrity" of this statement. And when the company inevitably goes out of business after racking up billions of debts, who will pay for the safe de-orbit of the ISS? Oh, right. The people who "sold" it.
Then again, if you make a few billion on the sale, deorbiting becomes less worrisome - at least the cash is available, safe in a trust fund... am I right or am I right?