If 'believable' is your criteria for a good movie then you're in for one hell of a disappointment. My main criteria are "interesting" and/or "entertaining", and Arnie made that happen in most of his movies, assuming you like that genre. I'm sure there are bunch of other genre's he'd really suck at, but to his credit he's stayed well clear of them.
Look closely at the dudes meter, its 2 megohms not 2 ohms. Lets guess its a single cell li-poly at 3.7 volts. Thats a smokin' current of 74 microamps. What, a quarter of a milliwatt, something like that?
You do have to look pretty closely (and RTFA in the first place of course:) but there's definitely an M there. That doesn't seem enough to induce any sort of fault in the thing, especially if it's a power output to drive a light where the resistance of the light bulb would be much less. Maybe scraping more paint off lowers the resistance significantly...
and the player learns that that's because his ISP is NATing their entire network, he's not going to be happy.
</reality>... and he goes to forums where such things are discussed and finds out that other users are using IPv6 and don't have problems like that and asks his ISP why they don't support IPv6. The ISP listens to their customers and makes rolling out IPv6 their #1 priority. IPv6 gets everywhere, world peace is finally achieved, and we enter a golden age of the internet.<reality>
NAT is fine for people who only make outgoing connections; i.e. the passive internet consumer.
Unless the passive internet consumer uses P2P software, or VoIP (from a provider which is not their ISP), which is harder with NAT and probably requires active participation from the ISP to make it work. The RIAA might have a few things to say about that.
Breasts and external genitalia are documented extremely well on the internet, and if you don't have an internet you only need yourself and someone of the opposite sex and you can find out all you need to know, so I don't know that a body browser would add much value by including them in much detail.
Unless there is some sort of god above, I don't think there is any innate law of the universe that determines what is wrong and what is right
Actually, even if there was a god, his views on what is 'right' or 'wrong' would only be his opinion, not fact.
I don't believe there is a god, but I think most religions operate on the basis of "His universe, His rules", and so if god existed according to that definition then his views on what is 'right' or 'wrong' are indeed fact. It would also mean that I'm going to hell, basically for the simple failing of not believing in him.
It's not so much that I am against their ideals. I just can't stand f**ing hypocrites.
Bah. Hypocrisy is everywhere. What bugs me is that they somehow think that they know what is ethical in the first place. Who are they to decide that it is wrong for an animal to suffer? Seeing a suffering animal invokes feelings of sadness, horror, and disgust in most people (or in me at least) and they want to see it stop, but that's just how our brains are programed and it doesn't make it wrong. There have been studies that show that people who enjoy inflicting cruelty on an animal are more likely to grow up to be , but that doesn't mean that letting animals suffer or causing animals to suffer is wrong either.
Unless there is some sort of god above, I don't think there is any innate law of the universe that determines what is wrong and what is right, it's up to us to decide. And just because PETA are noisy and violent doesn't make their point of view valid.
Why is it that every time someone asks a question like this on Slashdot, someone always pipes up with "your kid shouldn't have a computer they should be playing outside"? Who's to say the kid doesn't already play outside and doesn't already own a handful of fishing poles? Seriously, you aren't helping.
There's plenty of time in the day for doing both things, and depending on what part of the world he's in, going outside during most of the day is generally frowned on these days due to holes in the ozone layer (or is that just us in Australia?). A bit of time on the computer every so often isn't going to hurt him, especially if its a substitute for what passes as entertainment on TV these days.
If you have a payment due on X date, you wait until day X - 1, and something goes wrong and delays you by one day, this is your fault, not your bank's fault.
While most industries would _love_ it if everyone paid a day early and they got to suck on the interest, i'm keeping my money until the last minute. If my payment is delayed because of a bank error then it's the banks fault, not mine.
Maybe you are a bit older than me, but for pretty much the whole time i've been paying bills it's been electronic and it's never gone wrong, ever. We generally try and keep a bit of a buffer in the bank but I suspect that if we were with this particular bank it might not have helped... a bit of a buffer doesn't really help if your bank deducts your homeloan repayment (or any other major expense) an extra 3 times from your account or otherwise marks your account overdrawn when you go to pay for your meal at a restaurant.
That said, I get where your frustration comes from, there are plenty of people who could learn a few things about managing money, but second guessing a major failure like this is out of the scope of what I would call good financial management.
No I think it's reasonable to point it out explicitly. If they had just said "Observed by a team of researchers", you would fairly quickly assume that there wouldn't be any Canadians in that team, for obvious reasons.
Just like if a blind guy had ascended Mount Everest, the news article would read "A team of mountaineers, including a blind guy,...".
That's the problem with generalisations. They are all stupid.
And seriously, I bet you weren't really that offended. I doubt you could get to 49 years of age in an industry traditionally dominated by men without developing a thick skin to such stupid generalisations and a very well balanced sense of perspective.
You do have a point about the grandfather bit though... google for "so simple that your grandfather could understand it" and google asks " did you mean 'so simple that your grandmother would understand it'?"
Young kids have awful coordination. Big blocks. You can make a good set of blocks for about $10 and a day of your time.
Or you can buy more blocks than you can easily carry at a garage sale for 50c:)
Another good gift you can give both the kids and the family is to destroy their TV. A lot to be said for NOT having a TV in the house, and spending an hour each night playing games.
And yet if you walk into someone's house and destroy their TV, _you_ would be the one going to jail!
TV, like most things, is only bad if it's overdone. It's great for entertaining kids when they are sick, or just when you've got to hang out a load of washing and want to have some chance of the kids not trashing the house while your back is turned.
We've got more Barbie DVD's than I can count, and the kids love singing along to them (guess how quickly that got old:)
Our TV is just a smallish CRT. It broke a while back but we decided to get it fixed instead of buying a flat screen as our youngest at the time enjoyed playing a game that involved running at the tv and hitting it with his hands. And we just don't watch enough TV to justify spending that much on it.
They really do have quite incredible memories for stuff they are interested in. My oldest daughter is really into Big Bang Theory and she gets my youngest (5yo) to act out scenes from it. He can recite all the "sing soft kitty to me" scenes word for word, which he'd do over and over again while falling asleep:)
Books are great, and young kids are quite happy to read the same book over and over again but as they get older they'll tend to read it once or twice and move on. It might sound corny but maybe you could take the kid(s) to the library once a month/fortnight/weekend/whatever if they live close enough to you and your schedule allows it? A bit hard if you live hours away but spending time with an attentive adult is the next best thing to cheap plastic crap:)
My bike, books, lego, and computer are the only material things I can really remember spending a lot of time on as a kid. We got RC cars (which need charging all the time), motorbikes (which need fuel and adult supervision), and all sorts of other things but those 4 are the ones I really remember and that were always there and ready for me to play with (except maybe the computer... stupid computer hogging siblings!)
"single individual" might be written to rule out any confusion between "several individuals". Individual can mean "person", so depending on the meaning it isn't redundant.
Why should they be respected? Feeling and opinion should not be respected just cause. That's how you end up in another dark ages.
Because on the whole, respecting peoples feelings makes the world a better place for all those who live in it, that's why.
I'm sure that you can easily construct many extreme cases where the above doesn't hold true, but wanting the dead bodies of people you once cared for to be treated with a bit of respect doesn't hurt anyone.
Yes, you would be upset, but not for the reasons you think you would.
Always look at the motive. They must want to hate you to do something like that, and that's actually what you are really picking up. The action itself is of no consequence, for good or for bad.
What part of 'rational or not' are you having a problem with here? When people are upset the last thing they want to hear is someone telling them why they shouldn't feel the way they do. That's just now how it works.
Slashdot Mirror
If 'believable' is your criteria for a good movie then you're in for one hell of a disappointment. My main criteria are "interesting" and/or "entertaining", and Arnie made that happen in most of his movies, assuming you like that genre. I'm sure there are bunch of other genre's he'd really suck at, but to his credit he's stayed well clear of them.
Look closely at the dudes meter, its 2 megohms not 2 ohms. Lets guess its a single cell li-poly at 3.7 volts. Thats a smokin' current of 74 microamps. What, a quarter of a milliwatt, something like that?
You do have to look pretty closely (and RTFA in the first place of course :) but there's definitely an M there. That doesn't seem enough to induce any sort of fault in the thing, especially if it's a power output to drive a light where the resistance of the light bulb would be much less. Maybe scraping more paint off lowers the resistance significantly...
and the player learns that that's because his ISP is NATing their entire network, he's not going to be happy.
</reality>... and he goes to forums where such things are discussed and finds out that other users are using IPv6 and don't have problems like that and asks his ISP why they don't support IPv6. The ISP listens to their customers and makes rolling out IPv6 their #1 priority. IPv6 gets everywhere, world peace is finally achieved, and we enter a golden age of the internet.<reality>
NAT is fine for people who only make outgoing connections; i.e. the passive internet consumer.
Unless the passive internet consumer uses P2P software, or VoIP (from a provider which is not their ISP), which is harder with NAT and probably requires active participation from the ISP to make it work. The RIAA might have a few things to say about that.
Breasts and external genitalia are documented extremely well on the internet, and if you don't have an internet you only need yourself and someone of the opposite sex and you can find out all you need to know, so I don't know that a body browser would add much value by including them in much detail.
Foiled again by documenting bugs in bug reports. When will they ever learn? Security by obscurity is the _only_ way.</troll>
CAPSLOCK. It's like CRUISE CONTROL for AWESOME!
Unless there is some sort of god above, I don't think there is any innate law of the universe that determines what is wrong and what is right
Actually, even if there was a god, his views on what is 'right' or 'wrong' would only be his opinion, not fact.
I don't believe there is a god, but I think most religions operate on the basis of "His universe, His rules", and so if god existed according to that definition then his views on what is 'right' or 'wrong' are indeed fact. It would also mean that I'm going to hell, basically for the simple failing of not believing in him.
It's not so much that I am against their ideals. I just can't stand f**ing hypocrites.
Bah. Hypocrisy is everywhere. What bugs me is that they somehow think that they know what is ethical in the first place. Who are they to decide that it is wrong for an animal to suffer? Seeing a suffering animal invokes feelings of sadness, horror, and disgust in most people (or in me at least) and they want to see it stop, but that's just how our brains are programed and it doesn't make it wrong. There have been studies that show that people who enjoy inflicting cruelty on an animal are more likely to grow up to be , but that doesn't mean that letting animals suffer or causing animals to suffer is wrong either.
Unless there is some sort of god above, I don't think there is any innate law of the universe that determines what is wrong and what is right, it's up to us to decide. And just because PETA are noisy and violent doesn't make their point of view valid.
</rant>
If a domesticated animal has been abandoned and unwanted, the most humane thing to do is end its suffering as quickly and painlessly as possible.
And having done that, it seems like of a waste not to eat its meat, make clothes out of it's skin, and glue out of its tendons.
You livies hate us deadies!
Or...what other motor speeds could be targeted, and what would the results be ?
Could this be the plausible deniability of fault that Toyota have been searching for?
Why is it that every time someone asks a question like this on Slashdot, someone always pipes up with "your kid shouldn't have a computer they should be playing outside"? Who's to say the kid doesn't already play outside and doesn't already own a handful of fishing poles? Seriously, you aren't helping.
There's plenty of time in the day for doing both things, and depending on what part of the world he's in, going outside during most of the day is generally frowned on these days due to holes in the ozone layer (or is that just us in Australia?). A bit of time on the computer every so often isn't going to hurt him, especially if its a substitute for what passes as entertainment on TV these days.
If you have a payment due on X date, you wait until day X - 1, and something goes wrong and delays you by one day, this is your fault, not your bank's fault.
While most industries would _love_ it if everyone paid a day early and they got to suck on the interest, i'm keeping my money until the last minute. If my payment is delayed because of a bank error then it's the banks fault, not mine.
Maybe you are a bit older than me, but for pretty much the whole time i've been paying bills it's been electronic and it's never gone wrong, ever. We generally try and keep a bit of a buffer in the bank but I suspect that if we were with this particular bank it might not have helped... a bit of a buffer doesn't really help if your bank deducts your homeloan repayment (or any other major expense) an extra 3 times from your account or otherwise marks your account overdrawn when you go to pay for your meal at a restaurant.
That said, I get where your frustration comes from, there are plenty of people who could learn a few things about managing money, but second guessing a major failure like this is out of the scope of what I would call good financial management.
My sources tell me they doing their batch run on a cluster of PS2's.
No I think it's reasonable to point it out explicitly. If they had just said "Observed by a team of researchers", you would fairly quickly assume that there wouldn't be any Canadians in that team, for obvious reasons.
Just like if a blind guy had ascended Mount Everest, the news article would read "A team of mountaineers, including a blind guy, ...".
That's the problem with generalisations. They are all stupid.
And seriously, I bet you weren't really that offended. I doubt you could get to 49 years of age in an industry traditionally dominated by men without developing a thick skin to such stupid generalisations and a very well balanced sense of perspective.
You do have a point about the grandfather bit though... google for "so simple that your grandfather could understand it" and google asks " did you mean 'so simple that your grandmother would understand it'?"
Young kids have awful coordination. Big blocks. You can make a good set of blocks for about $10 and a day of your time.
Or you can buy more blocks than you can easily carry at a garage sale for 50c :)
Another good gift you can give both the kids and the family is to destroy their TV. A lot to be said for NOT having a TV in the house, and spending an hour each night playing games.
And yet if you walk into someone's house and destroy their TV, _you_ would be the one going to jail!
TV, like most things, is only bad if it's overdone. It's great for entertaining kids when they are sick, or just when you've got to hang out a load of washing and want to have some chance of the kids not trashing the house while your back is turned.
We've got more Barbie DVD's than I can count, and the kids love singing along to them (guess how quickly that got old :)
Our TV is just a smallish CRT. It broke a while back but we decided to get it fixed instead of buying a flat screen as our youngest at the time enjoyed playing a game that involved running at the tv and hitting it with his hands. And we just don't watch enough TV to justify spending that much on it.
They really do have quite incredible memories for stuff they are interested in. My oldest daughter is really into Big Bang Theory and she gets my youngest (5yo) to act out scenes from it. He can recite all the "sing soft kitty to me" scenes word for word, which he'd do over and over again while falling asleep :)
Books are great, and young kids are quite happy to read the same book over and over again but as they get older they'll tend to read it once or twice and move on. It might sound corny but maybe you could take the kid(s) to the library once a month/fortnight/weekend/whatever if they live close enough to you and your schedule allows it? A bit hard if you live hours away but spending time with an attentive adult is the next best thing to cheap plastic crap :)
My bike, books, lego, and computer are the only material things I can really remember spending a lot of time on as a kid. We got RC cars (which need charging all the time), motorbikes (which need fuel and adult supervision), and all sorts of other things but those 4 are the ones I really remember and that were always there and ready for me to play with (except maybe the computer... stupid computer hogging siblings!)
perhaps a subway train that drills its own tunnels, like a worm.
Well... there's this, but it probably doesn't have the speed or general ferociousness you are looking for.
Also, "a single individual" is redundant.
"single individual" might be written to rule out any confusion between "several individuals". Individual can mean "person", so depending on the meaning it isn't redundant.
The story you portrayed would be there was pure hate involved.
I was thinking more of pure indifference. Someone doing something because it entertained them, not to intentionally cause any pain to anyone else.
Why should they be respected? Feeling and opinion should not be respected just cause. That's how you end up in another dark ages.
Because on the whole, respecting peoples feelings makes the world a better place for all those who live in it, that's why.
I'm sure that you can easily construct many extreme cases where the above doesn't hold true, but wanting the dead bodies of people you once cared for to be treated with a bit of respect doesn't hurt anyone.
Yes, you would be upset, but not for the reasons you think you would.
Always look at the motive. They must want to hate you to do something like that, and that's actually what you are really picking up. The action itself is of no consequence, for good or for bad.
What part of 'rational or not' are you having a problem with here? When people are upset the last thing they want to hear is someone telling them why they shouldn't feel the way they do. That's just now how it works.