How about a fighting game (since it IS a simple genre) where strikes are realistic? The crack of bones, the slap of meat against meat, and if you stick a knife in someone, a bloody gash with blood coming out.
Red rain, tidal waves, earthquakes, electric hurricanes, tornadoes where none have been seen before and a biblical crusading war in the middle east that is being conducted by the Antichrist!
The end of the world is coming!!!
CAFE standards were stoopid. They worked somewhat on the whole, but idea is totally retarded.
For those who don't know, the CAFE system orders car companies to sell a fuel efficient vehicle for every gas guzzler so that they meet a median level of fuel efficiency across all the cars they sell.
Another words, they were selling super cheap low efficiency vehicles at a loss just to cover for the "normal" cars they sell.
That's why small cars in the US generally suck and are mostly badge engineering jobs. At the same time, normal cars could still be gas guzzlers.
If they had had rules to cover emmissions and fuel efficiency in all vehicles, it would force car companies to improve efficiency (and quality) through and through.
That's the way it is in Japan, and I don't see anyone saying Japanese small cars are lousy. Even performance is not affected, and Japanese sporty cars make do with 2.0liter inline fours, yet have plenty of power.
"Sure, it's an extreme example, but once you take the market forces out of play, quality will plummet."
Like a series of European countries? Say, like Brittain?
A recent study concludes, that the US health care is the worlds most expensive system, yet quality wise it does not come close to competing with the free universal healthcare systems in Europe.
Actually, Pol Pot was supported and sponsored by the US and deposed by communist Vietnam.
As far as Stalin goes, well, I guess thats inexcusable, however, it was in the process of forced industrialization in the country wich took a few decades in the Soviet Union and hundreds of years in Britain for instance. How many people were killed in the Dikensian nightmare that was Brittain during industrialization?
Deaths attributed to Mao usually include the famine brought on by the Great Leap Forward. This was actually caused by failed industrial and agricultural policy and poor communications -not really Mao. The other event was the Cultural Revolution, where indeed many people died violently and Mao's name was revered. However, it was not Mao doing the killing, but thousands, perhaps millions of ordinary Chinese. The whole event was truly a giant multifaceted societal upheaval, not the machinations of one man.
As far as Kim goes, that is for sure a rather depressing regime, but it has been under threat from war and invasion for most of its existance helping to keep a small very powerful bunch of people in power.
I read the article. Very intersting, kinda creepy.
But I don't like the way he (?) leaves other explanations out:
"Above arguments and facts indicate that it is difficult to explain the red rain phenomenon by using usual arguments like dust storms etc."
A thorough study of other possibilites would have led more credit to his pet theory. I don't think it is a good idea to use "etc." in a scientific paper. I am not saying that the "above arguments" mentioned in the quote are not valid, but he sure does not dwell on them very long.
So area 51 really HAD a UFO that has been dismanteled for its technology!
That's what explains the sudden surge in new techonolgies!
(of course the little people are actually people from the future that have evolved and they accidentally jumpstarted the technologial evolution that will eventually lead to time travel...oh no, I've gone cross eyed...)
Yes, yes, but regular cars nowadays have very advanced equipment. Lightweight aluminum all independent multi-arm suspension, all round ventilated disk brakes, advanced rigid unibody design and very advanced engines.
SUV's on the other hand have flexy body on frame chassis, stiff rear (and sometimes front) axels, drum brakes on the rear and old fashioned pushrod v8 engines.
This of course makes them very rugged for towing or hauling, but not very good cars.
You always get more and newer stuff when you spend money on a car.
That is what I've always thought too. Whats up with all the BS about ABS not shortening stopping distances?
I drive in slippery weather, which is alot like driving on asphalt, only you can go slower before you slip, so it is a good place to practice.
I'd take ABS over regular brakes any day based on my experiences. However, the difference between skillful use of regular brakes and ABS is perhaps overstated.
"All of this is expensive. A typical SUV starts out at the dealership at over $25K, with most coming in at over $35K once you add the additional towing packages, etc. Many come in at over $45K!
Actually, SUV's might be expensive at the dealership, but they are very cheap to produce, hence the extreme profitability.
Well, yes, I suppose what you are getting at is, that to operate an SUV, one would be required a commercial drivers licence?
I guess that would be one way to organize things and would in effect make SUV's much more expensive and require more trouble for the owner to get one.
What you said about gas is true as well. Alot of the problems with traffic in the USA would be resolved simply by making gas twice as expensive. That way, a gas guzzler would become the owners problem.
In the end, I guess fuel prices will kill the SUV -for the simple fact, that more mass requires more energy to move.
"I find it amusing when the vehicle is blamed rather than the operator.
I agree. Seatbelts ought to be BANNED and a large spike pointing at the drivers chest should be fitted on the steering column. Not only would it make people drive really safely, it would cut down on motoring.
Funny thing anout SUV's. They really are a hazard. Not only is the center of gravity higher, but they usually have misdesigned suspension (Ford Exploder, Mitsubishi Montero) that actually encourages rolling over, SUV's have higher bumpers, so cars running into them slide under, killing the occupants in the lower car. SUV's use more gas and cause more pollution. A very big problem is roof crush. SUV roofs are notorious for being frail and crushing in a roll over accident, squishing the people inside.
I for one don't like the idea of dying by having my spinal column driven into my skull.
Many of these things of course could be mitigated. There could be a standard lane change test to determine suspension quality, there could be rules on the center of gravity, there could be rules on bumper height (like on regular cars) and there could be rules on pollution, perheps making all SUV's except the kind with frugal modern common rail diesel engines (with particle filters) financially impposible to own/buy.
But this is not the case. Infact, with GM and to some extent Ford in financial trouble (and with all their profits coming from SUV's) the current US administration wil do nothing about the laws, that infact make SUV's above the law.
Right now, SUV's are excempt from current fuel efficiency laws (that are not very good in the first place, mind you), they are excempt from bumper laws (making SUV's lousy and expensive to fix in even the smallest parking lot accident) and there are no laws governing roll-overs (only tests).
With all these problems, I don't see why they even allow these on the road.
The funny thing is, I really like the idea of sitting up high in my car and being able to see further. That is probably the only reason SUV's are so popular. Looks like they could accomplish that in a macho looking vehicle without these problems.
The problem with blimps is the fact that they can't fly high enough. The lower you fly, the more extreme the weather is. Speed is important, but perhaps would not be such a big issue.
The lower you fly, the more succeptable you are to changing weather patterns.
"Expertise is a form of power; that is, experts have the ability to influence others. Alvin Toffler's Powershift argues that the three main kinds of social power are violence, wealth, sucking cock, and knowledge and, further, that these three kinds of power interact.
Slashdot Mirror
Now I can finally find my pig in the dark!
How about a fighting game (since it IS a simple genre) where strikes are realistic? The crack of bones, the slap of meat against meat, and if you stick a knife in someone, a bloody gash with blood coming out.
Now that's what I call entertainment!
So when do we get stereo?
Red rain, tidal waves, earthquakes, electric hurricanes, tornadoes where none have been seen before and a biblical crusading war in the middle east that is being conducted by the Antichrist! The end of the world is coming!!!
They should re-do the experiment. This time with big mallots and kittens.
Segway users are all NERDY FAGGOTS!
CAFE standards were stoopid. They worked somewhat on the whole, but idea is totally retarded.
For those who don't know, the CAFE system orders car companies to sell a fuel efficient vehicle for every gas guzzler so that they meet a median level of fuel efficiency across all the cars they sell.
Another words, they were selling super cheap low efficiency vehicles at a loss just to cover for the "normal" cars they sell.
That's why small cars in the US generally suck and are mostly badge engineering jobs. At the same time, normal cars could still be gas guzzlers.
If they had had rules to cover emmissions and fuel efficiency in all vehicles, it would force car companies to improve efficiency (and quality) through and through.
That's the way it is in Japan, and I don't see anyone saying Japanese small cars are lousy. Even performance is not affected, and Japanese sporty cars make do with 2.0liter inline fours, yet have plenty of power.
"Sure, it's an extreme example, but once you take the market forces out of play, quality will plummet."
Like a series of European countries? Say, like Brittain?
A recent study concludes, that the US health care is the worlds most expensive system, yet quality wise it does not come close to competing with the free universal healthcare systems in Europe.
I know, facts are stupid things.
Actually, Pol Pot was supported and sponsored by the US and deposed by communist Vietnam.
As far as Stalin goes, well, I guess thats inexcusable, however, it was in the process of forced industrialization in the country wich took a few decades in the Soviet Union and hundreds of years in Britain for instance. How many people were killed in the Dikensian nightmare that was Brittain during industrialization?
Deaths attributed to Mao usually include the famine brought on by the Great Leap Forward. This was actually caused by failed industrial and agricultural policy and poor communications -not really Mao. The other event was the Cultural Revolution, where indeed many people died violently and Mao's name was revered. However, it was not Mao doing the killing, but thousands, perhaps millions of ordinary Chinese. The whole event was truly a giant multifaceted societal upheaval, not the machinations of one man.
As far as Kim goes, that is for sure a rather depressing regime, but it has been under threat from war and invasion for most of its existance helping to keep a small very powerful bunch of people in power.
I read the article. Very intersting, kinda creepy.
But I don't like the way he (?) leaves other explanations out:
"Above arguments and facts indicate that it is difficult to explain
the red rain phenomenon by using usual arguments like dust storms etc."
A thorough study of other possibilites would have led more credit to his pet theory. I don't think it is a good idea to use "etc." in a scientific paper. I am not saying that the "above arguments" mentioned in the quote are not valid, but he sure does not dwell on them very long.
I knew it!
So area 51 really HAD a UFO that has been dismanteled for its technology!
That's what explains the sudden surge in new techonolgies!
(of course the little people are actually people from the future that have evolved and they accidentally jumpstarted the technologial evolution that will eventually lead to time travel...oh no, I've gone cross eyed...)
Yes, yes, but regular cars nowadays have very advanced equipment. Lightweight aluminum all independent multi-arm suspension, all round ventilated disk brakes, advanced rigid unibody design and very advanced engines.
SUV's on the other hand have flexy body on frame chassis, stiff rear (and sometimes front) axels, drum brakes on the rear and old fashioned pushrod v8 engines.
This of course makes them very rugged for towing or hauling, but not very good cars.
You always get more and newer stuff when you spend money on a car.
The XM is a sort of engineers car, atleast in that it is totally over engineered. Unfortunately those engineers happened to be French.
That is what I've always thought too. Whats up with all the BS about ABS not shortening stopping distances?
I drive in slippery weather, which is alot like driving on asphalt, only you can go slower before you slip, so it is a good place to practice.
I'd take ABS over regular brakes any day based on my experiences. However, the difference between skillful use of regular brakes and ABS is perhaps overstated.
ABS won't stop you from skidding sideways. Electronic brake force distribution will. Two different things.
"All of this is expensive. A typical SUV starts out at the dealership at over $25K, with most coming in at over $35K once you add the additional towing packages, etc. Many come in at over $45K!
Actually, SUV's might be expensive at the dealership, but they are very cheap to produce, hence the extreme profitability.
Well, yes, I suppose what you are getting at is, that to operate an SUV, one would be required a commercial drivers licence?
I guess that would be one way to organize things and would in effect make SUV's much more expensive and require more trouble for the owner to get one.
What you said about gas is true as well. Alot of the problems with traffic in the USA would be resolved simply by making gas twice as expensive. That way, a gas guzzler would become the owners problem.
In the end, I guess fuel prices will kill the SUV -for the simple fact, that more mass requires more energy to move.
I suspect you are working for the company that is going to make those. I don't see how having the mouse pad stuck to your keyboard is "really nice".
"What's the point of having a USB memory with you all the time, if you have to have a separate adaptor to actually connect it to the computer?"
I think there is a law that says that every gadget must have atleast ONE essential wire that you just HAVE to lug around seperately.
"Check out our super small ultrasleek gadget that you simply must have!"
(oh, and a mess of spaghetti twice the size and mass of the gadget)
"I find it amusing when the vehicle is blamed rather than the operator.
I agree. Seatbelts ought to be BANNED and a large spike pointing at the drivers chest should be fitted on the steering column. Not only would it make people drive really safely, it would cut down on motoring.
Funny thing anout SUV's. They really are a hazard. Not only is the center of gravity higher, but they usually have misdesigned suspension (Ford Exploder, Mitsubishi Montero) that actually encourages rolling over, SUV's have higher bumpers, so cars running into them slide under, killing the occupants in the lower car. SUV's use more gas and cause more pollution. A very big problem is roof crush. SUV roofs are notorious for being frail and crushing in a roll over accident, squishing the people inside.
I for one don't like the idea of dying by having my spinal column driven into my skull.
Many of these things of course could be mitigated. There could be a standard lane change test to determine suspension quality, there could be rules on the center of gravity, there could be rules on bumper height (like on regular cars) and there could be rules on pollution, perheps making all SUV's except the kind with frugal modern common rail diesel engines (with particle filters) financially impposible to own/buy.
But this is not the case. Infact, with GM and to some extent Ford in financial trouble (and with all their profits coming from SUV's) the current US administration wil do nothing about the laws, that infact make SUV's above the law.
Right now, SUV's are excempt from current fuel efficiency laws (that are not very good in the first place, mind you), they are excempt from bumper laws (making SUV's lousy and expensive to fix in even the smallest parking lot accident) and there are no laws governing roll-overs (only tests).
With all these problems, I don't see why they even allow these on the road.
The funny thing is, I really like the idea of sitting up high in my car and being able to see further. That is probably the only reason SUV's are so popular. Looks like they could accomplish that in a macho looking vehicle without these problems.
Cross-over anyone?
The problem with blimps is the fact that they can't fly high enough. The lower you fly, the more extreme the weather is. Speed is important, but perhaps would not be such a big issue.
The lower you fly, the more succeptable you are to changing weather patterns.
Umm, so what exactly happened?
Quote from Wikipedia article "Expertise":
"Expertise is a form of power; that is, experts have the ability to influence others. Alvin Toffler's Powershift argues that the three main kinds of social power are violence, wealth, sucking cock, and knowledge and, further, that these three kinds of power interact.
Nuff said.
(And they can't even count.)
*rubs dada21 all over naked body*