Floating cannon battles with the Ron Paul blimp.

The engineers don't have to seem as silly now that they get to put the purestrain gold shells to good use. Hard to starboard!

Um, no it's not. Sorry you suck at reading.

"We need more sensationalist bullshit that doesn't actually reflect the event PRONTO!"

>What's so great about nuclear fusion? If this works does that mean we'll have clean energy without radioactive byproducts?

Yes. Some reactions produce neutrons, but that's more of a 'how do we shield the reactors properly' issue.

>Why is this better than nuclear power plants today?

Because it's several (well, that's an understatement) orders of magnitude more efficient (in theory) and does not require uranium mining. Startup requires an initial energy investment but after this it is self-sustaining.

>Next, assuming we get this working, what material does it require to make it work successfully? And really, what then becomes the bottle neck to producing infinite cheap energy?

Mostly hydrogen and helium isotopes. Since fusion is not a particular, there are several different combinations that can result in exothermic reactions. Helium-3, for example, is known to be present in abundance on the moon. Unfortunately, the kind of reactions that it's involved in kind of suck for various reasons (energy density and production of neutrons) and helium in general is rather difficult to produce anyway.

They testfired the lasers they're going to be using for fusion later. Those beams (attempt to) put out a fixed amount of energy. They reported the total energy. No fusion happened, no energy was net produced, the only thing that happened was the lasers fired at 420J each.

This is pretty clear from the article, but not like anyone would RTFA anyway.

It's pretty easy to claim your own arguments are honest and insightful. Perhaps There Is No Cabal.

As ironic as that would be, if you want to be semantic it's only true if "illegal activities" is solely equal to "hacking". Otherwise it's purely inductive. Otherwise, anyone could get out of the same predicament on paper quite easily. 0. Create a site where users clearly are encouraged to blow up flags and statues of Lincoln or the moon or something suitably illegal and unpopular 1. Claim you're not responsible for the illegal activities of others 2. Ask people to stop turning left on red lights on your blog or something 3. People obviously don't listen and continue turning on red lights 4. You have supposedly proven you have no influence on the illegal activities of others and as such cannot be held responsible

The fact that no, people are not investing in $1000 graphics cards (they don't exist for the consumer market), processors (except idiots) and $500 computer cases (again except idiots) aside, the things that hit the CPU in gaming engines don't lend themselves to parallelism at all. And if they do, they're either now or going to be shoved on the GPU. If you've picked up a game box in the last four years, in fact system requirements do ask for "dual-core CPUs" and not insane, useless Ghz totals.

Are you seriously suggesting that answering a telephone is a task that is inherently parallel? The CPU is not a big truck. More cores aren't simply "extra power" just lying around.

Dunno, it's tough to get more advanced than "black".

Much less to conflate them with catgirls. If there was going to be a joke there, the infamous Bush human-animal hybrid quote would have been a lot better.

There's a spec for that. It's called "micro-ATX".

Looks like this game is leaving quite the trail of destruction behind it.

Your card was intended to be a basic step up from integrated one and a half years ago. Despite the software industry's absolutely nonsensical stand on supporting completely obsolescent hardware (Valve won't drop DX8 support for TF2 even though doing so would mean a better looking game w/ the improvements made from L4D), blowing $100 every few years to get a decent video card is not very difficult even for someone without a job.

They do run into each other, though it's extremely rare and I've only see it happen a couple times. Usually a Jeep will drive in and the other faction will open fire. Still, if GTA3 can do it, why can't FC2?

The voice acting isn't coincidence. FC2 has not been praised for the voices enough. It rivals Left 4 Dead in pure contextual voice acting glory: if you are hiding in a bus while under fire, the enemies will tell you you're "on the bus to nowhere, pal". If your reputation is high, they will believe you're two, three, or even more people. Characters will fight with each other about pursuing you, and freak out if their friends are dead and you have a high reputation ("why did I ever come to this god-forsaken place". They will go on patrol, fail to find you and then report back about how they've lost you, then go back to chatting about random events. It is absolutely stunning and while the game is decidedly mediocre to above average, that aspect was amazing. This sort of thing is absolutely necessary for immersive gameplay.