Comment Celular (Score 1) 115
Cellular is pretty much the only reasonable option given the lack of infrastructure. It can be installed completely wireless, aside from power. And finally, an answer to where the old phones can go.
Cellular is pretty much the only reasonable option given the lack of infrastructure. It can be installed completely wireless, aside from power. And finally, an answer to where the old phones can go.
replacing rockets with prayer
This is almost a good idea, but you've got it backwards. If you convince christians that sending their prayers to heaven on rocket casings will make them more interesting to jesus then you'll have all the funding you can use.
If you're turning a 1/2" bolt using a Hulk-like plastic ratchet with a 1" drive, you will have a lot more mechanical advantage to work with.
As an added bonus, big oversized tools are easier to work with while wearing gloves...
You're absolutely right, which means the *ratchet and drive* are under the highest stress.
Those parts are bigger than the output. The highest force is applied to the output, not the ratcheting mechanism, because the output is of lesser diameter.
I recently broke a Craftsman 1/2" to 3/8" socket drive adapter by breaking off the 3/8 drive nub, but it took a cheater bar to supply sufficient force.
What kind of a plant is designed in a way that a full failure of their control system would result in being unable to shutdown in a controlled manner.
Pretty much all of them. At best, you can lose a batch of something if the process fails in the middle. If Sunsweet loses power in the middle of cooking a batch of fruit paste, the batch not only fails and has to be trashed but cleaning the system is far more difficult than if the batch succeeds. At the point where factories become complex enough to need digital automation, you cannot reasonably create a failsafe mechanism which will prevent an error from losing a batch. The best you can hope for in some situations, probably most, is to create mechanical interlocks which will prevent immediately catastrophic combinations of inputs and outputs.
Well, thankfully I live in a country where it is virtually impossible to get into the predicament due to the special way our traffic lights work. You know 5 seconds before your green light goes to yellow that it's about to happen.
It's been well-demonstrated that some cities adjusted the yellows downwards. That's not a problem inherent to red light cameras, but there's no other "good" reason to do it.
So I really don't understand where this bashing of
It's not about perceived quality, although the perceived quality is fairly low because all of the identifiably
If you're happy being tied to Windows, more power to you, I guess. I'm not. I'm not happy about ask.com invitations either, mind you. But I don't actually see those on Linux.
Don't try to blow this off as some kind of SJWer bullshit. I believe those people actually exist, but I don't believe as many of the people you think are that are in fact that. I think gamergate is bullshit, and I have had passionate argument about how the name "feminist" is sexist and had to personally field the arguments about how it's not sexism if you're on the more oppressed side. Well, I could see how that could seem true if one doesn't own a dictionary... but let's face it, 1) the core claims of Gamergate have now been shown to be overblown at best, 2) there is no public evidence that any of the claims of harassment or threat at question were fabricated, only speculation, and 3) gaming journalism has long been corrupt, and even if all the initial claims were true, this would have been a minor example. So, being prepared to have a massive fight about it (even putting the discussion of threats and harassment aside for the moment) is fairly pathetic.
Do you really find it hard to believe that these death threats are genuine? I don't mean to imply that they are genuine in the sense that they will be acted upon, but that's not actually necessary for them to be an attack, is it? In fact, depending on where you live, it often is not. It's not okay to tell people that you're going to kill them if you could carry out the threat, because of the real psychological impact that has. We don't want a society of fight or flight. Being able to relax once in a while is, in fact, one of the primary goals of civilization.
Having a game of Civilizations where the best way to achieve victory is through scientific exploration IS a political statement.
The best way to achieve victory in Civ is to crush your nearest neighbors early in the game, and expand into their territory. That's true whether you're pursuing the scientific game (either for eventual economic or space victory) or the military conquest victory.
There's no reason why, for example, her boyfriend at Kotaku couldn't raise his hand at a meeting and say, "Hey, how about this game Depression Quest that my girlfriend made? I think someone should review that. Not me of course, because I am filled with integrity, but one of you should give her some free press."
What you're not getting is that this would be an example of relatively high integrity in the entertainment media. Most of it is much sleazier. A favor for a friend is the cornerstone of successful business. The benefits are intangible in this case, because you [allegedly] can't simply buy that kind of press from that particular outlet. But most "news" is simply something some corporation wanted published, and it often gets reprinted without meaningful comment, let alone changes. The parallel to law is, pretty frankly, disgusting.
The flip side to your argument is that nobody should ever say anything nice about someone they're screwing if they are a media personality, right? But since the internets have made sure that everyone knows who you were inside last night if you are even remotely worth trolling, we all have plenty of disclosure anyway.
That this moment is the "gate" of gaming journalism is deeply embarrassing, and what's more, it has guaranteed that gaming journalism is going to go through another era of embarrassing corruption — not the kind where someone helps a friend, but the kind where review scores are just made-up bullshit. This is what tells us that Gamergate is in fact simple petulance. There has never been integrity in gaming journalism, and you guys (yeah, you've found a handful of women to ally themselves with your "cause", congrats) are upset now because some sex was involved. Usually, it's just the typical ho-hum giving games a free pass in the form of undeservedly high review scores so that more free review copies will show up, which has led directly to the generally pathetic state of new game releases where they don't work for large numbers of subscribers until a patch cycle has passed and so on. The reviewers give a free pass to poor quality and we all "suffer", at the first world level anyway in this case. That's not to say that nobody should be incensed about the lack of ethics in gaming journalism, only that even if all the gamergater claims were true this would still not be the most egregious example of its lack going on right now. You would still have, for example, the entire mainstream gaming press. And by the way, the reason they're not sounding off on this whole rant? They're happy that you guys are distracting the people's gaze away from them, and clouding the whole issue of journalistic integrity with this nonsense non-story. Indeed, if the mass media et al have noticed this flap at all, they must be breathing a sigh of relief that calls for journalistic integrity at the grassroots level are currently being linked with sexism — due to some sexism.
More than half the year is entirely without rain, which is inconvenient at best.
Cisterns are not a new technology. They seem to work even in places with less rainfall than Los Angeles.
If I'm wrong, so be it, but the chances of that aren't very likely.
We know that the gamergater position is based on lies, so it's most reasonable to assume that the lies are coming from that side; they've proven their willingness to lie, the whole thing is based on lies, it's lies all the way down.
After all that has happened it's almost disingenuous to point out that the review never happened, like a "white nationalist" pointing out minor arguments over how many thousands of Jews died in a particular camp.
Hmm, evasion, godwin... BINGO! Man, this thread has been pay dirt.
It's true that review never happened but a good deal of favoritism did.
Welcome to commercial journalism! Boy, have you ever picked the wrong place to make your stand.
the journalist does implicitly make a commitment towards their readers to perform their job with a certain level of professionalism and adherence to good journalistic practices
And that level is very, very low. Pretty much all sites inflate scores so that they will continue to receive review copies. As you say, whether genitals are involved is totally irrelevant. It's beyond hypocrisy to make this moment the stand against the lack of integrity in games journalism when there has never been any to begin with. Games journalism was born at a time when journalism in general had already become grossly commercial, and it set out to emulate it as closely as possible. The games magazines followed the format of the sports magazines, which were already about selling you shit. It would be shocking if it had not come out to be horribly corrupt.
The fact that sex was the tipping point proves just how pathetic the gamergaters are. If they could get laid, they'd be less jealous. They should spend less time hating, and more time hustling.
"The four building blocks of the universe are fire, water, gravel and vinyl." -- Dave Barry