Was that 99.99% test done on a fire arm that has been used much? I kind of remember one of the big problems with these kinds of devices is that if you practiced regularly with the gun the shock from all those firings tended to break this kind of hardware. (And yes, you're supposed to practice with the actual gun you're going to use to protect yourself with. Picking up a random gun and getting off a perfect only happens in the movies.)
Since you know, righties hate stem cell research and lefties hate genetic engineering. (Which this apparently uses when they insert a couple of genes. Yeah, I'm cynical so go ahead and mod me down.)
I ask since it always seems that they use that one to explain everything even when it doesn't make sense. (IE fire walking where I saw Jearl Walker use plastic bags to build up sweat on his feet to do that but it still works even if you don't do this. BTW it seems the only requirement to fire walking is just don't stop.)
I mean we had a statie here in Mass literally shoot someone while hunting and didn't get charged. (Long story short he didn't identify what he was shooting at, thought a lady's dog was a deer and ended up hitting her. Last I checked any responsible hunter would not only know what he's shooting at, which this guy didn't do, but he'd also know what part of the animal he was shooting so it would die quickly without needless suffering. This guy took a half blind shot into some bushes because he thought he saw a tail.) The guy is still a statie and yes, still has a gun.
I mean it worked for Windows Vista. (I'll always wonder if they didn't have to rename it would we have gotten what became Windows 7 as a service pack.)
and of course I get ignored. I'm still pissed that I told them for the trade show demo we should use the older version which actually works and not the latest version which has a couple of show stopper bugs.(Given that 3 days is unrealistic for me to fix that and have QA test it.) Of course in their infinite wisdom they not only should we go with the new version(ooh, it's got new features, we don't care what they actually are it has them) but that I should add another new feature to it. (Lets just say they should have took my advice.)
Hey, I could bring up how they had the great idea to release software during a literal blizzard.(Yes, that really happened and yes it really was a blizzard. This did not go well.)
So "Cat Scan" was too bad of a pun?
It sounds great in theory but I've worked places recently where developers decided they didn't need to do code reviews or follow coding standards or use source control
Would be develop a way to make air, water, and sunlight into petroleum without needing all the time it takes nature to do the same thing.
My understanding is that the main way in pretty much every war one plane shot down another plane isn't via dog fighting but pretty much dicta boelcke, IE the victim was shot down before he had any idea he was getting attacked. (In other words "Shoot him in the fucking back.")
Why wouldn't you pretty much use this in every fighter plane we use. (I mean besides having to come up with upgraded electronics for the F-15, F-16, F-18, ETC) Why tie it to the F-35?
thing with you but I've seen similar stuff with self taught "experts". Let's see, I've seen experts that didn't know what the real difference between a list and array were, let alone knew what a map was. (CS 102 stuff.) Would always try to reinvent the wheel whether it was writing their own quick sort instead of using the built in one or building their own formatting routines that make the same strings as the ones already available in the class they're using. Then there's the whole issue of doing object oriented code because they're using C++ but having no concepts of some pretty basic OO ideas. (Like encapsulation or inheritance. Everything is public and everything is implemented multiple times it classes that really should be derived from one basic class.) Of course I'm guessing yours said the same stuff like "Oh my code is linear, if we need it to run faster get a faster computer." (It wasn't, it was order N^2)
I saw a report on I think 60 minutes probably 10 or 15 years ago where the black community was up in arms because they were losing out on scholarships. The complaint was they were losing them to the children of recent immigrants from Africa, a group that hadn't gone through the history of slavery because their ancestors didn't live in the US. (The whole point as far as they were concerned was this was to give a leg up to people that as a class had suffered through slavery and racism and recent African immigrants were not in this group but qualified for the scholarships and took them away from the people they were intended for.) To add insult to injury the recent African immigrants tended to be fairly successful and that lead to the complaint they didn't need the help anyway. But like you wrote, these immigrants were a self selecting group who went through all that hassle and they were more likely to be successful in the end.(It looks to me as though any group that intentional migrates will tend to do well because they're the driven to find success while people that are forced to migrate probably won't.)
It was one of a couple of TG-16 games they did on the Sega-CD. Funny thing was even though Lords of Thunder was basically the same game as the Duo-CD version the Sega-CD version of Dungeon Explorer was a totally new game.
from the Sega CD version of Dungeon Explorer
.(There's an obscure reference.)