Given that you're talking about cars in a conversation about ships, you may want to rethink tossing around words like gibberish. Crawl back under your bridge, troll.

Mashing Ctrl-C like a maniac during the boot cycle would do it.

I also got a TI-99/4A as my first machine. Fun story about "on the path:" Texas Instruments actually made a bunch of those machines in Johnson City, TN. I moved there in the late 90s and got a job working for Siemens, who had bought the industrial automation division of TI a few years prior, which included the Johnson City plant. I had a desk in a lab in a large electronics manufacturing space that was repurposed as a cube farm and was privileged enough to work with some amazing people, a few legit graybeards and a bunch of old school EE types. In passing, one of them gave me a history lesson about the plant and what they had done there in the past.

It turned out that my desk at my first "real" IT job was fifteen feet from where my first computer was made.

Coincidentally, and not as happy a memory, my mother came down to visit me at Christmas that year, and I showed her my office between Christmas and New Years when almost no one was in the office. She took a picture of me at my desk, and that picture hung in her home ever since. She just passed away last December, twenty five years to the day after that picture was taken.

I was as bored as you were in the stores, and used to go to all the display PCs and add "ctty null" to their autoexec.bat files.

You forgot to multiply that 75% by the efficiency of the generator...

So, first: explanation of why coal produces more CO2 when burned than oil or gas. The short version is, "because coal has more carbon in it."

Next, comparison of efficiency of different types of fossil power. The charts you want are on pages 13 and 15. The data is pretty noisy because it's by country generating, but coal and oil are roughly the same efficiency if you remove the outlier datapoints.

The rest of my post is inferences drawn from those two metrics. You're welcome to dispute those inferences instead of dismissing my comment as nonsense. Ass.

Are you sure about that?

Oil and coal have roughly the same efficiency for power generation, but coal produces more CO2 per ton than oil. That suggests you could put a generator on the ship to charge the batteries (burning bunker fuel) and have "lower lifetime emissions" than charging the ship from a coal power plant. Of course, instead of generating electric power with that bunker fuel, you could use it to turn the propeller shafts directly at even higher efficiency, so...

I haven't done the math, but unless the assumptions above are incorrect I would say you'd lose that bet.

It's true that the House of Representatives will not ratify this treaty. It's also true that the House will not ratify any treaties, because it is not part of the ratification process.

Again, you show a shocking lack of understanding about the treaty process. 50 + vice presidential tiebreak doesn't get you there, treaties in the US are ratified by a supermajority vote in the senate--you need 67 in favor (though, I suppose, under the right circumstances you could do it with as few as 35 votes in favor, i.e. if you convinced 49 senators to not show up that day you'd still have a quorum and the constitution specifies "two thirds of those present").

The summary suggests they never claimed it was certified N95. They claimed they used "N95 grade filters" (which was, apparently, true in that the filter material would block 95% of particles). They never claimed the mask itself was "certified" in any way.

I'm sure the droid that wrote the copy was probably using "N95 grade filters" in the exact same way that advertisers use the phrase "military grade encryption" to refer to 56-bit DES--technically true, but meaningless and misleading.

Counterpoint: "you are required to document your criminal conspiracy and maintain those documents for seven years" has obvious 5th amendment problems.

While "screeching" is certainly hyperbole, how about Hillary Rodham Clinton?

Maybe you think that's not a direct enough claim? How about this one:

Or maybe Jimmy Carter is more your speed?

Maybe the 11 Democrats who objected to the electoral vote certification on January 6, 2017?

No, sir. No allegations of stolen elections from Democrats, none at all.

I think you misunderstand the quote. I'm not suggesting there are no atheists in the military.

"RoddyVision, please make all the cars look like hot rods and all the people walking look like babes on roller skates."

Sorry, but all RoddyVision allows you to do is pierce the alien signal and allow you to see things as they really are. Side affects include chronic migraines and an unfortunate tendency to run out of bubblegum.

...to an extent. Sure, the Army and Marines measure ground distances in kilometers and e.g. elevation in meters, and all services describe their weapons in terms of millimeters, but beyond that? The USAF and Navy still use nautical miles for distance, knots for speed, and feet for elevation. The navy still uses yards for range.

This is more accurate, and the reason is simple: those guys only see one color, and that's green (or blue for the Navy and Air Force) and there are no atheists in foxholes.

However, I do love me some text including fairly unstructured output (which I am adept at structuring). Once one masters regular expressions, the flexibility is really unmatched in my experience.

I'm also adept at structuring unstructured output and regular expressions. However, both of those are a waste of my time most of the time, because the only reason why I have to do things is that the structure existed but was discarded and now I have to pointlessly recreate it.

A program had a structured view of the situation. A specific thing happened, on this date, to this path, for this client. This then gets written into a string into a log or stdout, and then I write a clever regex to put things back into separate fields. This is really, really stupid.

You know what's better? Not doing that. Having something like DBus where everything is in its separate fields to start with, or journald where you can log an IP address in a specific field, so then the admin can trivially match source_ip and destination_ip as necessary, without having to waste time on regex magic.

Now, the ability to parse stuff when needed anyway? Sure, that's cool. But it should be a very, very rare exception because the default shouldn't be to heap up pointless work on the admin. You don't write regexes to extract the source field from packets in wireshark. Wireshark already gives you all the fields parsed up, and then you only need to use a regex rarely, against a single field. That's how the entire system should be.