"...and an unspecified McQueen "
Clearly he's talking about Lightning McQueen, star of the animated Disney/Pixar movie, "Cars".
Kanye is planning on painting himself bright red, then running down the street making screeching noises.
223 publicly visible posts • joined 12 Nov 2009
This. A thousand times this.
I once saw a documentary where some poor bloke in Africa was pulling some sort of (very long) worm out of his leg by wrapping it around a stick. Since then, anything like that - even the thought of botflies - makes me want to puke in my shoes. Or possibly someone else's.
"Exposed sperm don't last long even if you do nothing, never mind cooking them with a phone."
So...you're saying that I'm wasting my time filling my fishtank with them then? Oh well, there goes my infertility insurance policy.
Ho-hum.
Does, um, anyone know if it's legal to dispose of 80 litres of semen down the drain in one go?
...only yesterday a commenter here said that although he's not in the industry and not necessarily tech-literate, he does enjoy reading many of the articles and learning.
So although he could probably go off and Google "DNS", it's a nice touch for people like him, and totally harmless for people like you and I. Well, unless you feel threatened by a red-top appearing to talk down at you, that is. ;-)
...in regards to AF447, Airbus' software doesn't sound the low altitude warning until 2000ft mid-flight."
I'm not an aircraft engineer (just a sim pilot) but as I understand it, the GPWS* is coupled to the radar altimeter, which points down and slightly forwards, and is used to give altitude *above ground level*.
Since it only really works up to about 2000-2500ft AGL, that would be your answer.
The main altimeter clearly works all the way up to the aircraft's service ceiling, but it does so based on air pressure, and reports altitude *above mean sea level* - it has no way of "knowing" where the actual ground is.
For reference, I usually fly the POSky 757-200 and -200C, so it's not an Airbus-specific thing.
*The box that shouts "TOO LOW - TERRAIN!" at you. It also gives altitude callouts on descent.
Ed: "Hey Rob - looks like we're just about to cross the heliopause."
Rob: "Great! Interstellar space, here we come..."
Voyager: *BONK!*
Seriously though, there's something a bit melancholy about the thought of these tiny spacecraft gamely soldiering on out there, and something hugely impressive about 1970s-era hardware still functioning in an incredibly hostile environment. Well done, guys.
The Nostromo was a tug, which pulled a large asteroid covered in/embedded with mining equipment and a refinery.
It separated from that asteroid before it landed on LV-426, and that's what you're seeing in the picture in the article - the Nostromo on its own. Later, after they repair the landing gear and took off again, they performed a rendezvous with the asteroid and reattached to it, (though I don't recall whether this was actually shown in the film).
Ripley's self-destruct of the ship took out both the Nostromo *and* the refinery - much to Weyland-Yutani's annoyance - and she escaped in the tiny Narcissus, an aerodynamic little shuttle.
"A pilot, sanctioned by May, commenced in July to target what she described as "high-risk passengers" entering UK ports."
I could be wrong, but that statement sounds an awful lot like it authorises profiling. I thought it had been decided that profiling was racist (by the modern definition) and therefore not acceptable?
...the fact that they honestly believe disruptive forum posts are within the purview of the police, or the fact that our glorious leaders and policy-makers are still using the word "cyberspace".
"Minister, what's cyberspace?"
"Well I'm lead to believe it's a little bit like that film TRON..."
"His PR team accused the Chocolate Factory of censorship and are threatening to bring the case to the UK Parliament for investigation."
Notwithstanding the content of this article, (which may provide an innocent explanation), if Google really had manipulated his page ranking, why would it be a matter for Parliament?
In other words, if Google said, "Yeah, we did that. So what?" exactly what sanctions would Parliament be entitled to impose? What misdemeanour would Goole be alleged to have committed?
I'm genuinely puzzled here.
From the article;
"You've obviously hacked my phone and if you do anything with this story... I'll go to the police."
"Hacked"? That conversation (allegedly) took place in 2001. Do you honestly believe that Heather Mills would have used the word "hacked" in that context at that time?
Even if her voicemails *were* intercepted, that conversation never happened. She's lying through her teeth and her credibility is as low as it's ever been.
Given the low power, I doubt we'll see a widespread commercial application for this anytime soon.What useful work could it do for the average person? Charge their watch maybe?
What I CAN see is a whole bunch of guys in MI6 sitting bolt upright in their seats with the realisation that this could enable indefinite unattended surveillance...
Wonder how long it'll be before they can draw enough juice to run an ornithopter with a mic and camera?
And while it would be disgusting to find that they'd actually done this, (though not particularly surprising), I really hope they were stupid enough to do so. There'll be a groundswell of rage so powerful that Rebekah Brooks will feel it in London through the heels of her Louboutins.
As for NI: Kick it. Kick it 'til it BREAKS.
...but I assume from the fact that it's a (makeshift) *radio* array, that it's only picking up RF and the image had false colour put on it later.
In other words, I was going to ask whether it would be worthwhile pointing it at an exoplanet or two, but I imagine the little natural RF planets put out would be drowned out by their attendant stars? Or have I got that wrong?
..somewhere that the US FDA does not recognise the anti-microbial properties of silver.
Therefore products such as clothing and food storage containers couldn't be avertised with it as a benefit.
Hope they don't get caught out by that, (assuming that military clothing and consumables need FDA approval, that is).
You know, I realise that animal testing is arguably for the common good.
But every time I'm confronted with it, I can't help thinking that surely humans would be better, and provide more accurate results. It's not as though we we don't have high-walled buildings just full of them that we could use.