ALL INVENTION STOPPED IN 1971 STOP THE PRESSES (which we still use BTW because it's 1971-tech)
-
Weren't you saying something about not being evil to someone else a bit ago? Remember reading something from you saying that today, but I've also been slowly catching up on stuff I missed over my vacation so it may have been said a couple days ago.
@accalia said:
Not necessarily evil, but most definitely mischievous.
:-D i could decide to delete all but the third word of that if i wanted.
besides, is this a face you would think is evil?
-
It's too young - it's not a case of it not being evil, more that it's not evil yet.
-
-
besides, is this a face you would think is evil?
Only someone evil would use the "too cute to be evil" argument.
-
drat! i'm found out!
-
-
hmm... i'm to lazy to edit the gender, but close enough....
-
Presumably it can receive satellite TV with those ears?!
-
Presumably it can receive satellite TV with those ears?!
among other things...
Fennec's are amazing!
@accalia wants one!
-
This post is deleted!
-
natch. if i have that level of power to enforce that edict well then i'm making it a requirement to have children. i'll put chemicals in the air such that everyone is sterile unless they get a parent license and gain access to anti-anti-fertility drugs.
i mean if i'm going to go evil, why mess about? go big or go home.
So you have to show you passed the common sense course in order to be able to have children? The human race is doomed if you ever get put in charge.
-
The course is like this:
Q) "Should you have children?"
If they answer "no" or "not yet", you allow them. If they answer "yes" or any variation, then nope.
-
So you have to show you passed the common sense course in order to be able to have children? The human race is doomed if you ever get put in charge.
it would be worse than the Genophage the Turians unleashed on the Krogan, would it not?
hmm... i think this calls for an evil laugh.....
-
Sure, our phones are great, but that’s not the same as being able to fly across the Atlantic in eight hours or eliminating smallpox.
I only skimmed, but this quote caught my attention.What about coming close to eradicating Polio (the last 1% is a bitch, but that label still applies), or regionally-successful Maliaria eradication?
The 777 has a perfect safety record, if you discount pilot error, sabotage and getting caught in a military crossfire.
Eh, that depends on what you consider as a "safety record." Deaths, yes. Crashes or serious injuries, no.But that's a minor quibble... jetliner crashes are (1) really pretty rare nowadays (and were never what I'd call common), and (2) when they do happen, are often on landing and have excellent survival rates. See, for example, BA38 (1 serious injury, 46 other injuries, 0 deaths of 152 total), Asiana 214 (3 deaths including one from the responders, 304 survivors), Air France 358 (43 injuries, no deaths of 309 people), and, in a different vein, US Air 1549 (5 serious injuries, 95 other injuries, no deaths of 155 people). That to me is the more amazing thing.
-
I thought we weren't charged for an edit unless it went past the 2 minute mark. Am I wrong? Or did that setting change?
It was changed to one minute from the default ages ago. (Though having just checked, it's 54 seconds for some reason...)
-
i know it's a company name, but i cannot help but think of these when i see that acronym...
Well, you know how difficult it can be to tell them apart. You've got an evil galactic empire on the one hand, and something that was invented for a film by George Lucas on the other…
-
Though having just checked, it's 54 seconds for some reason...
Weird...
No idea who that was. (Well I do, but no idea why.)
-
because 54 seconds is more discoursistent?
-
™
…macros…
Macros? Just enable composing. See: Menu¹, t, m = ™. Anywhere³.
¹ One of the options offered by the keyboard configurator² for placing the Compose key.
² I don't type out the xkb options anymore.
³ X11 required (ok, Windows have at least ALT+0153).
-
Macros? Just enable composing.
alas i do not run linux as primary OS. i run M$ because i'ma gamer. ;-)
-
Deaths, yes. Crashes…
“Crash” is not really defined. The closest thing to definition I know is
@http://avherald.com/h?faq= said:
Crash marks an accident, that is potentially catastrophic (has the potential to kill everybody on board of an airplane).
(Hell, three red Cs on the front page today. One of them is 777 (MH17, so it's not manufacturers fault; it's fault of some stupid autocrat who thinks inciting insurgencies and providing the insurgents best class anti-aircraft missiles are good ideas))
and that's not that different from deaths. Perhaps you meant to say "hull loss". That is better defined.
BA38, OZ214, AF358, US1549
Of which only the first was a technical problem. And in the second the technology (way post-1971 technology) most likely significantly improved the outcome as 777 has flight envelope protection and it would have ended much worse if they stalled.
Of course I agree that survivability of accidents improved significantly and it's a great thing.
-
“Crash” is not really defined ... Perhaps you meant to say "hull loss".
I was aware of what I hull loss is. I chose the more poorly-defined "crash" deliberately, because I specifically didn't want to tie to a particular interpretation; my statement didn't need a precise definition. (The only restriction in my statement is if you don't consider something like BA38 a crash, which... I think is stupid and insane and pretty much wrong, and that includes the avherald's definition if they wouldn't consider that a crash. )Of which only the first was a technical problem.
Oh sure, I didn't mean to apply otherwise; was just saying that surivability today is incredible.
-
The only restriction in my statement is if you don't consider something like BA38 a crash, which... I think is stupid and insane and pretty much wrong, and that includes the avherald's definition if they wouldn't consider that a crash.
They don't consider that a crash. It is simply “accident”. Occurrences are normally only divided¹ to “incidents¨ when something went wrong without consequences² and “accidents” where somebody was hurt³ or there was significant damage. AvHerald calls only the worst “accidents” “crashes”.
¹ By investigators.
² Engines and gear are designed to be replaceable and it apparently makes them not important, because damage to these does not count. So scary-looking engine fire is still an incident. Unless anybody sprains their ankle during evacuation.
³ Injury is anything from trivial things that nevertheless were treated by a doctor or prevented anybody from continuing their duty. So things like fume events are often rated “accident” because the cabin crew went to see a doctor after landing. Huge span from that to total destruction like TM-470.
-
I probably should now have included the "that includes the avherald" in what I said; I actually have some sympathy for their use because they needed labels for each of the categories and there's not really a good, precise term in English without starting to use longer terms like "major accident" or whatever, so they had to pick somtehing. But I stand by my statement in general; outside of a context such as that, I think that BA38 was quite clearly a crash.
