In other news today...
-
@pleegwat said in In other news today...:
@zecc said in In other news today...:
- airplanes don't float or do they?
Well there's the famous crash-landing on the hudson.
Yeah, but it's float was a little short. I expect my floating things to, well, float for a little longer...
-
@dcon said in In other news today...:
Yeah, but it's float was a little short.
Yeah, reckless typecasting like that is strongly associated with crashes...
-
@tsaukpaetra said in In other news today...:
@dcon said in In other news today...:
YOUR
You did that intentionally, didn't you?
Who ??? Me ???
-
@dcon said in In other news today...:
@pleegwat said in In other news today...:
@zecc said in In other news today...:
- airplanes don't float or do they?
Well there's the famous crash-landing on the hudson.
Yeah, but it's float was a little short. I expect my floating things to, well, float for a little longer...
If only they had had used a
double
!(although, clipping through surfaces due to float rounding errors can still be an atrocious problem.)
-
-
Ari Fleischer (Press Secretary for GW Bush) is spending his day on Twitter retelling 9/11 as he remembers it and roughly as it happened during the day. Quite interesting:
-
@polygeekery said in In other news today...:
Ari Fleischer (Press Secretary for GW Bush) is spending his day on Twitter retelling 9/11 as he remembers it and roughly as it happened during the day. Quite interesting:
In case it's not clear to anyone else reading, tweets are of course in reverse order. Fascinating stuff.
-
@heterodox yeah, you have to scroll down until you get to:
and work your way back up. It would be nice if Twitter could invert a timeline for stuff like this. Or if he had threaded it or something.
-
Also, the Politico article to which he linked (composed of interviews with two dozen people closest to the situation) was really good:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/were-the-only-plane-in-the-sky-214230
-
Clowns can fuck right off.
-
@polygeekery said in In other news today...:
killer clowns
Some clowns make you laugh,
Some make you cry,
These clowns, baby,
Gonna make you die!
-
@polygeekery Holy fuck, that was intense to read.
As a New Yorker, I remember quite a bit of detail of how it played out in my life.
I'm a bit emotional now.
Also, 2012-09-11 was the first indication I might be pregnant with my now 4 yo.
It was a sunny Tuesday, very much like it was in 2001, I was reading an article on it. I choked up way more than I think was normal for me.
The first test later that day was negative. As was, the next morning. I decided to wait until Friday to do the next one. The line was so faint, I took a picture and sent it to my husband for reassurance.
A funny story related to this:
We were out Thursday (before the positive test) with our snake. We bumped into a coworker of my husband. He, on Friday, told him, "Congratulations." Apparently, he knew I was pregnant before we did.
-
@karla the article that Ari references and @heterodox linked is a really good read also.
-
@polygeekery said in In other news today...:
@karla the article that Ari references and @heterodox linked is a really good read also.
Reading it now.
And goddammit...fuck you both because I don't fucking cry. I'm fine and hugs to those that need it.
-
Now that the courts have finally stopped wasting time, they can get back to more important cases.
-
-
In other news today: Ted Cruz "likes" porn video on Twitter.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJgPDrOVAAAG3t5.jpg
-
@anonymous234 Oh look, it's Felicity Smoak.
The joke's on me if that's actually a porn parody of Arrow.
-
@anonymous234 said in In other news today...:
In other news today: Ted Cruz "likes" porn video on Twitter.
Heh:
Cruz also reportedly joked about it, saying that they should have "done something like this during the Indiana primary."
That's a great response.
-
@dcon said in In other news today...:
They'd just "forget" to pressurize the hold.
That is, fortunately, not possible. The floor between main and cargo deck is not pressure-tight, so the pressure has to be the same in both.
-
@bulb said in In other news today...:
That is, fortunately, not possible. The floor between main and cargo deck is not pressure-tight, so the pressure has to be the same in both.
Then it was either a failure in thermal regulation (the animal froze during the flight) or a failure in handling at one of the ends (the box it was in was dropped from a great height, and the animal suffered lethal trauma as a consequence).
Why are PETA going after vets when they could be going after UA?
-
@dkf said in In other news today...:
Why are PETA going after vets when they could be going after UA?
UA is accomplishing what PETA wants done on its own.
-
-
-
@coldandtired said in In other news today...:
Will people ever change? (magic 8-ball: signs point to no)
-
@coldandtired said in In other news today...:
So, a bunch of impatient arseholes are moaning because they're being encouraged to allow people to get off the train before getting on LIKE YOU'RE FUCKING SUPPOSED TO DO ANYWAY YOU ARROGANT PRICKS!
-
@raceprouk said in In other news today...:
It's surprising they managed to make a 1000000+ lb drone lift off in the first place. :winged_trolleybus:
INB4 some pedant says some airplanes really weigh this much
-
@zecc said in In other news today...:
@raceprouk said in In other news today...:
It's surprising they managed to make a 1000000+ lb drone lift off in the first place. :winged_trolleybus:
INB4 some pedant says some airplanes really weigh this much
Boeing says Air Force One weighs 833,000 pounds. So, close!
-
@zecc said in In other news today...:
It's surprising they managed to make a 1000000+ lb drone
It says multi million. So 2,000,000+ lb.
@zecc said in In other news today...:
INB4 some pedant says some airplanes really weigh this much
No, they don't. There are only two that get over million:
An-225: MTOW 1,410,958 lb
A380: MTOW 1,268,000 lb
and it's still well below multi-million.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in In other news today...:
Boeing says Air Force One weighs 833,000 pounds.
It depends on which aircraft is Air Force One.
The VC-25 is based on rather ancient 747-200. Latest version, 747-8, gets up to 987,000 lb. Still short of even one million. And it said multi-million.
-
@bulb said in In other news today...:
And it said multi-million.
Clearly they're just not trying hard enough.
-
@zecc said in In other news today...:
INB4 some pedant says some airplanes really weigh this much
@bulb said in In other news today...:
No, they don't.
-
-
And in slightly exciting phone news*:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etmUU1bs41s
*May just be a date and not actually any news.
-
@bulb said in In other news today...:
It depends on which aircraft is Air Force One.
I thought all three of them were... :tinfoil_hat:
-
@pjh
Technically, none of them are until the president is on the plane.
-
@dragoon said in In other news today...:
@pjh
Technically, none of them are until the president is on the plane.Which one?
And before or after they replace her batteries?...
:looks:
Ah - wrong thread. And universe.
-
@bulb said in In other news today...:
@zecc said in In other news today...:
It's surprising they managed to make a 1000000+ lb drone
It says multi million. So 2,000,000+ lb.
It also says drones. So more than one million pound drone.
-
So, technically, you could arrest a child for looking into a mirror while being naked, I guess.
“But our duty is to interpret the law as written and, if unambiguous, apply its plain meaning to the facts before us.
Yes, no interpretation needed. Why do we need judges and lawyers again if we can simply take the plain meaning of any law?
-
@rhywden said in In other news today...:
So, technically, you could arrest a child for looking into a mirror while being naked, I guess.
No, because there's no pornographic image being created. The image produced in a mirror isn't real, so it doesn't count.
@rhywden said in In other news today...:
Yes, no interpretation needed. Why do we need judges and lawyers again if we can simply take the plain meaning of any law?
Because it's a shitty law, and needs to be fixed, not just ignored. Judges ignoring it and just ruling however they feel like won't fix it, and actually just open the door to judicial abuse and inconsistency: it'll depend upon the whims of a bunch of different judges who are all deciding to interpret (or ignore) the law differently. Meanwhile, since some judges are just smoothing over the problem, there's little incentive for anyone to fix the law so its plain meaning is actually sane and so it should be enforced, as written. And if you happen to be the unlucky kid who gets a hard-nosed letter-of-the-law sort of judge, oh well just sucks to be you I guess.
-
@anotherusername said in In other news today...:
The image produced in a mirror isn't real, so it doesn't count.
Well yeah. How can they be real if our eyes aren't real?
-
-
@anotherusername said in In other news today...:
The image produced in a mirror isn't real, so it doesn't count.
...
.... ....., ....?
I think y'all forgot a :troll indicator with that statement...
-
@rhywden said in In other news today...:
So, technically, you could arrest a child for looking into a mirror while being naked, I guess.
“But our duty is to interpret the law as written and, if unambiguous, apply its plain meaning to the facts before us.
Yes, no interpretation needed. Why do we need judges and lawyers again if we can simply take the plain meaning of any law?
What @anotherusername said.
This and half the things that can put someone on the sex offender list.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in In other news today...:
@anotherusername said in In other news today...:
The image produced in a mirror isn't real, so it doesn't count.
...
.... ....., ....?
I think y'all forgot a :troll indicator with that statement...
vs.
-
@anotherusername said in In other news today...:
@tsaukpaetra said in In other news today...:
@anotherusername said in In other news today...:
The image produced in a mirror isn't real, so it doesn't count.
...
.... ....., ....?
I think y'all forgot a :troll indicator with that statement...
vs.
I'm completely confused now. I blame memory contention currently breaking referential loading. I'll put that on the backburner...
-
@tsaukpaetra the reflection you see in a mirror is a virtual image.
-
@anotherusername said in In other news today...:
@tsaukpaetra the reflection you see in a mirror is a virtual image.
Accepted factoid for insertion into [Trivia9].
-
@rhywden said in In other news today...:
So, technically, you could arrest a child for looking into a mirror while being naked, I guess.
“But our duty is to interpret the law as written and, if unambiguous, apply its plain meaning to the facts before us.
Yes, no interpretation needed. Why do we need judges and lawyers again if we can simply take the plain meaning of any law?
Yah, but..
In a dissent, Justice Sheryl Gordon McCloud noted that Gray [said teen]—who had already been registered as a sex offender for a separate crime
-
@anotherusername said in In other news today...:
Because it's a shitty law, and needs to be fixed, not just ignored. Judges ignoring it and just ruling however they feel like won't fix it, and actually just open the door to judicial abuse and inconsistency: it'll depend upon the whims of a bunch of different judges who are all deciding to interpret (or ignore) the law differently. Meanwhile, since some judges are just smoothing over the problem, there's little incentive for anyone to fix the law so its plain meaning is actually sane and so it should be enforced, as written. And if you happen to be the unlucky kid who gets a hard-nosed letter-of-the-law sort of judge, oh well just sucks to be you I guess.
Well, here's the thing: In Germany we sometimes have the problem too that laws are written in a shitty way that would, for example, result in "cruel and unusual punishment" (you may recall this wording from somewhere) or be otherwise unconstitutional.
Instead of judges wringing their hands and lamenting that they're forced to implement that law, we actually have a fail-safe in the system: Any judge who thinks that the law he's supposed to apply would result in an unconstitutional result can appeal to the constitutional court. During this appeal, the original trial is put on hold.
If said court then rips the lawmakers a new one for writing a shitty law the first judge does not have to apply that shitty law.It's almost as if someone thought of such problems happening and provided a mechanism to deal with this now instead of throwing people under the bus and waiting years for something to prevent such abuse from happening again.