It honestly runs fine on a spec like that with certain things turned off very similar to F3 you could probably use that as a gauge. This engine feels a bit more optimized than F3, though.

>> ^Peroxide:

Would you recommend buying it if, say I only have 2 gigs of RAM, and a 512 card? Or am I going to have to run it in shit mode.
In reply to this comment by shagen454:
Installing it now, but for some reason I already feel bored. Hopefully that will fall away when I get into it.

>> ^blankfist:

@JiggaJonson, teaching can be tough. As tough as any job. It's difficult to gauge opinions when people work in the industry or have at one point, because naturally there'd be a bias.


And people who haven't worked in the industry don't have a fucking clue just how tough it is...

@JiggaJonson, teaching can be tough. As tough as any job. It's difficult to gauge opinions when people work in the industry or have at one point, because naturally there'd be a bias. I have no doubt the majority of teachers are great. But the system isn't great.

And then there are those who put teachers near sainthood. I had a number teachers I've looked back on fondly and think they were a great influence. But I think anyone of us can say that of just about any profession most likely.

>> ^direpickle:

@OMG_SMALL_SAMPLE_SIZE_PEOPLE
Statistics moar! If the experiment is done properly, you can do good science with a small sample size. This is what error bars and confidence levels are for.


If only there was some sort of power one could do an analysis on so as to gauge an appropriate sample size for a study. Alas statisticians shall just have to consult the Ouija table in the back of their Experimental Design and Analysis books.

The diagram didn't show how the air gets into a pressurized chamber. Since it's a clincher type tire, and clincher rims don't hold air pressure at all, I'm guessing this tire uses a regular bike tube, and there's an external device from the tire to the tube valve similar to the valve on a bike pump. I'm seeing something like that in the photos of the wheel before the ride. This device would also have to contain a gauge so it would know when to stop putting the air into the chamber.

The only advantage this product provides is eliminating regular maintenance pumping (10 strokes once every few weeks). It does not eliminate the pumping needed when you get a proper flat, because you can't roll with no air in it at all. This product would be aimed only at recreational cyclists who want to occasionally avoid using a pump. Seriously?

Also given that the pump's life is over once that outer tube got cut, that's the whole point of the tire gone. I guess it'd still continue to function as a normal tire, but where's the fun in that?>> ^albrite30:

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
..what happened when you get a couple nails/shards of glass in 'em?

I was wondering that too. I would suspect that they would have to buy a new outer tube to surround the aluminum. Great idea, but perhaps not cost effective yet.
[edit]

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

People can be unhappy for valid and invalid reasons. Happiness is an emotion. Happiness isn't rational. Happiness is related directly to what makes us animals, not humans. Happiness has no proper gauge, it has no measure, it has no quantifiable meaning outside of personal subjective experience. Something that makes one person sad, makes another happy. Some people like being mad, which makes others unhappy, which makes some people happy. Happy is a useless idea for basing moral arguments. I am staring to hold that Aspergers is the next stage needed in humans to put aside these silly emotional states that tie us to animal notions of morality. If we want to be better than pigs and rats, then happy needs to die, and soon.


And yet pain and pleasure are at the core of how we experience the world. We can try to pretend we're not connected to the world of animals, but we are.

Oh, and for sure, in a society built on glorifying selfishness, disconnectedness, and individualism as an end in and of itself, evolution is pushing us all ever closer to a race of total psychopaths.

You know, the ultimate moral creatures. Totally unhindered by any such animal emotions, like empathy, sympathy, compassion, honesty, loyalty, etc. Obsolete concepts that only those bestial liberals keep pushing, as if there was any moral worth in guaranteeing people a right to the pursuit of happiness...

Also, if your chief complaint about utilitarianism is that following it requires you to actually think about the consequences your actions will have on other people, and never provides any totally clear answers even then, you might want to think about whether that's really bug and not a feature.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
More happiness isn't a moral argument. It might make more people happy to have capital punishment, but that isn't a moral justification. So do go on and on.
Capital punishment doesn't make people happy, and a society that inflicts it on people who are sometimes completely innocent makes people really unhappy.
As for "happiness isn't a moral argument", the right way to think of it is "how is it moral to arrange society so that vast classes of people are unhappy?"
Maybe you have an answer for that, maybe you don't, but it's not an invalid moral question to raise.


People can be unhappy for valid and invalid reasons. Happiness is an emotion. Happiness isn't rational. Happiness is related directly to what makes us animals, not humans. Happiness has no proper gauge, it has no measure, it has no quantifiable meaning outside of personal subjective experience. Something that makes one person sad, makes another happy. Some people like being mad, which makes others unhappy, which makes some people happy. Happy is a useless idea for basing moral arguments. I am staring to hold that Aspergers is the next stage needed in humans to put aside these silly emotional states that tie us to animal notions of morality. If we want to be better than pigs and rats, then happy needs to die, and soon.

In-gauge!

138 views and 5 votes is a pretty obvious gauge of interest in this.

I don't care, I will force you all to like what I like

*promote

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Lots of misinformation


1) Check your numbers on Wikipedia. Hint: They're incorrect. Recessions are always expensive for the government. Bush Sr managed to double our debt in 4 years, but that was largely because a recession killed our revenues. The true irresponsibility is putting policies in place that hemorrhage money when the economy is strong. Bush Jr managed to rack up $400 billion a year in debt when the economy was growing. Right now 1/3 of our deficit is Bush largesse. 1/3 is lost revenues from a weak economy. 1/3 is Obama's attempts to fix the economy.

2) This is hard to gauge. If there were no tea party, and S&P demanded $4tr in cuts, I could imagine us getting the grand bargain that Obama and Boehner tried for. When the chips are down, serious republicans are willing to raise revenues if it's part of a large packet of cuts. The existence of the tea party makes such a compromise unlikely. But maybe it wouldn't have happened anyway.

3) The federal government is mandated to pay each retiree a certain amount in social security. It is mandated to pay for seniors medical treatment whatever it costs. It is mandated to pay for veteran's medical treatment. It is mandated to give assistance to the unemployed. Blaming spending growth on greedy bureaucrats is completely misplaced. The programs are in place, and as more people get old, go to war, or lose their jobs, these outlays will grow. For the next decade they will grow faster than our economy, that's just demography. If you want to cut some of these programs, go ahead and advocate for that. But don't pretend there will be no consequences for the individuals who use them.

For those of you who seem to be hopelessly stuck on 'Team America' as a gauge of Matt Damon's talent for discourse: http://videosift.com/search?q=matt+damon

"why is this baby dying, while God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent?"

Not a hard question. If you look at our ability to grasp concepts, we tend to compare things only in contrasts.

Today is cold--because we know what hot (Or warm) is.

Think of a child born without a nerves to feel pain without even knowing it is doing so. The child will gauge its eyes out if left to itself. You know love because you know pain, happiness because you know sadness, life because you know death.

If I was God, I would do things exactly the same way He supposedly did things. Of course, I don't believe in God, so the point is moot.

And as a last joke, I would burn in hell all the sick Christians and save all the good aethists.

>> ^jmzero:
Pains me to do it - but I am going to agree with ShinyBlurry in that he has a correct conception of how many Christians view the situation and that that view is not internally inconsistent. There are, of course, Christians who view it a bit differently in one way or another, but those differences don't really impact the question we started with here.
In general, the starting point question is "why is this baby dying, while God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent?" This is a good question: shouldn't God, being omnipotent, should be able to realize all his goals (including this baby surviving, since he's benevolent) without compromising any other principles or goals?
It depends on what kind of definition you have for "omnipotent". Is it "the ability to make true anything that can be stated?" (ie. He can make 2+2=7). Is it the weaker "he can, without limits, control physical and spiritual reality" (ie. he can make gravity go backwards and make electrons "more wet")?. Is it the weaker "limitless control over the physical configuration of the universe" (ie. he can turn the universe into a pretzel, but gravity will still work the same)? One can make similar distinctions about His omniscience, how it extends into the future, how it interacts with free will, and how it extends into paradox.
It also depends on self or otherwise imposed limits. Does He have bounds in terms of what He can and/or will do? Does He mess with "free will"? Can he create and/or destroy "souls"? Did he create "Satan" or evil or good or law, and what is his relationship with the law?
How you (or an individual Christian) answers the above question dictates, to an extent, how they resolve the question. However, for most Christian groups that I'm familiar with, the presence of evil and bad outcomes in the world is (one way or another) the result of God's unwillingness or inability to limit free will, and the cascade of related mishaps ever since the fall of Adam. The flip side is, for a dead baby like this, that they'll get a good go of it in heaven (or Paradise Earth, or whatever).
The specifics of how this is resolved and stated varies with Christian groups and people, but the overall point is usually pretty similar and, as before, I don't think it's internally inconsistent.
Similarly, the oddity of Jesus (being God) praying to the Father (also God) is resolved in a few different ways (all of which restore consistency in one way or another). Sometimes it is, as sb points out, the idea that though the same in many ways, Jesus was a separate being and was legitimately asking (or sometimes just communicating, with no real desire to be spared). Or you can see it as an instructive, rhetorical thing - demonstrating how normal people are supposed to deal with God (even though Jesus didn't need to communicate or deal in that way). Or there's probably 10 other resolutions that are internally consistent, again depending on exact definitions of God's nature and what not.
All in all, it's natural that Christians are going to have a lot of leeway on something like this. The Bible doesn't spend a lot of time nailing down the properties of God (and it only spends a few chapters literally nailing Him anywhere) - so complaining about it is kind of like complaining about the magic in Lord of the Rings.

Rapid meltdown in No.1 reactor: Tokyo Electric Power Company, the operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, says most of the fuel rods in the No.1 reactor had dropped to the bottom of the pressure vessel within 16 hours of the earthquake on March 11th.

TEPCO to change reactor cool down method: TEPCO also says the gauges at the No.2 and 3 reactors might not be showing the actual water levels and that both reactors are likely to have undergone meltdowns.

I was hoping 'fps' was a temperature gauge. Jelly dropped onto super hot plates!

>> ^solecist:

i thought they were going to be dropped at 6200 feet per second. this is...disappointing.

Re-elect Obama.-OK, then what? Wait for the system in the U.S. to become a sinkhole filled with who ever fits some media-birthed bill of goods sold to people who vote 4 whatever and 4 who ever they think they are told would be better, worse, according to a formula of
television pundits/alternative news sources * one's own twisted gauge of ethics or morality filtered through some convoluted, programmed, world-view??

Democracy, republic??-The best examples have only lasted 250 years-The U.S. is overdue for a real mess. Voting for presidents be a damaged exercise.

Stop watching television and become fluent in Cantonese.