 | | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
|
(...) Another thought is maintainability and cost. Consider that WWII Germany was able to produce several tank destroyers for the cost of a single tank, simply because the expense of the turret went away. As the end of WWII approached and money (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
|
(...) Those are all powerful advantages but I think that tanks are more efficient at providing an armored and enclosed area because they're closer to a spherical shape than a power suit, and because they get mass fraction advantages. Anecdotally: (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
|
(...) I think so. Since a tank (I'm talking about real life MBTs, not hovertanks) is firmly situated on the ground, it is a more stable firing platform. Also, even if powersuits are eventually developed, I doubt that they will be able to carry the (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tanks or Power Armor
|
|
(...) I think tanks will still remain useful as siege weapons, spearheading assaults, and general heavy battle. Power armor might be very useful for surgical strikes, and urban warfare. But in an open field, or over long distance, I think tanks will (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Tanks or Power Armor
|
|
Hello everyone. I was checking out (URL) Ryan Wood's Jade Empire Hong Hovertank post> and he mentions that we have seen little in ground combat vehicles other than (URL) power suit>. That got me thinking, when you have Power Suits available, should (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) You play with LEGO bricks. You openly admit it. You even joined an online community to bask in the brickiness of it all. You've got the Geek gene. Now, your gene might be smaller and more selective than those of others here, but it still (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) Recursively speaking. I saved this reply so I could enjoy it all over again. See, by ignoring this post, thus savoring the experience, I held off in replying so I could cherish the moment. Until I was ready to pop-stack. THEN, I look over and (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Attention all RSS geeks!
|
|
(...) I've become convinced that Atom might be a better solution. If only because it has better mechanisms to ensure that entries are identified uniquely, and support for meta information about authors, etc. (...) If we're using RSS, using a custom (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.general, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.org)
|
| |
| | Attention all RSS geeks!
|
|
Call for technical participation in a proposal for LEGO enthusiast content sharing. BACKGROUND: I've been working on a project for a couple of months that extends the RSS spec to encompass envisioned needs of specific communities, specifically (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.general, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.org, FTX) !!
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) True. There's always the square equivalent where you cut into nine and remove the centre square. Sorry, back up. That's just too weird to contemplate. Cutting a slice of bread into ninths, not quarters? I mean, even the triangularists still (...) (20 years ago, 20-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) The easiest way to divide up a bottle of liquid would be to use the spirit measure, though this is not recursive: Repeat Attach measure to bottle Repeat pour drink drink Until bottle empty Seek another bottle Until too drunk to lift glass not (...) (20 years ago, 18-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) Hey thanks Todd, I think. To be honest I just found the whole thing so funny because I can honestly say, none of my non-Afol friends can manage to spell "recursively" after a night of drinking never mind have a working theory around it based (...) (20 years ago, 18-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) Heh heh, ok, lemme see if I can give it a non-geeky explanation... Instead of eating your french toast by carving out roughly equal-sized small pieces one at a time, do this: Cut the toast in half and consider each half a new piece of toast. (...) (20 years ago, 18-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) snipped You know, I think I may take this as proof that I am missing the GEEK gene, as I heard the discussion first hand, and now I'm reading it again..... and STILL the *ONLY* part I understand is "copious amount of liquor." On a side note, (...) (20 years ago, 18-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Todd Lehman wrote: snip (...) And what makes this even more impressive is that earlier in the evening, Todd gave every impression of a man so tired he couldn't hit the ground two tries out of three (although I know a (URL) (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) I feel privaleged to be present when this important algorithm was created. But, I am not so sure that Todd's very important contribution into the consumption of food and to the further appreciation of the culinary delights is really as limited (...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) Well let's just say it was a thinking and reflecting kind of evening. --Todd (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Todd Lehman wrote: <snip> (...) <more snip> (...) It may be sound in theory, but I think you need to recheck your math a bit... (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
On 02:13 16-08-04, Todd Lehman wrote (...) <MUCH GEEKAGE SNIPPED> (...) Me thinks someone was over thinking this a bit too much.... excellent geek analysis... Note that this algorithm doesn't apply well to liquids in bottles or (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: On the recursive subdivision of two-dimensional food items
|
|
(...) Get some sleep! :-) -->Bruce<-- (now I'm going to have make French Toast in the morning...) (20 years ago, 16-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
