That's typical of the right-wing ideology. If you are successful it's because you worked hard. Hence anyone who isn't successful was lazy, and only has himself to blame. You are ignoring the fact that some people are born in a bad environment. A drug-addicted mom, an abusive dad, a bad neighborhood, etc. They may contract a serious disease. Or they grow up during a worldwide economic crisis. Sometimes it's just dumb luck that decides how you fare.
If you cling to the belief that your own effort is the only determining factor in your life, then you have freed yourself of the obligation to care for your fellow humans. Is anyone poor? Down and out? It's their own fault.
Perhaps you should look up "compassion" in the dictionary.
Somehow I think they're not that ignorant. These statements may sound silly on the surface, but they are ways to say "he ain't one of us" ... without mentioning his skin.
As I read Victor's post, the visitors to these servers did nothing wrong. The ban was set by a bug-ridden InSim application, without any action by an admin. A subsequent automated unbanning by the InSim app enabled them to re-connect, so they got another ban, and so on until LFSW issued a warning.
According to Snopes, the story about the forgery is false. More debunking here. Makes me wonder why people would like it to be true, though. Disgruntled Hillary fandom? The conservative vs. liberal culture war? Or plain racism?
The village of Warten, in the North of the Netherlands. The story goes that frequently German tourists stop at the entrance to the village. (Warten = "wait" in German.)
The village of Dorst (= thirst), in the South. Guess they have some good pubs over there.
One is available from the context menu of a graph. It contains the single channel that is in the graph, for all RAF files that have been loaded.
The other is available from the context menu of the "Legend" pane. (The mouse pointer must be over the name of a file.) It contains all channels, and for all wheels, of that file.
For LapSim you should use the latter. The LapSim manual says that the file must contain at least the lateral and longitudinal G, and a wheel speed. Those are all in the file, so it ought to work. Send me a PM if you encounter any problems.
I don't think there is any. The format of an MPR file is not public (except for the header), and LFS has no facility to output the data.
It should be possible to make your own program, though. There are two tools that can read an MPR file, LFSPoints and MPR2UBB. Perhaps the creators of those tools can tell you where to look in the MPR for RPM data.
No, it's not possible for LFS to generate RAF files from multiplayer replays. This was also discussed earlier in the thread:
RPM data are available (for .spr replays at least). Engine damage or is not written to the RAF file, so you can't view it in LRA. The same holds for any other kind of wear or damage (tyre temperatures, clutch, etc.).
In other news, a proposition was accepted in Arkansas that prohibits child adoption by unmarried couples, thus reducing the number of available foster parents.
And in Colorado, amendment 48 was rejected. The amendment gives legal "person" status to fertilized human eggs. That would mean that each year thousands of corpses are flushed down the toilets of Colorado. illepall Still, about 1/4 of the people voted for this amendment.
Sooo, U.S. citizens ... What's it like, living in a developing country?
Sorry for the bump, but there is news about the DP1 (though not related to LFS). Dennis has formed a company, Palatov Motorsport LLC. Apparently there are plans for 4 carmodels: the DP1, a shortened version of the DP1, and an Ariel Atom-like barebones sportscar, in single-seater and twoseater version.
They were still out looking for a Gaelic-speaking gay Jew.
I know quite well what "sanctity" means. It means that you declare the subject untouchable, and won't ever compromise. It means you're closing the discussion, and turning your back to people who have different values.
Talking about sanctity is a cheap trick. People who talk about the "sanctity of human life" in the abortion debate are hypocritical, except if they also oppose war and the death penalty, and promote spending every dollar on fighting poverty and disease.
I never said that Californians have the monopoly on bigotry.
If procreation were the criterion then we'd outlaw celibacy and promote rape.
I suspect that this reason is just a front, as are all the other ones. The real basis for judgment is a strong notion that homosexuality is "not normal". But that notion can not be defended with respectable (i.e. rational) arguments, so people come up with fake reasons like the laws of nature, AIDS, etc.
Yep, the notion of right and wrong are usually based on morality. And contrary to what many christians think, atheists also have a sense of morality.
What's the friggin use of having two types of marriage, of which one must never ever be called marriage? Two types that give couples exactly the same rights -- except for the label, which is so bloody important that they will change the constitution for it? If you don't call that inequality, then I have a better name for it: Apartheid.
Could it be that they no longer want to be regarded as second-class citizens?
No, because stricter gun laws decrease the supply of weapons, which makes it harder for crooks to get a gun. So only the richest/toughest criminals will be able to get one. Small criminals will have to revert to other, less deadly weapons.
Technically not, AFAIK. (This is all legal stuff, not having much to do with perceived fairness, etc.) Same-sex marriage is currently allowed. If they wanted to revoke those marriages, they'd have to prove that it was already against the law, and that the law was misinterpreted. If Prop 8 is accepted, it becomes against the law. The couples who want to marry after that won't be allowed to, which may seem unfair, but that is basically what you can get with every new law.
It's still discrimination, though, and it's thinkable that someone takes the DOMA to the US Supreme Court and wins the case, based on the inequality that it creates.