Randomness

[yeishia]

Twirling a cherry stem into a knot takes tons of practice *giggles* and lost of saliva before you succeed

Helps if you cheat and choice a long one!

 

[Vail_Indigo]

I really want to scream but I have no idea why or even if it is a good scream or bad scream

 

[xOxCherryxOx]

This made me chuckle....


BLUE BALLS

LMAO! Thats a hot mess

 

[yeishia]

LMAO! Thats a hot mess

Yes I got a good laugh out of it, lol I almost stole it for my eclectic thread

 

[Mephistophelily]

*Starts throwing things out the window*
WHO THE FUCK PUTS AN AIRHORN ON A RURAL TRAIN?!
AND WHY HAVE THEY BEEN SETTING IT OFF EVERY 15 MINUTES SINCE 6 AM ?!

*Goes to get Mister's weight set to hurl next*
AAAGH!! Shut up shut up SHUT UUUUUP!!

 

[dragonrazor]

*Starts throwing things out the window*
WHO THE FUCK PUTS AN AIRHORN ON A RURAL TRAIN?!
AND WHY HAVE THEY BEEN SETTING IT OFF EVERY 15 MINUTES SINCE 6 AM ?!

*Goes to get Mister's weight set to hurl next*
AAAGH!! Shut up shut up SHUT UUUUUP!!

Try being on the footpath part of a bridge as a train passes under it.....

 

[Vail_Indigo]

I love when things at work fail so perfectly that the work which was going to eat up several hours of my weekend may gobble up much much more.
Whee.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Its amazing how 'not on' Literotica's schedule I am.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

So, there's this book by Mark Leyner (I think it's 'Et Tu, Babe'), and in one passage, he talks about a writer who is taking all the classic works of fiction, Macbeth, Don Quixote, War And Peace, all of them, and rewriting them word for word, except at the end of each one, to Mossad storm in kill everyone.
Thats sort of how zombies are being used today.
Trends.

 

[dragonrazor]

Prince of Persia. A video game series that started off dark, edgy, and violent. That went through numerous changes, but kept that nature until the release of a 360 game that almost doomed the franchise. But now a movie has been made. It stars Jake Gyllenhall, a man who prior to being cast had only played the original Prince of Persia game, as the main character from the Sands of Time Trilogy. The movie is made by Disney, and has the potential to be Disney's greatest work...or its worst.

 

[Drunken_Angel]

A pig's orgasm lasts thirty minutes.

 

[Veroe]

A pig's orgasm lasts thirty minutes.

So that means all the girls who rejected me for a date are wrong.

 

[Rayne_Clowd]

Bitch Slap was totally not worth the rental fee, it is a cross between sin city, a low budget porno and a lame fight movie. On the up side a lot of teenage boys can hire it from the video store and will no doubt find it useful for something. http://www.bitchslapmovie.com/

 

[dragonrazor]

For those who don't know, a Rotan is a six foot long, split bamboo pole used for caning.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Dinner was delicious, however, I could have lived without the grease burn on my pinky which still hurts

 

[Trinique_Fire]

I feel like I'm always broke. Boo...hiss....

 

[dragonrazor]

Contrary to popular belief, a giant humanoid robot is not only possible, it would be quite easy to build. Balancing it would be a cinch, since it's humanoid shape. If, like most people assume, it would be top heavy, then so would we. Humans have the same balance.

 

[Veroe]

Contrary to popular belief, a giant humanoid robot is not only possible, it would be quite easy to build. Balancing it would be a cinch, since it's humanoid shape. If, like most people assume, it would be top heavy, then so would we. Humans have the same balance.

We are top heavy, Razor, just watch any baby trying to learn how to walk to see it for yourself. We have the majority of our weight balanced precariously on two legs. We learn how to balance that instinctively so we don't have to think about it while we do it.

The reason why we'll never see a giant humanoid robot on the battlefield is not a matter of whether it can stay upright rather than fallover on its back. A sturdy internal support structure, servomotors, and gyroscopic sensors can deal with that problem.

The reason is a matter of practicallity. Think like a general in the pentagon and compare a futuristic supertank like one of Keith Laumer's Bolo's to a Gundam. It's cheaper to build a Bolo tank rather than a Gundam. You'd need years of research and development to build a working Gundam that stands up and walks around effectively much less can go into combat while for a Bolo the basic technology is already there. A Bolo tank is a far more effective a weapons platform than a Gundam on the battlefield. A Bolo is far more adaptible tactically and strategically than a Gundam. A bolo tank can traverse ground faster than a Gundam. In the air or in outerspace a Gundam is even less practical. You'd need some sort of thruster assembly attached to it to move the Gundam around where you want it to go which will take space instead of using that space for say lasers and missiles.

While there could be something that makes a tank obsolete in the future I doubt it will be giant humanoid robots.

I'm not knocking Gundams, I love them as a peice of technology from an impractical fantasy.

 

[dragonrazor]

We are top heavy, Razor, just watch any baby trying to learn how to walk to see it for yourself. We have the majority of our weight balanced precariously on two legs. We learn how to balance that instinctively so we don't have to think about it while we do it.

The reason why we'll never see a giant humanoid robot on the battlefield is not a matter of whether it can stay upright rather than fallover on its back. A sturdy internal support structure, servomotors, and gyroscopic sensors can deal with that problem.

The reason is a matter of practicallity. Think like a general in the pentagon and compare a futuristic supertank like one of Keith Laumer's Bolo's to a Gundam. It's cheaper to build a Bolo tank rather than a Gundam. You'd need years of research and development to build a working Gundam that stands up and walks around effectively much less can go into combat while for a Bolo the basic technology is already there. A Bolo tank is a far more effective a weapons platform than a Gundam on the battlefield. A Bolo is far more adaptible tactically and strategically than a Gundam. A bolo tank can traverse ground faster than a Gundam. In the air or in outerspace a Gundam is even less practical. You'd need some sort of thruster assembly attached to it to move the Gundam around where you want it to go which will take space instead of using that space for say lasers and missiles.

While there could be something that makes a tank obsolete in the future I doubt it will be giant humanoid robots.

I'm not knocking Gundams, I love them as a peice of technology from an impractical fantasy.

Yes, that's exactly why. It would be the sort of thing that would require corporate sponsorship. Also, the idea of a giant robot in space would need an entirely different concept for propulsion, such as a Vernier Assembly, a series of ionic emitters that provide maneuvering while high output thrusters provide propulsion itself.

 

[Drunken_Angel]

Weaver, hun, your pm box is full

 

[Veroe]

Yes, that's exactly why. It would be the sort of thing that would require corporate sponsorship. Also, the idea of a giant robot in space would need an entirely different concept for propulsion, such as a Vernier Assembly, a series of ionic emitters that provide maneuvering while high output thrusters provide propulsion itself.

You're not getting it. It'd be easier and cheaper to build a starfighter with a vernier assembly and high output thruster. Coat it in Gundam's impregnable armor build it around one of the beam gatling guns and that's it. Don't need a head and don't need legs in outerspace. I'll grant you the arms those could be practical in outerspace. Beam sabers are ludicrous, now attaching them to missiles that can deliver from long ranges small beams that fan out for a brief time and slice targets up-that's practical.

My beef isn't with the technology to working an actual giant humanoid robot its with the design involved, its why would anyone want to. Mobile Suit Gundam stated at some point I think that the humanoid shape was the most flexible and adaptible-and to some degree I agree with that, but not as the justifaction for a five story tall humanoid war-machine. The sheer size of the things makes that logic behind building mobile suits rather than tanks or fighters ridiculous.

 

[Daydream_weaver]

Weaver, hun, your pm box is full

Odd...I hadn't realized I had received so many PMs.

 

[dragonrazor]

You're not getting it. It'd be easier and cheaper to build a starfighter with a vernier assembly and high output thruster. Coat it in Gundam's impregnable armor build it around one of the beam gatling guns and that's it. Don't need a head and don't need legs in outerspace. I'll grant you the arms those could be practical in outerspace. Beam sabers are ludicrous, now attaching them to missiles that can deliver from long ranges small beams that fan out for a brief time and slice targets up-that's practical.

My beef isn't with the technology to working an actual giant humanoid robot its with the design involved, its why would anyone want to. Mobile Suit Gundam stated at some point I think that the humanoid shape was the most flexible and adaptible-and to some degree I agree with that, but not as the justifaction for a five story tall humanoid war-machine. The sheer size of the things makes that logic behind building mobile suits rather than tanks or fighters ridiculous.

I look at it more like this. While it's very adaptable, it's also only as useful as the pilot. As for the size, that's merely a problem with weight. In space, the shape of something is far less of a problem. And the head holds the cameras (in the case of the Gundam design, stereoscopic vision from dual cameras). Beamsabers are more a thing of personal taste, though if you think of a single humanoid fightercraft against say a three or four hundred meter battleship, the sabers are more practical than projectile weapons, as they require much closer range. A battleship would have a great deal more trouble fighting off a mecha with beamsabers. In reality, on earth there would be far less capability than in space, as it would still have to deal with gravity and terrain. While the human form is well suited for dealing with terrain, it's not as good as, say, an arachnid's form.

And the cost would be dependent on the materials and technology used. Our existing concept of the Gundam relies on Hydraulics and pneumatics, with servos for joints. But I have a slightly different idea in mind. Take a cue from the human body itself. find or create a material that reacts the same way human muscles do when exposed to electricity.

 

[Veroe]

I look at it more like this. While it's very adaptable, it's also only as useful as the pilot. As for the size, that's merely a problem with weight.

Not just with weight but with scale too. But that can be overcome if mobile suits as they are in the Gundam cartoon series become ubiquitous.

In space, the shape of something is far less of a problem. And the head holds the cameras (in the case of the Gundam design, stereoscopic vision from dual cameras).

On the contrary. any military designer for such a thing will want something like a cross or x shape with those vernier emitters at the end points to provide maximum manueverability in a vacuum in every direction possible efficiently. Secondly legs will counteract that efficiency by just sticking out skewing its inertia whenever it maneuvers, now that could be compensated for with some sort of computer programmed use of the thrusters but it'll be easier to tuck the legs up against the fueselage like in Robotech's veritech fighters.
By keeping the majority of its mass in the center of its turning radius it'll be able to make tight manuevers for dogfighting.

As for the cameras why on a head, why not on a sensor pod in the nose of a fighter.

Beamsabers are more a thing of personal taste, though if you think of a single humanoid fightercraft against say a three or four hundred meter battleship, the sabers are more practical than projectile weapons, as they require much closer range. And the cost would be dependent on the materials and technology used. A battleship would have a great deal more trouble fighting off a mecha with beamsabers.

Heh, if you read David Weber's Honor Harrington series of Military Scifi books this is only a step or two straight from that. any way why risk manned fighters when you can just send cheap programmable missiles for the battleship in gigantic sized volleys to overwhelm its point-defense

For that matter beam sabers would be far more useful to the battleship in question as a point defense system. Just have multiple saber sweeps around the circumference of the cicumference of the ship's exterior, if its fast enough the only defense better would be actual deflector shields.

In reality, on earth there would be far less capability than in space, as it would still have to deal with gravity and terrain. While the human form is well suited for dealing with terrain, it's not as good as, say, an arachnid's form.

We agree there. Why alot of companies tasked to submit design for space rovers study spider and insect motions and designs in nature.

Our existing concept of the Gundam relies on Hydraulics and pneumatics, with servos for joints. But I have a slightly different idea in mind. Take a cue from the human body itself. find or create a material that reacts the same way human muscles do when exposed to electricity.

Interesting. The overall look would be less robotech and Gundam more NeoEvangelion.

Nods good points, but perhaps we should take this discussion to the pegasus wing. I wonder what AMCHentai would think of it?

 

[dragonrazor]

Not just with weight but with scale too. But that can be overcome if mobile suits as they are in the Gundam cartoon series become ubiquitous.



On the contrary. any military designer for such a thing will want something like a cross or x shape with those vernier emitters at the end points to provide maximum manueverability in a vacuum in every direction possible efficiently. Secondly legs will counteract that efficiency by just sticking out skewing its inertia whenever it maneuvers, now that could be compensated for with some sort of computer programmed use of the thrusters but it'll be easier to tuck the legs up against the fueselage like in Robotech's veritech fighters.
By keeping the majority of its mass in the center of its turning radius it'll be able to make tight manuevers for dogfighting.

As for the cameras why on a head, why not on a sensor pod in the nose of a fighter.



Heh, if you read David Weber's Honor Harrington series of Military Scifi books this is only a step or two straight from that. any way why risk manned fighters when you can just send cheap programmable missiles for the battleship in gigantic sized volleys to overwhelm its point-defense

For that matter beam sabers would be far more useful to the battleship in question as a point defense system. Just have multiple saber sweeps around the circumference of the cicumference of the ship's exterior, if its fast enough the only defense better would be actual deflector shields.



We agree there. Why alot of companies tasked to submit design for space rovers study spider and insect motions and designs in nature.



Interesting. The overall look would be less robotech and Gundam more NeoEvangelion.

Nods good points, but perhaps we should take this discussion to the pegasus wing. I wonder what AMCHentai would think of it?

Working backwards here. Firstly, those pseudomuscles could be hidden under the armor plating of a Gundam. And yes, you're probably right, we should transfer this discussion.