• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
The Old Hack

Story Friday June 22, 2018

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Southern Cross said:

So Elliot also needs to check his spellbook...

Let's not start demanding miracles here.

I'm sure Elliot will pick up his spell book again.

 

Someday.

 

Maybe.

 

If he happens to think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't fly a fish while sitting on the neck of a giraffe in Chicago?

What about the rest of Cook County?  Illinois?  How about Gary?  Does this apply if the Giraffe is on the deck of a boat in Lake Michigan?

The rights of responsible fish pilots to fly their fins from their long necked steeds should not be limited by legislative misunderstandings of the Giraffic Aeronautical Anglers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tom Sewell said:

I just discovered that it's illegal in Chicago to fly a kite or fish while sitting on the neck of a giraffe.

Why specifically giraffe? Was that the same giraffe which was forbidden to be tied to a telephone pole in Atlanta ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tom Sewell said:

I just discovered that it's illegal in Chicago to fly a kite or fish while sitting on the neck of a giraffe. I wonder if this will affect the story?

What, were you browsing dumblaws.com or something? I did a report on that for an essay back in high school once. As I recall, one I found particularly amusing was some city that had a $500 fine for detonating a nuclear device within the city limits. Would enough of the city even be left after such an event to be able to collect the fine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Douglas said:

What, were you browsing dumblaws.com or something? I did a report on that for an essay back in high school once. As I recall, one I found particularly amusing was some city that had a $500 fine for detonating a nuclear device within the city limits.

If the city is Detroit, is everyone sure it hasn't already happened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Douglas said:

As I recall, one I found particularly amusing was some city that had a $500 fine for detonating a nuclear device within the city limits. Would enough of the city even be left after such an event to be able to collect the fine?

For real answer, probably - cities can be big and nuclear devices small. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still inhabited, with estimated populations 1,196,274 (Hiroshima, 2016) and 425,723 (Nagasaki, 2017).

For funny answer, doesn't matter - the major can collect the fine even if whole city is glass crater if he was on vacation in Caribbean when that happened and therefore survived.

Obviously, neither will bother you if you detonate the device manually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

For real answer, probably - cities can be big and nuclear devices small. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still inhabited, with estimated populations 1,196,274 (Hiroshima, 2016) and 425,723 (Nagasaki, 2017).

There was a joke in NATO during the Cold War that villages in West Germany were generally one kiloton apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Tom Sewell said:
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

For real answer, probably - cities can be big and nuclear devices small. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still inhabited, with estimated populations 1,196,274 (Hiroshima, 2016) and 425,723 (Nagasaki, 2017).

There was a joke in NATO during the Cold War that villages in West Germany were generally one kiloton apart.

Are you sure it was joke?

Also, it was In Germany, the towns are only two kilotons apart.

However, nuclear weapon won't completely obliterate everything up to specific distance, while dominoes and houses from card one meter further away would keep standing. The damage level is changing continuously. The damage level for "most people survive" is different from "no survivors". There can be building still standing with surviving policeman and clerks inside the city which was hit, even if there were causalities in next town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah - that's why it always irks me when people make fun of "duck and cover."  That's terrific advice, and basically the advice you'll find in preparedness pamphlets today, trying to steer as clear as possible of the stigmatized phrase.  Obviously, if you're too close to the epicenter, it won't help, but that's not whom it's meant for.  You can find telephone poles in Hiroshima that show the silhouette of the leaves of trees.  Dirk Gently complains about the titanium airplane joke, but the people who tell that joke must know that there's a reason, even if they don't know what it is, why the black box can be built to survive when a plane can't (incidentally, his explanation is wrong: while it's true titanium couldn't fly as easily as steel and aluminum, the plane could be built of a more durable metal, but that would actually be worse for the water balloons inside, as well as worse for the black box), whereas the people who make fun of "duck and cover" truly think they've outsmarted nuclear preparedness experts based on the logic "nuke strong, blanket weak."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WR...S said:

incidentally, his explanation is wrong: while it's true titanium couldn't fly as easily as steel and aluminum, the plane could be built of a more durable metal, but that would actually be worse for the water balloons inside, as well as worse for the black box

Also, those more durable metals tend to cost more.

1 hour ago, WR...S said:

Yeah - that's why it always irks me when people make fun of "duck and cover."  That's terrific advice, and basically the advice you'll find in preparedness pamphlets today, trying to steer as clear as possible of the stigmatized phrase.  Obviously, if you're too close to the epicenter, it won't help, but that's not whom it's meant for. 

1 hour ago, WR...S said:

whereas the people who make fun of "duck and cover" truly think they've outsmarted nuclear preparedness experts based on the logic "nuke strong, blanket weak."

There are people who value dignity extremely high. For most people, however, ducking and covering is good idea simply because it's the best they can do. Sure, it won't help MUCH, but even outside the range where it may actually be the difference between surviving and not - or in extend of injury - it won't HURT. Except the dignity, possibly.

It is still questionable how much time it's worth spending on TRAINING it. I think making fun of training duck and cover might be ok if you spend more than hour on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

It is still questionable how much time it's worth spending on TRAINING it. I think making fun of training duck and cover might be ok if you spend more than hour on it.

I disagree. It is an excellent move against 'mere' conventional explosives. Also, remember that while the zone of total destruction of a nuke is quite large, it is not even nearly as large as the area which is still damaged but where a chance to survive exists.

It is also not the worst possible move when someone opens fire on you with a rifle or pistol of some sort, depending on the situation. At least you present a much smaller target profile that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

I disagree. It is an excellent move against 'mere' conventional explosives. Also, remember that while the zone of total destruction of a nuke is quite large, it is not even nearly as large as the area which is still damaged but where a chance to survive exists.

It is also not the worst possible move when someone opens fire on you with a rifle or pistol of some sort, depending on the situation. At least you present a much smaller target profile that way.

That's all arguments for doing it, not spending lot of time training it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

That's all arguments for doing it, not spending lot of time training it.

To you maybe. Me, I have a great liking for minimising my exposure to large explosions of all sorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

To you maybe. Me, I have a great liking for minimising my exposure to large explosions of all sorts.

I'd rather stick to small repeated explosions myself, they get me to work on time. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Old Hack said:

Don't you dare use our schnapps for that, you barbarian! :mad:

Nah, we import rum from Austrailia, there's a reason they call it "The Queen's Diesel" down there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now