you all suck
Funny story. NASA one time failed a rocket launch costing I think 100 million or some large figure, because half the scientists used metric, and the other used imperial. And neither half knew what the other was using.
@Mhael, сука ыуат
@mrmoe, I agree.
@Mhael, America because we're special
@Mhael, Here's another one, NASA spent millions of dollars trying to design a pen that writes in zero gravity. Russia solved the problem by using a pencil.
@Mhael, I think it was one of the Martian Landers. An early one. They calculated in feet, and programmed it in meters so when it went to land, it still had full velocity and smashed into the planet.
@Frankito, actually using a pencil is quite dangerous. For example, Apollo 1 basically caught on fire because of a few extra strips of Velcro to start it off if I'm not mistaken. Also, having a pencil break can have the lead fly out pretty fast, and when basically every system is extremely sensitive it can mean life or death to have something flying at one of the things that controls life support or if it pokes a hole through an important cable
@Thatbright, on top of needing to create a pen to avoid using pencils becuase of the danger NASA didn't even design the pens. They asked Fisher to. The company did spend over 1million, but after NASA spent some money testing it they pens were sold everywhere so it wasn't like Fisher lost a bunch of money developing a pen. In the end NASA bought the pens at something like 3-4$ each.
@Gallium , Yeah I dont know I just heard it on a movie
@mrmoe, translation please
@Frankito, Pencil lead is dangerous in spacecraft as it can be conductive very fine dust and when nearly everything around you is there to keep you alive, it's highly critical to not fvck it up. The Russians use pens too.
Astronauts needed a pen that would provide consistent writing, write at any and all angles, not splooge out in low pressure + microgravity so NASA hired Fisher to design a pen and they did. I don't recall if astronauts still use that pen.
@Mhael, It was a joint operation between NASA and ESA. We used metric so the French engineers wouldn't have to convert and the French used imperial so everything would work in American space-grade units. No one caught on till it was too late.
@Mhael, launch went fine, the lost the probe en-route due to the mis-match in trajectory burns between the orbital calculations and the transit calculations.
All calculations are done in imperial units now, though they always have been. We flew to the moon on an agrarian measurement system, cause the metric system was the easy setting, and we wanted a challenge.
@Linc7991, Captalist Pig.
And the imperial system is retarded
@benderama, It fvcking is. The metric system makes so much more sense.
@SimonPetrikov, if your system is so perfect why does it get fvcked to pieces if you divide anything by 3?
@benderama, but Antarctica uses it
@Captain Swordsman, I live in the USA
@SimonPetrikov, that doesn't answer my question
@Captain Swordsman, because using fractions to express lengths is also retarded
@benderama, republic scum
@ItalianSausage, so if you have a ten-meter pole and you need it to be one third as long as it was before, that's retarded? Sorry buddy, but I think you're the retarded one.
@ItalianSausage, so funny pics refuses to let me see your reply I got notified about. I'll check back later today after work and see if it's there.
@Captain Swordsman, again, why are you so obsessed with fractions? How should this even matter when you are driving a car? The only problem here is that the whole world uses certain units of measurement as it recognised them as the most scientific ones, but hey! Where are fūcking america, no one can tell us what's better for us!
@ItalianSausage, I'm not saying that the US is stupid per se, but it is using some units of measurement that don'take sense and should little by little get less used, to not freak the population out.
And I'm sorry funny pics is not working properly, sometimes it also happens to me :)
@ItalianSausage, I'm obsessed with fractions because things occasionally need to be divided into multiple equal portions in real life. Sure it has nothing to do with driving a car, but cooking requires it a lot.
@ItalianSausage, it is very easy to use Imperial units IRL. Things are easy in a base 2 system. Metric makes some stuff weird. (Wire guage? SQ mm. Ok, that sounds nice. 273.4 sq.mm. WTF is this? Lol)
I have this flexible measurement device. I fold it in half, it's half as long. Googles "How to fold into tenths"
Honestly, we will most assuredly Eventually make the move to metric but it's gonna be a total PITA for generations.
At least Antarctica isn’t commie... yet. *prepares penguin army*
This acts like British people don't use miles and inches and such
@Thatbright, the British, the weird hybrid of metric and imperial yet constantly bashes the USA for imperial. What a great dad
Actually the Russians beat us to the moon with a rover first
@Iceymicdue, inanimate objects don't count.
@Oujosh29, summary of the space race - "satellites don't count! Wait orbiting doesn't count! People don't count! Spacewalk doesn't could! Rovers don't count!"
"First world countries that still have frequent mass shootings"
@YUNoJump, I don't see France on there
@Lie Ren Licks Taint, when France has a gun massacre it makes international news and everyone changes their profile pictures to have French flags, when USA has a mass shooting its reported a bit on the news and then after a few days everything is back to normal. And the French attacks are done by terrorists that are against the whole country, while US massacres are done by US citizens who are unstable and dangerous but still allowed a highly deadly weapon.
@YUNoJump, oh I'm sorry I thought the San bernadeno shooting was an act of terrorism, how about the Miami night club shooting? No? Really? because both of those were claimed by isis and both of them were by immigrants... How are they any different from the shooting in Ottawa? The definition of terrorism is to spread fear and panic, is that not what a mass shooting does? It's funny that mass shootings here are stopped by armed citizens, while other countries have to wait for the police? Oh and you know what? The Orlando shooter was on a terrorist watch list and yet he still managed to get a gun. I thought guns were illegal in France as well, yet they have full auto Aks opposed to our semi auto regulations here. Apparently the laws don't work, hum?
@Lie Ren Licks Taint, of course not all attacks aren't terrorism, but there are a lot more attacks by citizens in USA. Sandy hook, columbine, etc. every country has terrorism but when a crazy guy wants to kill some people because he's angry, in most countries he can't walk into a school and start shooting children. You act as if changing regulations in USA won't fix anything, even though every other first world country has FAR less gun deaths and mass shootings than USA, and much better gun regulation. What magical constant exists in USA to stop that? Terrorists got automatic guns in France, but France is connected to most of the world by land, and besides, this one time that they had automatic guns was a HUGE worldwide catastrophe. Laws can't stop 100% of crime, but if you get rid of 90% of gun murders with proper laws then that's still a lot of lives saved.
@YUNoJump, Sandy's hook : man who was on watch list for psychiatric and legally wasn't allowed to purchase them.
Columbine: two teens who A. Illegally bought the weapons, And B. Were to young to own the guns legally. Also you just named two shootings in "gun free" zones meaning the shooters knew they would have time to wreak havoc without opposition. You literally just said it yourself what would happen if we change the regulations? You just contradicted your whole argument by saying you can get guns if you're connected to land mass. Guns would still be smuggled in just like drugs, and you know what our government supplied the cartel with weapons anyway. You know the rest of the world's violent crime rate is higher than the US? You know that there are 3x times as many stabbings in the UK per capita as shootings in the US? You know what? It's illegal to shoot someone too, but that law didn't stop them either now did it? Just because there is a law doesn't mean it will work.
@Lie Ren Licks Taint, most of Adam Lanza's guns were his mother's, he didn't legally own it but his mother did, the guns were still legally purchased. The columbine shooters bought their guns off of friends who legally purchased them from gun shows and such, no black market involved. Even besides the point of legal gun ownership, you can't deny the fact that massacres just don't happen anywhere near as often in any other first world country. I'd be interested in the source for that 3x more statistic. The reason I'm interested is because uk and us have very different populations, definitions of crime etc. Any murder weapon other than a gun is far less effective as a weapon. Try robbing a bank with a knife, performing a massacre with more than maybe 2 victims if you're lucky, fighting police forces with a knife. You aren't going to get very far. Not all laws work, but gun laws very clearly DO make a difference, based on leagues of empirical evidence.
@YUNoJump, no they don't... Once again they were in gun free zones and they broke the law by shooting people. Just like drugs you can get them if they're illegal. You know that Chicago has the most strict gun control laws in the country and yet they still have the highest murder rate In the country? Google it if you're skeptical, I said per capita, do you know what that means? Switzerland for example has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world and one of the lowest crime rates. If guns are the problem, explain that.
@Lie Ren Licks Taint, laws aren't designed to stop a crime in progress, they're designed to prevent people from being able to commit a crime, or to act as a deterrent. It's illegal to drive your car on the pavement, but it's really easy to do it. Gun laws reduce the number of guns in the country, less guns = its harder to find a gun to do crime with = less gun crime. The black market can't provide as many guns as a free market can, that'd be ridiculous, and not everybody that wants a gun is willing to deal with criminal organisations to get one. Chicago is a state, there's nothing stopping you from going to another US state with less laws and buying a gun there, then bringing it back. It's harder across country borders. As for Switzerland, they are a) a much smaller country and b) very different to USA. They have much higher taxes, and a more capable government. Switzerland is extremely different to USA, you'll need more context than just "they have more guns and less crime"
@YUNoJump, oh guess what everything you just said is illegal! You didn't know its illegal to purchase firearms in a state that's not your residence? Every one of your arguments has been fücking stupid and without anything to back it up. Switzerland requires its citizens to own a fire arm, and guess what? When you know everyone has a gun you're less likely to fűck with someone. Laws are exactly as you said to prevent crime but guess what? Criminals break the law! So by preventing people from legally being able to own a firearm you take away someones only defense, and guess what criminals are going to break the law anyway so if they want a gun they don't care if it's illegal to own or buy one, they'll still do it, just like people who do drugs!
@Lie Ren Licks Taint, you've failed to acknowledge my arguments that a) no law ever stops 100% of crime and b) many first world countries directly benefit from increased gun control. Yes, gun murder is illegal, so is theft of another person's property, but if you want to tell me that the laws preventing property theft don't actually matter then you need to reevaluate what you see in the world. My sources on these arguments are empirical and clearly observed in most countries. Look at Australia's introduction of gun laws after the Port Arthur massacre. Do you know how many massacres we've had since then? One. One massacre where two people died, and it was the biggest national tragedy in years. Gun murders are worthy of national news when they do happen. Switzerland is an outlier in the example that every other first world nation sets, and there is a lot of unmentioned context behind why they don't have as much gun crime.
@YUNoJump, sorry buddy, but if you think you are going to change the mind of a pro-gun American, you are going to have a bad time. There are way too many facts to support gun ownership.
But before we go on, realize that states in the U.S. work similarly to countries in the E.U. Each one has it's own firearm laws and require you to be a resident to purchase a firearm there.
The states with the stricter gun control laws also have the highest rates of murders with firearms. But most gun deaths in the U.S. are not homicides. Truth be told, roughly 60% of gun deaths are from suicide while less than 1% are from mass shootings/terrorist attacks.
@YUNoJump, you are right that the US has more shootings than European countries like France. Owning a gun is a constitutional right, and rights are only restricted in very extreme circumstances. Just like you can't get fined or arrested in the US if you say something mean or racist like you could in Europe. And you're kidding yourself if you think outlawing guns wouldn't just open up illegal gun smuggling like with alcohol with prohibition or drugs today. Where's there's money to be had, criminals will exploit it.
@Oujosh29, he's already touched on the point that many people would be deterred by having to work with criminal organizations to get those guns. Also, it's not like we would need full gun control, we just need better control on the regulations we already have
@YUNoJump, actually stricter gun laws increase death based on leagues pf empirical evidence, but I guess said evidence doesn't count because it doesn't fit your preconceived (and very, very wrong) position on the matter.
@YUNoJump, Australia's falling gun crime after the gun ban was merely part of a trend pf already decreasing gun crime. Once again, your argument holds 0 grams of water when the actual facts are examined.
@Pinkpuppetfred, like people are deterred from buying drugs from criminals? The sellers are just average people, not Al Capone. It would never work, it would make the probally worse by driving the whole gun economy underground and not subject to any regulations. You're right in that the regulations we do have need to be enforced more. Don't forget the US is the size of Europe, so you can't compare it to France.
@YUNoJump, The problem with comparing the US to any other country is that there are very different cultures that will react differently to gun control laws. The people in the US lost their minds when prohibition happened. People actually drank more than before prohibition and there was no way to regulate it because it was illegal. There has to be a middle ground that will work for the super pro-gun and super anti-gun people, but both sides seem like they can't budge in their opinion. (Chicago is a city in the state of Illinois by the way. It's not a state)
No one has landed on the moon
@benderama, next you'll be telling is the earth is flat or something
@a shiny haunter, no it is not flat
@benderama, that's a relief
@a shiny haunter, the earth's not flat its just bullshiit
@JinxTheCat, again, I'm relieved
@a shiny haunter, this might relieve you: the earth is not flat.
Nationalism is so pointless
Thank god Antarctica is Imperial system
I don't see Hawaii.
Yeah... maybe on the moon it will work
Hurray for Myanmar!!!