counterfeitfake

You placed the Z1??? How'd that go?

don't forget the sit-start in puget sound

Hey, does anyone else think SAC's new format sucks?

you bless people when they fart??

What??? I dare you to make sense.

I'm trying to farm ice on my patio right now. It's not freezing. Any tips?

everything should be pink

It seems a strange position for a software engineer to take- CRC checksums, RAID mirroring and striping, there are plenty of ways to protect data and verify it to be correct. I have no specific knowledge about Diebold, just that they seem to be a bunch of fuckups. They've had responsibility for what should be the biggest technological advance in the history of voting, and they just can't deliver. What is that saying- never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity?

Of course I agree there is a lot of shitty software out there. For secure voting we're talking about something that is not in the same league as Microsoft Office or even Windows. I think the Diebold systems right now ARE in the same league. Don't forget that paper can be hacked too. There is no system that is absolutely secure.

I'm a software engineer. There are absolutely ways that electronic voting can be made to work securely and accurately. Software operates spacecraft and nuclear reactors and does all kinds of way more delicate and critical things. But it's not being done right now. Diebold sure as hell doesn't know how. And I'm not sure there's even a strong enough case for it- sometimes, "if it ain't broke"... I'm really amazed at the problems we've had with electronic voting. I assumed that when it actually came into play, it would be overseen by people who knew what they were doing and would make sure it was done right. With something as important as VOTING, I figured this would surely be the case. But, clearly, no. I also assumed when we did something as obviously important and critical as invading Iraq, smart competent people would be making the plans. Is this just what they call "becoming jaded"?

Hey, PP appears to be trying to have an acutal discussion for once, complete with rational arguments and everything. Let's not just blindly hose him down.

Spray is easy to identify: If it's not climbing related this is where you post it.

grigri rapping sucks.

I eagerly wait to see whether or not this is true.

Christ kevbone, shut up. Whether anyone was bragging or not, you're the only problem in this thread. There's a good conversation going on here and you don't want to be part of it, your only motive is hijack it and direct the attention to yourself. Everyone else- can we please ignore this douchebag? How many more good conversations are we going to let devolve into spray just because of this guy?

dimensions?

I didn't feel like I was chestbeating, obviously my accomplishments are pretty minor compared to what some others here can do. But they were climbs I was excited about and would love to share that excitement. Save the bickering for spray.

would she just get naked already

three words: willis wall beta

West Arete of Argonaut Town Crier McTech Arete Pearly Gates Frogland

If you have little or no physics knowledge, how about a book about physics? Climbing physics is physics. I don't think it makes sense to try and learn more specialized info without knowing the basics.

long live spray

Well let's keep in mind the current setting- an 8 foot tall concrete barrier might not be as nice as a view of undisturbed wilderness, but what is there right now is a parking lot and then a giant football stadium. It would be reassuring to see the rock accounted for in the plans. It looks like they have explicitly included all the structures that need to be torn down or disturbed, if it's not there I think it's safe. Trying to get clarification on this is a fine idea. I do think we could have a decent chance of carving out some budget for some extra trees or some other kind of visual barrier around the rock. This is a great time to make your voice heard. I think the best results are possible when it's a well-informed, non-panicky voice.

I wrote a lot and maybe nobody wants to read paragraphs of my yapping, so just in case: If you look at chapter 3, page 25 of the proposal you can see VERY CLEARLY the UW rock in the map. It is well clear of the new interchange and there's a sound wall between the traffic and the rock.

tradclimbguy, I am not trolling, I'm fighting against what I see as a short-sighted knee-jerk response. The climbing community is part of the larger community. I do use the UW rock and would like to do so in the future. I also travel to and from Seattle frequently and would like it if this became easier. There are two arguments happening here, one about the UW rock and one about the wisdom of this bridge/highway construction plan overall. From what you said a bit ago I thought you wanted to discuss both of them. Honestly, the more I read the proposal the more I'm convinced you haven't. To the first point, the future of the UW rock: If you look at chapter 3, page 25 of the proposal you can see VERY CLEARLY the UW rock in the map. It is well clear of the new interchange and there's a sound wall between the traffic and the rock. I just don't think there's an issue here. To the second point, the project as a whole: - The existing bridge is old and could fail due to a storm. - The 6-lane alternative consists of 2 general-purpose lanes in both directions (what we have now) and an HOV lane for carpools and transit. - Both 4- and 6- lane alternatives include extensive pedestrian and bicycle paths, which don't exist currently. - Both 4- and 6- lane bridges are designed for the addition of high-capacity transit in the future (I think this is very important, because I don't believe we're ready to build high-capacity transit here yet, but we will be in the future). - The 6-lane alternative includes multiple "lids" over the freeway which will "reconnect communities separated when SR520 was built" and "provide new landscaped open spaces". - Both the 4- and 6- lane alternatives include sound walls along most or all of their length. - To me, personally, it sounds like a good idea. That is the opinion I have come to after trying to educate myself. I will still gladly listen to other's arguments. Finally, thanks for the unwarranted name-calling, you seem very reasonable now and I hope lots of people listen to you.