OT: Movie thread

[AD Skinner]

I think the fact that it’s Christmas time does sort of affect the plot of it’s a wonderful life in that it’s part of why George is so busy that he has to trust Uncle Billy at the bank who then hands Potter the money. Like yeah he was always a f***up anyway but it sort of adds to it

 

[MinJaBen]

I think the fact that it’s Christmas time does sort of affect the plot of it’s a wonderful life in that it’s part of why George is so busy that he has to trust Uncle Billy at the bank who then hands Potter the money. Like yeah he was always a f***up anyway but it sort of adds to it

That same logic applies to Home Alone and Die Hard as well. So either they all are Christmas movies because the time was set at Christmas, or none of them are.

 

[Unsustainable]

I believe Bill Nye was asked this question in a Reddit AMA and he said “Their sizes would be disadvantageous for both. A horse-sized duck would collapse under its own weight and 100 duck-sized horses would freeze to death.”

Given that answer, I’d pick single horse-sized duck, because I imagine it’s a faster process to have it collapse under its weight than to wait for 100 duck-size horses to freeze

Dolph Lundgren is more qualified to be "The Science Guy" than Bill Nye

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Dolph Lundgren is more qualified to be "The Science Guy" than Bill Nye

In general that's probably true. When discussing objects of different masses like this, a mechanical engineer (Bill Nye) is more qualified than a chemical engineer (Dolph).

 

[MinJaBen]

In general that's probably true. When discussing objects of different masses like this, a mechanical engineer (Bill Nye) is more qualified than a chemical engineer (Dolph).

*scientist here thinking they should both be called the "the engineering guys"...

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

*scientist here thinking they should both be called the "the engineering guys"...

Meh...Engineering is applied science. It's taking science and making it practical.

EDIT: this wasn't meant to knock scientists at all as the work to come up with what to apply is just as important as applying it.

 

[LakeLivin]

I believe the argument for under is that you’re always going to get the amount of paper you want. By going over, the paper may tear early, leaving you with not enough to do the job safely, forcing you to either discard it or use two attempts.

Wondering if anyone has actually experienced this? Not arguing, just curious as I tear toilet paper at the "break point" (regardless if it's over or under), not from the end like I might tear waxed paper, say.

[side note: it just jumped out at me that "tear" is a word that would be a perfect fit for the pronunciation poem Confirmed with Link: - Meme/Like Thread 6 - A new season on the horizon

Over. And anyone who disagrees should come prepared for a roll off, Trinity Rd Bo's.

Toilet Paper Roll Orientation and What it Says About Your Personality

Who cares about toilet paper orientation?
Quite a lot of people apparently! Roughly 50%3 of the population say they pay active attention to toilet paper orientation, and 20%3 say they get agitated if the toilet paper is oriented the “wrong” way. 19%3 of people admitted to changing the orientation of toilet paper in someone else’s house.

Does gender play a role?
According to most studies, gender does not play a role in how you orient your toilet paper. However, men3 do rate higher for agitation if the orientation doesn’t match their preference.

Ask the experts
Some think how we mount our toilet paper says about our personality. Dr. Gilda Carle is a consultant for Cottonelle® Brand Toilet Paper and has devised a toilet paper personality test that links paper preference to personality types.

What does hanging “over” say about you?
Generally, Dr. Carle4 says that people who utilize the “over” technique are more likely to have a dominant personality type.

What does hanging “under” say about you?
If you hang “under” you’re more likely to have an easy-going nature, according to Dr. Carle4.

The Verdict
So, in summary4 “overs” are more dominant and “unders” are more laidback. You might be able to guess who’s changing the orientation at other people’s houses!

Toilet Paper Debate: Over or Under? | Cottonelle® US

The age-old question: should toilet paper sit over or under the roll? Read this guide and learn the correct direction to hang your TP.

www.cottonelle.com

View attachment 951511

Who'd a guessed that a "toilet paper: over vs. under" article could be interesting lol? And it lists the first good reason I've heard for under, to make it more difficult for a pet in the house to unroll it.

 

[Unsustainable]

In general that's probably true. When discussing objects of different masses like this, a mechanical engineer (Bill Nye) is more qualified than a chemical engineer (Dolph).

MS vs BS though lol

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

MS vs BS though lol

In a different field though lol

Which is why I said "In general that's probably true" (Dolph being more qualified). But in this discussion, a mechanical engineer with a BS has more expertise on mass of objects, forces and the effects on those objects than a MS Chemical engineer, or MS Electrical Engineer, etc...

 

[LakeLivin]

Meh...Engineering is applied science. It's taking science and making it practical.

EDIT: this wasn't meant to knock scientists at all as the work to come up with what to apply is just as important as applying it.

I know you meant the opposite, but the way you phrased that sounds like just the slightest tinge of condescension to me, lol. The topic in general brings me back to this:

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I know you meant the opposite, but the way you phrased that sounds like just the slightest tinge of condescension to me, lol. The topic in general brings me back to this:

No, I meant it exactly as I wrote it, without condescension. This is clearly a generalization, but scientists come up with a lot of the theory and innovation that is required to advance technology. Engineers are the ones that often take that theory and innovation and implement it.

I was in the Semi-conductor field for years. We had a research team of scientists that came up with some of the coolest ideas, theories and inventions to advance semi-conductor technology. Not all of them were practical, which makes sense as nobody bats 1000. The engineers would work with the scientists, take those inventions and figure out how to develop them into a workable process, implement them in manufacturing, and improve on them.

It's difficult to make something work without both the research scientists and the engineers. Thus the work coming up with what to apply(overgeneralization for a scientist) is just as important as figuring out how to apply it (overgeneralization for an engineer). No condescension intended or implied.

 

[ONO94]

And this is how the Tesla v Edison debates begin....but remember, in the end, we are all salespeople

 

[LakeLivin]

No, I meant it exactly as I wrote it, without condescension. This is clearly a generalization, but scientists come up with a lot of the theory and innovation that is required to advance technology. Engineers are the ones that often take that theory and innovation and implement it.

I was in the Semi-conductor field for years. We had a research team of scientists that came up with some of the coolest ideas, theories and inventions to advance semi-conductor technology. Not all of them were practical, which makes sense as nobody bats 1000. The engineers would work with the scientists, take those inventions and figure out how to develop them into a workable process, implement them in manufacturing, and improve on them.

It's difficult to make something work without both the research scientists and the engineers. Thus the work coming up with what to apply(overgeneralization for a scientist) is just as important as figuring out how to apply it (overgeneralization for an engineer). No condescension intended or implied.

I got that you meant it without condescension, tried to convey that in my first sentence (clearly not very clearly, lol).

What sounded very slightly condescending to me is that it reads to me like you view the implicit starting point that needs to be corrected as one of engineers being more important than theoretical scientists. You clarify that to state that they're equally important. While I would have thought that any such discussion would more commonly have an implicit starting point of the theorists being more important (which would also be viewed as flawed if it's felt that both are equally important).

Note that I'm not taking a position either way, and maybe my perception of which would be more commonly viewed as more important is biased by watching Sheldon in the Big Bang Theory, lol.

Hope this better explains where I was coming from but it's a rather subtle idea to try put into words and sometimes me not talk too good.

 

[Lempo]

Gruber deliberately chose the time of his heist at the Nagatomi Plaza to coincide with the Christmas Eve party with all the handy hostages at his disposal and his opponents being in various ways distracted due to the seasonal considerations.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Gruber deliberately chose the time of his heist at the Nagatomi Plaza to coincide with the Christmas Eve party with all the handy hostages at his disposal and his opponents being in various ways distracted due to the seasonal considerations.

They originally didn't have him in a suit, but were planning on him wearing tactical gear, until he suggested it. According to him.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Gruber deliberately chose the time of his heist at the Nagatomi Plaza to coincide with the Christmas Eve party with all the handy hostages at his disposal and his opponents being in various ways distracted due to the seasonal considerations.

But it could have been any party. It could have been a birthday party or a retirement party. If it had been a costume party for Halloween, would Die Hard be a film you watch on Halloween?

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

But it could have been any party. It could have been a birthday party or a retirement party. If it had been a costume party for Halloween, would Die Hard be a film you watch on Halloween?

no. Run DMC didn't have a song "Halloween in Hollis".

Checkmate!

 

[Lempo]

But it could have been any party. It could have been a birthday party or a retirement party. If it had been a costume party for Halloween, would Die Hard be a film you watch on Halloween?

But he didn't do it at any other time, he did it when every move by his opponents would be checked through the qualifier "on Christmas?". He was counting on that they'll shut down the power grid as per the protocol, because his "Christmas miracle" was that the guy calling the shots will refuse to allow it being the Chrismas Eve to affect on the decision and he goddamn will order the power grid to be shut.

Had it been written to take place in Halloween, the film would have all the silly chiches and the robbers entering the building in costumes and Bruce Willis running around wearing the lower half of a chicken costume. And yes it would still be a holiday classic because the goddamn Alan Rickman would make it work, but in this case it is specifically written to be Christmas with all the associate bells and whistles and Cristmas music and ho-ho-ho.

(The Halloween Die Hard would actually be awesome though if they played John McClane like the monster in a slasher flick and the POW would be more on the robbers and their growing paranoia.)