cp702

Those aren't actual designs released by Dodge; they're people's guesses as to what the 2015 Charger will look like. They're just guesses, nothing official about them.

You know the US has around 20 times as many nuclear warheads as China, right?

While some graphics programs show shrunken things at full resolution, once you save an image as a PNG, shrinking necessarily leads to some loss of quality. There is simply less information in a smaller picture than a bigger one. No program can ever avoid this, as once the image is rasterized into a fixed set of pixels, it happens. That said, lots of programs are good at handling shrinking, so it looks roughly the same. When programs show shrunken images at full resolution, it's only possibly because the whole image is being shown at more than 100% zoom. In that case, it's possible to show details that are actually less than one pixel in the final image. But since you need to save as a rasterized file for GTA, you literally *cannot* shrink with no loss in detail.

@NB: You are technically wrong about exclusion zones. There is nothing in international law to support the idea that a country can declare the area around any of its ships to be off-limits. This is not to say exclusion zones don't exist, or that they aren't pretty universally accepted in practice, but as a matter of law, there is no force behind them (again, as a matter of actual force, instead of legal force, what's behind them is an aircraft carrier battle group, which is quite a lot of real force). Nevertheless, the whole point of freedom of navigation exercises is that one country sends warships where they are legally allowed to go, but where another country has warned them not to go. The idea isn't to shoot: the USN shot down a few Libyan fighters in the 80s in an exercise, but a) that's Libya, which isn't a credible military threat and b) that's fighters, not ships. In this case, I'd expect both sides were under orders not to fire unless fired upon or given permission by high command. Even if either side did attack, I doubt it'd lead to a full-on war. No one sane wants a war. There's the human cost of any war, the risking-the-world cost of a war between nuclear powers, the economic cost (the US and China are massive trading partners, and both sides benefit from the economic relationship), and all for not much upside. If I had to guess, I'd guess the US would back down before getting into a real war.

a) Read the ELS 7 manual. b) Those actually aren't really added cars. They are coded into GTA (even IV) as special police vehicles, and are supported by most scripts. That's because they're built in to TBOGT. I think the ELS series is emerg1-emerg7, and the sirens don't make cars pull over. For truly added cars, you *can't* make the siren pull cars over. At least, no one's figured out a way yet.

ELS v7 added vehicles only works with very specific added vehicle names. Off the top of my head, I think that's EMERG1-EMERG7, but I don't quite remember - it may be police5, but I don't think so. You can't call your added vehicles whatever you want; you have to call them something from the list of acceptable names.

And curiously enough, we manage to keep mass murderers (people who have done something horrible, not just people who are sick) in prisons and it works perfectly fine. Why is a secure confinement facility not enough? And lest we forget, this guy's offense is that he broke a sprinkler and drove over empty police cars. As crimes go, those aren't that bad. Crime shows are not reality. Even "true crime" tends to play up shock value, and play down the fact that the perpetrator is also a human being. No. No NO NO NO!!!!!!!!! This is wrong in every POSSIBLE way. By "euthanasia", I assume you mean people injecting a human being with poison, killing him. This is murder. I don't care WHAT you call it. He isn't "going for a map". You are killing him. Not treating him; not keeping everyone safe while medical science advances to make them treatable (and medical science does advance; unlike sane criminals, who have to reform to stop committing crime, insane ones just need proper medical care). You are KILLING someone. There is no way, NO WAY that the death of a human being is nice, simple, "went for a nap". Designating a group of people as unworthy to live because they are sick is one of the most reprehensible things it is possible to do. I repeat, the systematic killing of people due to illness or disability is a crime against humanity. In terms of severity, it's worse than murder. It ranks up there with genocide.

Just so we're clear, pictures of Niko photoshopped onto swimsuit models are never necessary. That's a general life rule, not just a this-site thing.

We've established this. It's the Mongolian Cyber Army.

How DARE you insult the proud nation of Mongolia. You have a decent shot at having Genghis Khan in your ancestry, and you glibly dismiss them like that?

OK, I'll bite. I'm pretty sure that "euthanization" of the mentally ill falls under the category of crimes against humanity. Killing someone due to mental illness isn't some sort of clean "euthanization". It is murder.

The issue is that you cannot put on *just* a vest and helmet. The way GTA does peds, you can't mix-and-match clothing with just a script (you can do so to a limited extent outside the game, but we don't want to have LCPDFR replace the normal cop ped). The way it is in a vanilla GTA install, the only way to get a vest and helmet on a cop is to switch the cop to be a full-on NOOSE officer. That would include changing the head to one of the NOOSE heads (which are different from cop heads), and the pants to the fully tactical NOOSE bottom (including the drop holster, instead of the cop's duty belt).

What he said.

^^^ And that's the reputation I was talking about. I've seen that sentiment expressed elsewhere as well about the same company.

I think most US departments make volunteers complete EVOC before they'll *consider* giving permission to use lights and sirens, even on actual ambulances and fire trucks. It's the same idea - emergency operation puts you, your passengers, any patients you transport, and the general public in danger. That's why it's only allowed in emergencies, and why they want you trained in how to do it safely before you can do it.

That wasn't what he was talking about. He's talking about volunteers. In plenty of places in the US, volunteers may only violate traffic laws in official agency vehicles - they can't do POV responses with emergency equipment (e.g. in New York, a volunteer may use blue courtesy lights to request the right-of-way, but you don't have to yield to someone using courtesy lights, and it's illegal for them to break traffic laws while using them). Other places, vollies get to put emergency equipment on POVs. Sometimes, supervisors and chiefs can put equipment on their POV when most vollies can't. The idea is that a firefighter or EMT volunteer would only take their POV to the station, because they can't really help if they respond to the scene with just their car - they should take the fire truck or ambulance. OTOH, a supervisor *would* be responding to the scene in a POV, because their role doesn't require all the equipment on the truck. Police are NEVER under those sorts of rules - they aren't volunteers in the same sense. Oh, sure, there are auxiliary/reserve officers, but they work shifts. Volunteer FFs and EMTs often just go about their business until they get an emergency call, at which point they respond. Outside of EXTREME circumstances, reserve officers off-duty aren't going to be called upon to respond to an emergency.

That looks more like an EMS supervisor, not an ambulance. That ambulance agency has a (quite likely unjustified) reputation, I think, for giving everyone supervisor status so they can get lights and sirens and use them for private ends. Even if they are responding to an emergency, every emergency driver has to operate with due care for safety of others. Lights and sirens aren't an excuse to barrel through a work zone and risk lives of road workers.

Exactly the same. There is ZERO difference between capabilities. The differences are almost entirely superficial - the actual capabilities are identical. And in general, language used to code something is IRRELEVANT to anyone not coding it. Different languages can do different things more easily from the programmer's perspective, and C++ has some options available that neither VB or C# have relating to direct memory modification. But using C# instead of VB? That's just b/c LMS likes C#.

It used to be. I think it's now all in C#, though. Why? VB.NET is exactly the same language as C#. The only differences are superficial. You can have an automated tool to convert between the two.

MODERATOR NOTICE Topic moved.

Actually, I could see it being possible to use FB or the like for location tracking, as smartphones are much more likely to leave an online trail if you aren't careful. I have a normal phone and set it to only share locations with 911, which is why you'd have trouble tracking me. But I retract my strongest doubts about your buddy finding where she was. And I think lots of people would love to file charges against Facebook (for example, I'd like to charge them with wasting my time). Unfortunately, the law doesn't think that's a crime :(

I just used that site on my own number. It just said "***** Wireless Mobile", and gave a city and state which, while it's where I used to live and where the area code would track to, is actually not even in the right state, or bordering the right state. Cell phone numbers in the US are all unlisted - that's why you can't call 411 and get the number. It actually is not open source for cell phones. If it's been used by them online, you can sometimes track it to them, but you still can't get the location unless they specifically gave it out, you work for the telecom, you work for an intelligence agency, or you can break into their networks and are willing to commit a felony in order to track the number.

They CAN be undercover, but they aren't designed for it - they're general duties cars, normally marked b/c normal cop cars are marked. That was my point, may have been unclear.

No. CVPIs aren't for undercover techniques. They're for general fleet use - they can sometimes see undercover work, but are much more likely to be marked patrol cars. Almost all police CVPIs are marked patrol cars, because almost all police cars in general are marked.

They don't stand by and watch houses burn with people in them. It said in the article, they WILL respond to rescue people in all cases. Human life takes absolute priority in every single fire department operation. They don't stand by and watch houses burn with people in them. It said in the article, they WILL respond to rescue people in all cases. Human life takes absolute priority in every single fire department operation.