kvn8907

My hard drive says it has a capacity of 931 GB. Currently, it says I am using 832 GB, and have 99 GB free if I right click on C and select Properties. If I select all the folders in C and select properties, it says that they total 364 GB. Now, I know that there are typically some files that are hidden and the two numbers will never be the same, but right now that's a difference of 468 GB. What could be using 468 GB, and why isn't that listed when I select all files in C?

I already cleared the recycle bin, and Appdata is only using 5 GB of RAM.

I'm sure many of you have seen the famous pictures of Georgian riot police in oddly-shaped gas masks cracking down on government protesters. But I've been trying to research it on Yahoo!, and all that I can find are people commenting that the gas masks look sort of like Mickey Mouse or Goofy. What I'd really like to know is:

1. What are those specific brand of gas masks called?

2. Why are they shaped in the way they are, rather than like more traditional gas mask?

For those unfamiliar with what I'm referring to, here are several links:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/07/wor...

http://world.commongate.com/post/Georgian_riot_cop...

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/11/08/georgian-riot...

http://exiledonline.com/my-autocrats-worse-than-yo...

I went on a walk earlier (without bugspray or a hat), and as soon as I entered the woods, bugs started swarming over my head, and didn't stop until I left the woods. I was able to catch one and look at it carefully, but it escaped before I could take it home and take a picture. So, the information I remember about it is all conditional on my memory being correct.

*It had 6 legs (hey, that narrows it down to 900,000 species!)

*It lived in upstate New York

*Head to abdomen, it was just under half an inch long

*It had a tough abdomin, like a beetle

*The throax and abdomin was covered in verticle stripes of black and red. Also, the eyes had red coloring similar to the back markings

*It had two thin, veiny, but relatively tough wings (I was able to carry it to my car by one wing, and it didn't seem hurt after that)

*It had what looked like two hairy proboscises

*It seemed to swarm together with fellow bugs of the same species

*It was very interested in my hair and neck, but only my hair and neck. I think one bit my neck, but didn't break the skin, or at least didn't have anything alergic in its saliva, because I didn't form a bump on my neck

*Aside from being extremely annoying, it seemed to be rather benign. It kept trying to land in my hair, but aside from the one bite, didn't seem to want to suck my blood or anything like that

Anyway, I left it alive for the drive home, and it escaped. Can anyone guess which insect was bugging me from the written descriptions of what I can remember?

I was thinking about this last night, and it didn't make any sense. In the first scene of the movie The Lion King, after the introduction Circle of Life song, Scar catches a small mouse. But it doesn't say anything. Now, it's normal for anthropomorphic movies to have some cut-off, so ants and fish aren't talking, but here it didn't make much sense.

*It's not because it was a different species. Lions and Hyenas and Meerkats are talking to each other just fine.

*It's not because it's a non-character. Practically every animal on the savanna shows the power of speech in the Just Can't Wait to be King song.

*It's not because it has a tiny brain. Zazu, Timone, and that prarie dog-thing that told Mufasa that hyenas were spotted in the pridelands all weren't much bigger than a mouse, but they could talk.

*It's not because of an evolutionary cut-off. The mouse was a mammal, not a fish or bug or bacteria.

So why in the world wouldn't the mouse Scar caught say something to him?

I asked this question before, and thought I got a correct answer, but seeing the bug again, I realized my old question's answer wasn't quite right.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArhP4...

This time, however, I got to take a picture of it. Excuse the quality. It's a 3.2 megapixel camera, but doesn't do small objects well, because if the camera gets too close, the picture is blurry and unfocused, but too far away and the object can't be clearly seen. So see what you can make from this picture:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y104/ervty/bugcut...

Written description follows:

It's got 6 legs and 2 antenna. It's almost precisely 1 centimeter long. It's back is long and flat, and it has a very tiny head, with two small, bulging, red eyes. At the back of its back is an upside down V in light red, and while it looks like it can fly, it seems to definately prefer walking. It's belly is black and banded, with orange between the bands and on the outside of the belly. Also, I live in NY state, where at certain times of the year they seem to be very abundant, and this one likely got into the house escaping the cold. I don't think it's possible to give any more information about it than this.

What's it called when one continues to pour effort into something simply because one has already poured a lot of effort into it?

This should be an easy few points. I think the name is rather well-known, but I'm drawing a blank.

While reading Robert M. Utley's book, "Frontier Regulars", it mentioned picket pins. I looked it up, and found it's something that looks like this:

http://www.campsiteartifacts.com/unioncavalrypicke...

or this

http://home.earthlink.net/~coehornmortar/images/Pi...

But, I'm having trouble finding what exactly it is. Is it some sort of tent spike or something?

As usual, this is a question that doesn't snugly fit in any category, so bare with me if you think it's in the wrong place.

This is something that a simple dictionary check and Yahoo! search hasn't turned up any answers for. So, for anyone on here, can you find a source that actually explains this epithet?

(Not sure if this should go under "Words and Wordplay" or "Mythology and Folklore")

It seems logical that if you have antimatter in your brain, annihilating with electrons, that it can't be good. But there doesn't seem to be much concern about that sort of thing. So, can the positrons in positron emission tomography damage your brain? Why or why not?

I'm researching an essay, and I need sources. Any article or book on the subject is welcomed (I'm at college, and we have a huge library, so likely we'll have the book. Plus we have academic search engines), and, if you can get more specific, do you know any good articles or books relating to officers and the Pacific theater of World War II?

I have a HP Photosmart C4280, and I just installed a new Black cartridge (the color cartridge is registering as 1/4th full). But, after I installed the cartridge, my prints went from being grayish from not having enough black to color them, to streaking. Now all my prints are covered in thin streaks, which are most noticeable as yellow streaks across orange surfaces. I aligned my printer cartridges twice, and it hasn't done anything. So why is my printer still giving me streaks?

In the book The Thin Red Line, on page 76 it says "He couldn't quit now, not with them all watching. Once on fatigue detail, he had lifted a whole tree down off its freshly cut stump on his back. He concentrated on remembering that."

Now, I can sort of get what he means, but not exactly. And when I tried to look it up online, all I got were hundreds of documents about the construction of steel bridges. So, for someone in the Army during the Battle of Guadalcanal, what might "fatigue detail" mean?

In the book The Thin Red Line, it says "The bullet had entered at the bottom of the flat part of the pectoral muscle just above the nipple and had struck bone and keyholed downward, coming out flatways below the left shoulder blade." I've tried to look it up, and I've found mentions of keyhole wounds, but I've never found it defined.

So what does it mean when a gunshot "keyholes"?

(I'm not sure whether I should ask this in the military or medical section.)

Great. Just a month after Haiti gets hit by a huge earthquake, Chile does too. So, now that Chile's devastated (and not for the first time. They're on a fault line.), are Americans going to have to send another boatload of money to help a devastated foreign nation? Is the world's slenderest nation going to need as much aid as the poorest nation in the western hemisphere?

While reading Beetle Bailey in the Democrat and Chronicle, I was reminded of the Wondermark article at http://wondermark.com/comic-strip-doctor/ The comic seems to be about the army, but as David Malki put it, Beetle is "a soldier who never kills, in an army which never fights, for a country which never calls on him."

Hagar the Horrible, on the other hand, actually goes out on campaign every now and then, has probably killed at least one person in his life (maybe the comics are discression shots, and after the Queen in the castle tells Hagar not to mess up the carpet while he's pillaging, he cuts off the king's head, rapes her, pillages everything from the castle, and messes up the carpet. Who knows?), though he's not on campaign constantly.

So, I propose some pros and cons for comparing each comic to real life in the armed forces:

Beetle Bailey

Pro: Takes place in modern-ish times (1950s era tanks and rifles though), has a clear division of rank, seems to have logistical support on a base with a priest, a dedicated cook, and secretaries.

Con: No one on the entire base has ever fought in an actual conflict in the entire history of the comic, which has been around since 1950. Beetle and his sergeant take turns alternatively trying to maim each other and playing tennis with and other amicable games with each other, Mom sends Beetle cookies every now and then, and with the exception of the General with his wife, and Beetle's Mom, no one has any friends or family outside the base. Soldiers are a diverse group of people with exactly one defining characteristic, including one soldier who's functionally retarded, and probably couldn't hold a spoon much less be counted on in a firefight.

Hagar the Horrible

Pro: Hagar occasionally gets on a boat, sails for England, meets heavily-armed knights and accurate but ineffective archers, and assaults castles. Then he sails home for a time. He's a military man with a wife, kids, and his own house. He cares about money and possessions, which he gets from his work and sometimes loses to tax collectors or his wife, he enjoys a good meal, and he sometimes sees people outside his army or family, such as Dr. Zook, the ship repairman, and others. Visits places besides the Army base. He is friends with his second in command, Lucky Eddie, who doubles as the cook when they're on campaign, and though he's not very bright, he's at least useful.

Con: Hagar is set somewhere in the 9th century, probably, and doesn't seem to be about life in the armed forces. Rather than being one-dimensional caricatures, the soldiers and sailors under Hagar's command are zero-dimensional clones, who all look alike and follow him without question or individual thought. Inexplicably gets into near-death situations with no explanation of how it happened, or how he survived. Whereas Beetle never had any reason to be in danger from anything more than a splinter, or being stomped on by his swearing, abusing Sergeant, Hagar should have died 1000 times, but somehow still lives to complain about tax collectors.

So, especially for those that have been in the armed forces (specifically Army, Navy, and Marines...Coast Guard and Air Force don't seem to apply to either comic), which of the two comics was a better example of what life was like? Was it more like an insipid endeavor where you spent all your time on base doing exercises and digging trenches, or more like a mix of army and civilian life, where you were at some time actually in some sort of danger for a period of time, but after that time was over, went back to your home and family for a while? And for those who have never been in armed forces, which comic do you figure would be the more accurate depiction?

I know the Capybaras are rodents, not fish, but I read that the Church classified them as fish so their New World missionaries could eat them. Is this still true? Can Catholics still eat Capybaras over Lent?

If so, why hasn't the decision ever been reversed?

Obviously, if there's no danger, they could simply get out of the tank and go off to the side. But what do they do if there's a long mission, and outside of the tank is unsafe for an extended period of time? What happens if they have to go into an area with nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon threats for an extended period, and have to stay in the tank to live?

In short, how do soldiers relieve themselves when they can't get out of the vehicle, and can't hold it?

(By the way, if you're wondering what brought up such a random question, I read that the original design for the MICV-70, a prototype of the M2 Bradley, had built-in toilets, and that got me thinking.)

I mean, you'd think that with computers these days, you could put any symbol on the keyboard into a file name. But there are still about 9 or so different symbols that one cannot put in a file name, the colon being one of them. Why?

Apple juice from concentrate tastes good. Pear juice is cheap, and used as a filler for many fruit juice blends. Lemon juice is tart by itself, but it's usually mixed with sugar to form lemonade. And orange juice is good if it's fresh-squeezed, or has been transported to market without being concentrated and re-hydrated again.

But, when it comes to orange juice, if it's concentrated, re-hydrated, and sent to market, the end result is a beverage with a taste somewhat similar to unsweetened lemon juice, and a strong aftertaste which could probably best be described as a mixture of spit and vomit.

Why the huge degradation in quality when it comes to concentrated orange juice, especially considering that many other fruit juices still taste good even if they're from concentrate? And perhaps more importantly, why do people even BUY orange juice from concentrate, knowing full well that it will taste terrible?

Years back, I read that in Ancient Rome, once men had made an agreement, they'd pee and cross their streams to seal the deal.

However, recently when I tried to search the internet for evidence of that, all the search terms I could think of didn't bring up what I was looking for.

So, has anyone heard or read anything similar? Does anyone know of a source where it was mentioned? Am I thinking of the reason why wrong, and they actually did it as some form of friendship, brotherhood, or cementing trust? Have I remembered the practice correctly, but so little is written about it that there's not much information available? Or have I completely remembered the practice wrong?