General Questions Thread

[Sumeragi]

Hydropower, copper, and gold. Unfortunately PRC is trying to gain a monopoly.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Hydropower, copper, and gold. Unfortunately PRC is trying to gain a monopoly.

Strip mine or permanent enslavement? They have got hydropower, but with minerals PRC doesn't seem to have much use for them in the long term.

EDIT : According to wikipedia, they HAVE a tourism industry. In Vientiane, a mega mall is about to be built next year, something called Lao Plaza, using FDI. Where does the funds come from?

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

EDIT : According to wikipedia, they HAVE a tourism industry. In Vientiane, a mega mall is about to be built next year, something called Lao Plaza, using FDI. Where does the funds come from?

China.

They've been heavily investing in the Mekong region for quite a while now.

[willx]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

China.

They've been heavily investing in the Mekong region for quite a while now.

Keep in mind that for Chinese entities there's "economic/market value" of commodities and resources and "strategic value" of those same resources and commodities.

By that, I mean, they invest in projects that are economically infeasible by profit seekers for some odd reason. Like random mining projections that generate negative NPV values ..

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by willx

Keep in mind that for Chinese entities there's "economic/market value" of commodities and resources and "strategic value" of those same resources and commodities.

By that, I mean, they invest in projects that are economically infeasible by profit seekers for some odd reason. Like random mining projections that generate negative NPV values ..

Resource control in the future. Probably a war brewing in 5-8 years under their charge?

[Asuras]

So I was talking to my friends about cars just a couple hours ago, and I came to the realization that despite sports cars generally being smaller and having less overall 'material' put into them, they still manage to look cooler than generic sedans you see constantly on the streets but are nevertheless incredibly expensive.

Why do car companies continually produce sedans without any distinguishing features or anything "sexy" to them? Why is it that coolness is limited to a vehicle with only two seats? I would think that if generic sedans were suddenly produce that had similar awesome designs to their sports car counterparts a lot more would be bought.

I realize that much of this may be opinionated (who knows, maybe there are some who find general sedans to be extremely cool), but I honestly cannot see anyone successfully arguing that they are anywhere near as cool as a sports car.

[Dextro]

Originally Posted by Asuras

So I was talking to my friends about cars just a couple hours ago, and I came to the realization that despite sports cars generally being smaller and having less overall 'material' put into them, they still manage to look cooler than generic sedans you see constantly on the streets but are nevertheless incredibly expensive.

Why do car companies continually produce sedans without any distinguishing features or anything "sexy" to them? Why is it that coolness is limited to a vehicle with only two seats? I would think that if generic sedans were suddenly produce that had similar awesome designs to their sports car counterparts a lot more would be bought.

I realize that much of this may be opinionated (who knows, maybe there are some who find general sedans to be extremely cool), but I honestly cannot see anyone successfully arguing that they are anywhere near as cool as a sports car.

Why are sedans beige you ask? Because people keep buying them sadly. However not everything is grim and there are some pretty fine looking "normal" cars in the market. The Dodge Dart comes to mind for instance or, in Europe, anything by Alfa Romeo. I also think that the euro hatchbacks are overall a lot less boring than the American and Asian sedans. The Renault Megane, Alfa Gilletta and Honda Civic come to mind as rather daringly designed cars here in the old continent.

[Irenicus]

I don't know, there are boring sedans designed for the "class" over "style" aesthetics, or even outright utilitarianism, but there are also sexy sedans out there that incorporate sports sexiness into them. Some BMW sports sedan cost you an arm, a leg, and a liver, but you'll get back more than your fair due of, well, "compensation."

And then there is the recently released electric Model S, which looks rather sexy and apparently drives like a sports car. I'm not big on cars, but if this is the future, then sure as hell I'm catching a ride on one.

[DonQuigleone]

I'd say anything that's mass manufactured will lack "sexiness". The coolness of a car is somewhat down to it's rarity.

If you actually took a step back and thought about it, most sedans are downright futuristic looking.

Also, most sports car designs are not practical for the range of driving needs that sedans cater to. They're very low to the ground, have impractically powerful motors, are fuel inefficient, and are not built for countries where the weather is at all unpredictable.

Still, I'd argue that a lot of these sedans are actually pretty good looking.

Of course, the really ugly class of car is the hatchback, but you can't beat that flexible space in the rear...

[DonQuigleone]

I have a question myself. Is there any reason that KDramas (and to a lesser extent JDramas and shojo manga) seem to populated almost exclusively by the uber-wealthy? If the entire cast isn't mega wealthy, then at least the male lead is almost always incredibly wealthy.

Is there a reason why the medium can't have a story populated by people of more normal means?

[Ascaloth]

Put 'sexy' and 'sedan' together, and what comes to mind for me is the Lancer Evolution.

And technically, the AE86 is a hatchback.

[Zakoo]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

I have a question myself. Is there any reason that KDramas (and to a lesser extent JDramas and shojo manga) seem to populated almost exclusively by the uber-wealthy? If the entire cast isn't mega wealthy, then at least the male lead is almost always incredibly wealthy.

Is there a reason why the medium can't have a story populated by people of more normal means?

A prince needs to be cool, blond, blue eyes, but above all, wealthy.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

I have a question myself. Is there any reason that KDramas (and to a lesser extent JDramas and shojo manga) seem to populated almost exclusively by the uber-wealthy? If the entire cast isn't mega wealthy, then at least the male lead is almost always incredibly wealthy.

Is there a reason why the medium can't have a story populated by people of more normal means?

Because nominally people of more normal means would be quite a bit more preoccupied with life for the drama that is supposed to happen.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Zakoo

A prince needs to be cool, blond, blue eyes, but above all, wealthy.

Not in K-Drama though.

I don't have an answer to Don's question, but it's pretty easy to notice indeed. Interestingly, I think it's less dominant in J-Drama by a considerable degree, though I speak without expertise.

Going by Korean girls' manwha, which is heavily influenced by the drama industry's tropes, Korea really likes the super rich, the Cinderella poor, the vicious social competition and bullying, idol groups, very handsome, androgynous men, picture perfect beautiful women (not much on "moe"), and Starcraft.

Oh, and Gangnam style as well. Rather literally, as in not just the worldwide hit parody song, but the actual posh, fashionable Gangnam image too.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

I don't have an answer to Don's question, but it's pretty easy to notice indeed. Interestingly, I think it's less dominant in J-Drama by a considerable degree, though I speak without expertise.

Going by Korean girls' manwha, which is heavily influenced by the drama industry's tropes, Korea really likes the super rich, the Cinderella poor, the vicious social competition and bullying, idol groups, very handsome, androgynous men, picture perfect beautiful women (not much on "moe"), and Starcraft.

Pretty much. While I can get some interest in the lives of the wealthy (Dallas anyone?), I don't understand why it's so ubiquitous, and why every idealised male lead has to be incredibly wealthy, a genius and fabulously good looking.

In Japan you do get the intelligent and fabulously good looking, but the incredibly wealthy part is more optional. For instance you at least occasionally get delinquents and other things.

Is Korean culture obsessed with wealth? Or am I reading too much into it? Or are there other factors leading to the ubiquity of wealth in Drama?

Then again, now that I think about it, a lot of American soaps (the closest analogue I can think of to most KDrama), are also obsessed with the lives of the wealthy, though in the American case it's usually the upper middle class, not the uber wealthy upper class as seen in KDrama.

You also see similar in Taiwanese and other Drama, but is this just a case of them copying KDrama?

Either way, I don't really get it. Surely poverty presents plenty of dramatic possibilities (and not simply being rescued by some snooty rich guy)?

[risingstar3110]

Well, I thought Korea is still in its developing stage, and leaving capitalism to its fullest. That's why they value 'being rich' so much and assimilate it to be the only way of being successful?

Will be interesting to find out, but i bet the average household income of male main character in modern Korean drama (by the ending) will always be much higher than in any other Asian countries (apart Taiwan which has similar state). Stereotypical speaking, their drama is not to make the male audiences relating themselves to (like in shounen anime/manga), but to make them idolising, those filthy rich business owner/tycoon's son who make supermodel girls left and right falling. That's why they only adapt Japanese shoujo, but never shounen

But i do not "really" watch Korean drama, so I could be wrong



Anyway, actually i come here to ask....

• Is there anyway to know the difference between MT (Mega tonnes) and MT (metric tonnes)?
• Does MT (metric ton) commonly used in US?
• If they write "MT" as "M T", does it specifically means one but not another?

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

Anyway, actually i come here to ask....

• Is there anyway to know the difference between MT (Mega tonnes) and MT (metric tonnes)?
• Does MT (metric ton) commonly used in US?
• If they write "MT" as "M T", does it specifically means one but not another?

Not without explanation or context. Typically, the writer should spell it out the first time. Americans will spell it "ton" rather than "tonne".

"metric ton" - Not used at all by lay people or many businesses. You will see it used frequently in engineering, science, or international business. OTOH, you won't see "megaton" used much except as a slang expression outside of nuclear or rocket science.

And I've never seen it written as "M T"

[blaze0041]

I've been wondering... is there a site out there that can identify Japanese fonts? Or perhaps someone knows the name of the font used here?

Images

Rinne no Lagrange OP1

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[risingstar3110]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Not without explanation or context. Typically, the writer should spell it out the first time. Americans will spell it "ton" rather than "tonne".

"metric ton" - Not used at all by lay people or many businesses. You will see it used frequently in engineering, science, or international business. OTOH, you won't see "megaton" used much except as a slang expression outside of nuclear or rocket science.

And I've never seen it written as "M T"

Thank, Vexx

Basically in this published article i'm reading, there is this guy who (as i see) supposedly divided "3 M T" by "90 MT" and somehow got 0.3% (?!?!). Then happily declared that it 's similar to the figure of 0.5-2% from another guy

So was really frustrated here not knowing whether he carelessly forgot that 3 mil/90 mil = ~3%, or it's simply a case of 3 and 90,000,000 with unknown extra calculations behind it. Of course the first make more sense to me, but it's within my interest for it to be high so can't totally trust myself

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by risingstar3110

Thank, Vexx

Basically in this published article i'm reading, there is this guy who (as i see) supposedly divided "3 M T" by "90 MT" and somehow got 0.3% (?!?!). Then happily declared that it 's similar to the figure of 0.5-2% from another guy

So was really frustrated here not knowing whether he carelessly forgot that 3/90 = ~3%, or it's simply a case of 3 and 9,000,000 with unknown extra calculations behind it

I'm going to *guess* he was using "metric tons" as "M T" and "megaton" as "MT" ... but it still doesn't add up.