Delay

Awfully specific. What about Voyager if we decide to stick with with Star Trek? Strangely, about that last one in particular: It doesn't actually look that bad to me. It looks exactly like what "HDR" promises - a High Dynamic Range. And although they're not great games in terms of gameplay, the last two Need for Speed games - 2015 and Payback, managed to restraint themselves with bloom to very realistic values, something you'd actually see with not just a camera, but also the naked eye. The Oblivion screenshot could be explained by a Sun which is a few orders of magnitude brighter than ours. What (metallic) material wouldn't appear to glow then? So yes, I can agree that these are overkill representations of the effects. But the OP is against having these effects at all, which heavily I disagree with. If the values used to compute the strength of every single one of these post-processing effect are set just right they can greatly enhance the visuals.

Source: NASA (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/images/586473main_iss028e005671_full.jpg) Source: NASA (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/thumbnails/image/iss060e014984.jpg) Source: NASA (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/thumbnails/image/iss060e013819.jpg) Clearly NASA should turn off their visual effects!

(I'm very pessimistic right now, I realize that) My permission (the Abitur) to study mathematics later in my life depends on how well I can speak, read and write Spanish now. And I suck at that language. Welcome to the German education system! I don't know how many countries share this downright stupid way of evaluating a student's performance. I'm fairly certain however, that studying a science has - or at least should - have nothing to do with a foreign language only taught for exactly that certificate. I don't intend to live in Spain! If a second foreign language wasn't a requirement I would not have to learn Spanish and I would not be on knife's edge right now. This makes my problems in physics look trivial, and then some.

But only 3 out of 5, apparently. The Principia documentation goes into more, though.

Today I learned that in spite of playing the piano for 8 years I still cannot discern seconds from thirds. Or from sevenths, I genuinely made that mistake today!

I think I got it now. If PartVariants is not in use I can make different texture sets and use KSPTextureSwitch, else I have to make every texture set its own variant.

I thought that KSPTextureSwitch allowed KSP to use the TU mats in the first place. Then I'm afraid I don't quite understand what the module is for. The question was aimed for the case of multiple texture sets for each variant. As an example I have two mats for the Mk3 parts - one more metallic and one less metallic to reflect what aircraft (reflective) and the space shuttle (barely anything reflecting) looked like. Now, Mk3 only has one variant for each of its parts, but what if I do have a multi-variant part and I want to have a choice between different texture sets?

Is it possible to add KSPTextureSwitch to specific part variants? I'm asking because MODULE{ name = KSPTextureSwitch } doesn't seem to work inside @VARIANT code.

Not really sure if he's okay with that!

I fixed my typewriter! The problem I had was that uppercase letters were put on the paper a little to high up, by about half a character in fact. Turns out that a tiny piece of something got stuck in an inconveniant place and prevented the carriage from moving up completely!

I could see how that one might make it!

Granted. The universe fast forwards to its heat death. I wish the universe didn't do what I just described.

Granted. You forget how to complete them, however. I wish the like feature was repaired once and for all.

Yesterday, after editing some stuff in GIMP I noticed a gap in my desktop icons that I could swear wasn't there before. I'm now slightly worried that files have been deleted at some point by something (or someone), but if they were I'd have no idea what was there, so it must have been pretty unimportant. Everything else is exactly where it should be, but it feels like 3 icons are missing... Strange.

Yeah, exactly. This is the required material for school. Before my exam I need to know this stuff. For some of these things it is "merely" a lack of understanding. I know that voltage can be defined as the difference in electric potential between two points, and I know what a difference is. But I don't know what electric potential really is, so I can't work with the definition. Something with electrons and the electric field, that much I know. How this explains the functionality of a capacitor is beyond me.

What is voltage? What is an electric field? What is electric potential? How does a capacitor even work? How do joules and watts tie in with electricity? Why am I even asking these questions. Why do I need to ask these questions. Am I really that dumb? That I'm not able to figure out the answer to any of those questions in a manner that doesn't create 10 more? At this point I have no other conclusion left. I have to infer that I'm mentally not capable of grasping the implications of (moving) electrons doing some thing I cannot describe in further detail. I'm an idiot. Period. I'm nearing my 18th birthday and I have the deduction skills of an infant. "Electricity is electrons moving through a wire." I know that's incorrect (lighting aren't moving through wires), but that's where my knowledge ends. That's how much I can claim to know ábout electricity without lying to myself.

Congratulations...? Not sure if this is something to be proud of. Certainly you're getting exposure, but in the wrong group, for the wrong purposes.

I spent one entire day patching just one part for TU. Welcome to my life for the next few years. Also: I might have found a new easter egg? Or has anyone else checked the console?

You don't have that privilege with film cameras, so it must be possible in digital photography!

It has that bar, but what I mean is that you can't see the over/underexposure. It only shows up when taking the photo. Other cameras, like the one I used before, show wrong exposures on the display. You can see exactly what part of the image is over/underexposed and get direct visual feedback after changing the settings.

I bought a "new" camera today - a Nikon D3100. In spite of manufacturing starting as early as 2010, as far as I can tell it's a good camera. However, par for the course for a Nikon is that exposure is not simulated in previews. You either get it right or you have to retry until you do. Lots of guessing. But I wouldn't call that "bad". It's a chance to learn what the settings actually do and how to use them efficiently!

Dammit. I have a 16:10, 1680x1050 monitor...

There's always something I forget. Sometimes it's an antenna, sometimes it's a solar panel and other times a specific contract-required part. Imagine going to Duna only to discover mid-capture that you forgot the thermometer the contract required you to take with you! Okay, I never had things go that wrong, but it's annoying nonetheless. Let's wait some 300 or so days for the next launch window...