The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
Does this count as soapboxing? If not I have a follow up question; how do those who believe in God explain the conservation violations caused by magically making things? Paragon12321 (talk)
The whole point is that only a Supreme Being could explain what they see as deviations from the laws of physics. Creationism generally focuses on discrediting scientific explanations of our origins. When belief is on your side, you don't have to explain everything in terms of lawa they same way scientists do. Generally, Creationists will say "The law of conservation of matter and energy was established after Creation was complete and cannot be applied prior to that, because matter and energy are both objects of Creation." Naturalists would say, "The totality of matter and energy has always been the same, the Big Bang simply saw a change from energy to matter". Rockpocket08:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's simple: the amount of energy stays the same, and the amount of matter stays the same, and neither of these conservations are caused in any way by a supernatural being. They just are there. 'Those who do believe in "GOD" (and CAPITALIZE every OTHER freaking WORD) should explain how he exists even though there are hundreds of years of scientific evidence pointing to the opposite. For example, if the Earth is only 6000 years old, how come our knowledge of geology makes sense? If evolution is not a fact (it is), how come there is perfect (alright, near-perfect) evidence in fossils? How come stars are in existence when if the universe really was only 6000 years old we would still be a superheated cloud of hydrogen gas? Instead of trying to disprove valid scientific evidence, why not try to prove god? See Burden_of_proof. Ilikefood (talk) 16:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note that the vast majority of theists are not creationists. I'm a Christian, and you can't say something just is, what created it? Nothing cannot cause something.--193.120.116.177 (talk) 20:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whose saying nothing caused something? I never said that something came from nothing. I said that something happened and was not influenced by a supernatural being. And, assuming that the big bang theory is correct, there wasn't a "nothing", its just that everything was compacted into an infinitely dense point before it exploded outward. Ilikefood (talk) 00:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, the point is, if you really try and put yourself in the viewpoint of someone whose beliefs are different than yours, you'll see that those people aren't total morons either. It's not really hard to see either the non-believer (or Creationist, or whatever) viewpoint if you give it an honest try. It doesn't mean the viewpoint is correct or is compelling to you, but pretending it can't be conceptualized is just intellectual laziness, no matter who is doing it. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A more popular question might be how those who don't believe in God explain those things - in other words, if there is no intelligence behind creation why should there be any form of order or regularity at all? DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If the question is, from a scientific viewpoint, why is there order in the universe rather than chaos (or perhaps more accurately, why is there complexity rather than chaos), this is a field of great interest to physicists. The timeline of the Big Bang gives some idea of how various forces became distinct from others over (very brief) periods of time. One could also, of course, ask why an infinite god should decide to create a universe. Warofdreamstalk09:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Digitigrade bipeds
Would that even be possible? They stand on a smaller area than plantigrades, and probably the "tip-toe" stance would strain the muscles more than plantigrades. I'm guessing it would be pretty hard just to stay balanced for a while. 24.6.46.92 (talk) 02:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And "traditionally bipedal dinosaurs have been viewed as strict digitigrade walkers" according to this academic paper [1] whereas reptiles are apparently plantigrade (until they pick up speed!). cursorial relates to that. Mhicaoidh (talk) 04:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose birds count, but I was thinking of more like a wolf's paws. My main question is if it is even practical to have digitigrade legs on a biped and be able to run/walk/stand normally. 24.6.46.92 (talk) 20:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The answer then is yes,even if you are big and heavy like a dinosaur. It helps you hop, leap and/or run fast BUT you need a counterweight / support such as a tail, which we see in kangaroos, dinosaurs, birds...and werewolves! Mhicaoidh (talk) 23:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand from the article whether they are walking on the whole of their toes, or just the tips of them. If it is the whole of the toes, I tend to run and sometimes walk like that without any trouble balancing.HS7 (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cookies or bars
Which was invented first, Cookies or bars(like brownies, special K, and lemon bars)?
I am seeking employment and the position I am applying for, has a questionaire attached. I must answer 10 questions so the person hiring me can get a better feel for any seriously interested candidate. The question I am stuck on is: "if you could get rid of any of the US states, which one would it be, and why?
Can you believe it? And this is a position for a dental office a manager.
Thank You for your help. Maybe you can help me in the direction of where this is going. JudieJudith Stew (talk) 04:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a seriously inappropriate question and in my country you wouldnt be allowed to ask it, as your answer could be seen to reveal your personal views on all sorts of things such as politics, religion and so on. The dental firm is a business therefore I would avoid giving a direct answer eg Vermont! New Jersey! and instead discuss your reasoning, after all the job you are applying for is manager. Perhaps the state that contributes least to the US economy? mind you I'd imagine such an impoverished region would be full of dental problems and thus need your dental service. But would they be able to pay for it? And that would be your problem as manager; so then start talking about your skills... Mhicaoidh (talk) 07:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Florida: the biggest player in the US sugar industry contributing 21.4% of the total (from sugarcane and beets combined) sugar produced in the United States. Get rid of Florida, the simplistic theory goes, and the price of sugar goes up, sweet foods that rot teeth get more expensive and less people will buy them. Thats great if the goal is to improve the teeth of the nation, but the ultimate consequence of that could be less business for the dentist. Thus perhaps you should choose the State that contributes the least to the US sugar or high fructose corn syrup industries!
Alternatively, you could be controversial and say "Iraq: because since its acquisition it has cost the rest of the country $3 trillion to maintain". A pretty clever choice if the dentist is in San Francisco, less so if it is in Texas. Rockpocket07:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You could say "Get rid of the United States.", but that means that Mexico and Latin America loses its Health coverage and has to sponge off of Europe. 205.240.144.214 (talk) 07:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The question is probably intended to test your wit. Whatever you do, don't propose a serious answer (unless, perhaps, it's related to dentistry as above; that would at least show you had done some homework).--Shantavira|feed me09:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The question is worded so you have a choice. If you could... which one would it be... So why not choose to keep them all ? Demonstrate loyalty and avoid accusations of bias, racism, etc.86.209.29.33 (talk) 13:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)DT[reply]
Perhaps choose the state in which you are applying for the job. That way maybe you'd have some kind of remote chance at a decent health care system to work in; something with universal national health insurance. Or maybe that would be a little pessimistic for a manager. Hmm. --Prestidigitator (talk) 06:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
God Being an Angel
Please reply to this edit only if you are not a Christian.
In the novel The Amber Spyglass of the series His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman, God, the Authority, is false, fake, and fraud, not really God or a god, but is actually an angel. Could it be possible that God is false, fake, and fraud, not really God or a god, but is actually an angel, in reality, in the real world, in real life?
When the story His Dark Materials said that God is not really God or a god but is actually an angel, it meant and was talking about the Christian god. But Christianity is just one of the many different religions that exist in the world today. There are so many different religions in the world today. There are some people who claim and believe that Allah, the god of Islam, is false, fake, and fraud, not really God or a god but is actually an angel. Did you know that? See section 29 in page 20 of the article Islam - A Case Of Mistaken Identity.
It is possible that a Christian God is false, fake and fraud in "real life". He could, in reality, be an angel or he could, in reality, not exist. It is also possible that an Islamic God is false, fake and fraud in "real life". He could, in reality, be an angel or he could, in reality, not exist. The probability of each of those possibilities is a matter for debate elsewhere. Rockpocket07:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bowei, this is not a good question. There are many different beliefs regarding god/gods. We may think of a religion as a set of beliefs. So when you ask "Could it be possible that God is false...?", you need to specify which set of beliefs you're refering to.
Asking the refdesk whether it knows that some people believe that the muslim god is false is not appropriate and doesn't belong here.
Bowei, you are asking about questions of belief. Each person has their own beliefs which they may be able to share in parts with others. None of this is testable in ways that are applicable to the stuff that a reference desk deals with. You could find some much more appropriate forum to ask this kind of question. SaundersW (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Or what if the other angels are just less powerful gods, under a diferent name? That would be basically the same thing.HS7 (talk) 18:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A popular idea in Christian theology has been that Satan is a fallen angel and is quite capable of convincing people that he is the Christian God. Warofdreamstalk09:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why does it cost Ford a billion dollars to develop a car but Tesla Motors can pop one out on $40 mil startup?
Lotsofissues 13:27, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Where's a source for Ford needing a billion bucks? Or is that just a turn of phrase? Similarly, where's Tesla's $40 mil? Tesla Motors suggests more like $150 mil has been dropped into the company.
Tesla is developing with other people's money and effectively has nothing (or at least comparatively little) to lose. They can take risks that an established car company, be it Ford or Toyota, can't.
Depending on what is classed as a development cost, Tesla isn't attempting to build in volume. If you call a car's $10000 worth of parts "development", and Ford makes 100,000 to Tesla's 10, then there's your difference. — Lomn14:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tesla is building upon an existing Lotus platform.
Tesla is a new company. They don't have to pay retirement money to people who used to work for them. They only pay pension insurance for the people they've hired so far. [3] Tesla's design doesn't have to fit existing mass production facilities. If they build a bumper they don't have to figure out how to reconfigure their metal press from the previous model. --Lisa4edit (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Reconfiguring equipment is not a problem: stamping machines and the like are designed to be reconfigured. Ford and Telsa will have about the same design costs there (Ford might spend more on dies because they've got a higher production volume, but that's not a design cost). The difference is probably in indirect costs like advertising, market research, management, and the like. --Carnildo (talk) 22:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i'm a 21 year old young kenyan.i recently got hired on one of the biggest call centres in Africa.I'm currently doing transcription services for the company.i'm just about to end my training and i'm to hit the live floor, where i'll be doing live messages in the next few days.We are doing canadian voicemail transcriptions.First question,Anybody know a site i can go to or a tutorial i can download to learn how canadians speak.Cos their accents is so fast, i make lots of major errors.Question two-Incase i do a trnscription wrongly is there someone who checks my messages before they go to the receipient?Cos where i work only three to five messages are checked daily.And you do like 30 messages daily.
3.I want to learn about the canadian culture.Not the general stuff like provinces,cities..i want the grassroot stuff.Like the hottest band, The hottest mall, clubs, roads.Common stuff i'm likely to encounter while doing my transcriptions.PLEASE HELP> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.49.87.164 (talk) 13:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The last bit is going to be hard. You can check for Canadian billboard ratings for songs, but really most of the culture stuff you simply pick up. Maybe Google.ca news, and othernewssites? It's a big, diverse country, so there's no simple "popular mall/street/clubs", unless you're doing a specific city of small region of the nation. 206.126.163.20 (talk) 03:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's the amount of food or nutrition that's necessary for sustained existence of an animal, neither growing nor starving. A google search yields many pages which look like they explain this. —Steve Summit (talk) 16:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
From Google books: 'A maintenance ration may be described as that which will maintain an animal that is in a resting and non-producing condition and in good health, in the same condition and at the same weight for an indefinite period.' It is contrasted with the production ration, 'that part of the daily diet which is given in excess of maintenance requirements, and which is available for being converted into energy, as in working horses, or into milk, or into fat or wool, or is used for growth.' Algebraist16:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rx
Why do many medical sites (particlularly those "pharmacies" based in North America) feature the letters "Rx" prominently in their name or logo. As a brit, it seems odd to me that these letter would have anything to do with the medical profession at all. Astronaut (talk) 15:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Medical prescription article has a big "US centric" tag on it. Not surprising since the Rx symbol does not exist (in common usage) here in the UK. Here, a precription is an order you get from your doctor so the chemist shop can issue you with a prescription controlled drug, for which the patient is charged a fixed (by government policy) fee. In common with most pharmacies in Europe, the chemist shop often has a sign incorporating a green cross - No Rx in sight. Astronaut (talk) 16:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It actually stands in its abbreviated form for "Recipe" - and it most certainly is used in British medicine and pharmacology. 92.8.196.184 (talk) 10:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, because that will vary widely. What crop?, what kind of seed?, what fertilizer?, what type of soil?, how much rain?, unseasonable weather?, etc. Some of these factors vary over a scale as small as an individual field. You could find tables of average yields for specific regions for specific crops in certain years, however. Rmhermen (talk) 03:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your IP address indicates you are from Michigan. Check for publications or web postings by the Michigan department of agriculture. Edison (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How does the pitcher beat the baserunner to first?
Im familiar with the geometry of baseball (Hell, I played in a lot of games) and it doesnt seem logically possible for the pitcher to beat the baserunner. He cuts an angle, but he covers more ground. Please wow me with the complex mathematical formula that makes this happen.Baseball and and and Popcorn Fanatic (talk) 17:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Er, he covers less ground, not more. The pitcher's mound is closer to first base than home plate is. Maybe you could still be a popcorn fanatic? Matt Deres (talk) 18:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The distance from home plate to first base is 90'. The distance from home plate to the pitcher's mound is 60'6". That would make the distance from the pitcher's mound to first base about 67'. So, the pitcher has about a 23' head start on the batter. If the ball was hit as a line drive back at the pitcher, he'd probably be able to catch it before the batter even put his bat down. Dismas|(talk)21:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Er, sqrt((90/sqrt(2))^2+(90/sqrt(2)-60.5)^2) feet = 63.717 feet = about 63'8½". (67 feet would be about right for second base.) Of course, the distance the better has to run isn't exactly 90 feet anyway; it depends on whether he's right- or left-handed. --Anonymous, 04:28 UTC, May 5, 2008.
World War II English spy: Code Name, Christopher Robin
Hello,
A number of years ago, we read a book about a World War II English spy that worked with Churchill and was code named: Christopher Robin. Neither my husband nor myself can remember the name of the book or the spy's real name. We would very much like to get the book again. Can someone help us?Sbignrnt (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You might find the book 'The Paladin' published by Simon & Shulster in 1980 is what you are looking for. Good luck in your hunt!--Artjo (talk) 20:01, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why wouldn't it? Springer's website ought to know, and it's not like it's an unrealistic number for a series to have (my Modern Graph Theory lists 230 books in the Graduate Texts in Mathematics series). Algebraist23:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I just wanted to make sure I was not spewing random numbers onto Wikipedia articles. I try to be a good example to other Wikipedians on campus here so I try to stay really careful. Thank you once again. Kushal (talk) 00:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the "Did You know that....." section of Wikipedia
Did you know that if you took the word POLITE, crosses out certain letters in that word, you'll have the word LIE? Can someone place this in the proper area of Wikipedia? 205.240.144.214 (talk) 20:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Now, can someone place this? Its not often that the word "polite" is associated with the word "lie", and the "brutally honest" find that amusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.240.144.214 (talk) 21:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think he means he wants this factoid put in the "Did you know..." section on the Main Page, in which case, no, because those facts are taken from wikipedia's newest articles. If you create an article focused around this pit of information (possibly an article about those word puzzles, though you'll want to check this page to be sure the article does not already exist), then this factoid would be qualifiable for inclusion in that section. --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 01:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, this question was asking for legal advice and that's not allowed here. You need to consult a lawyer in the relevant country. --Anonymous, 04:25 UTC, May 5, 2008.
If you're going to delete questions, please have the courtesy to identify yourself. I contend that this question was regarding facts, not "advice". Not everything touching on legal topics equates to legal "advice". --Nricardo (talk) 10:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Asking whether something is copyrightable is not an issue of "legal advice". It's easy to answer for someone who has even the faintest association with the basic ideas behind copyright law. I'm restoring the question. If you object, take it to the talk page. And if you are going to delete questions, please sign your posts. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anon, please report removals of requests for proffessional advice on the RD talk page. I'm not saying that I don't trust your judgement but it's always nice to have a second opinion. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 18:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, talk page it is. I've said my piece; discuss away. --Anonymous, 22:25 UTC, May 5, 2008.
Restored
I want to write a story involving people from Cappagh in 1901 & 1911, as taken from this census. However, I also don't want to get sued. Since these records are about a hundred years old, would they (and the people mentioned in them) fall into the public domain? --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 00:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Census data is never copyrighted anyway (it is just route collection of data, it has no creative content). The people mentioned in a census are not copyrighted, they are not creative works of an author (for the purposes of the law, anyway—theologians might disagree!). In general this page is a handy-dandy chart to figuring out whether something is in the public domain (in the United States), but in any case, for something like what you are asking it is totally not an issue. Even if the census was done last year, it wouldn't be an issue. Even if the records in question were done by a private company, it wouldn't matter. Census isn't creative; and names of people aren't copyrighted. It's like data in a telephone directory. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note, however, that outside of copyright issues, there may be other legal impediments to using someones likeness in a story. I can't remember specifics, but I believe that some countries have "right to identity" statues - making it illegal to appropriate someone's likeness for your own purposes. Depending on country, the specifics of the law, and the extent of your appropriations (e.g. are you just using names, or are you using details from their life and/or photos of them) you may or may not fall afoul of the law (if it exists). Also note that there may be additional laws against "speaking ill of the dead" - claiming, for example, that a specific person from 1901 was a murderer (when he wasn't) may run you up against libel/slander laws. Prominently labeling your work as Fiction may get around these laws, but you probably would need to consult a lawyer to be absolutely certain. (The various laws and different jurisdictions in which they apply is one of the prime reasons the WP:RD can't give legal advice.) -- 128.104.112.85 (talk) 15:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, there are other things to take into account, and if you are doing anything that someone might get offended with, you should probably talk to a lawyer later (once you have something to show them). But copyright is not an issue. --Captain Ref Desk (talk) 15:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting. But the "database rights" would have long since expired, as they only last 15 years after the first publication of the database. The copyright status itself does not change as it is still not a creatively selected database, so that doesn't add anything to that question. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, so this new directive says I can't use these peoples names, since they (and the censuses they appear under) fall under the criteria of a "database?" Or is it just the censuses? Did I read that correctly at all? (There's a very good chance that I didn't) --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 23:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another point of note. If you are taking the information from a source seperate from the original source, do not assume it is in the public domain simply because the source data is in the public domain. In the UK and other places Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. is generally of no consequence and UK courts have upheld Sweat of the brow as sufficient in some cases for copyright protection even without much creativity or originality. See also Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service#Other countries (like Bridgeman, generally consider irrelevant in the UK as far as I know). N.B. This is one of the reasons why legal advice is a bad thing. People tend to give examples which may not apply in the jurisdiction in question and may miss subtle legal issues. BTW, if I'm not mistaken individual census records are not released to the public for 100 years in the UK. Nil Einne (talk) 16:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cat dreadlocks
We have a siamese, about six years old, with long hair who is constantly getting dreadlocks. I can't really comb them out (I'm not that brave) so I end up cutting them out with a scissors. The cat looks terrible but I;m sure he's more comfortable. The cat also has a lot of dandruff. Anyone have any advice, experience stories to relate, etc., that tie in?--68.237.223.179 (talk) 01:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They aren't dreadlocks, they're called mats. Long haired cats and dogs can often get these, though cats usually are good enough about cleaning themselves that they don't become an issue. The only way to get rid of a mat is to cut it out. Regular brushing can help keep the mats from reforming. Go to your local pet store and ask them for a slicker brush. We have two long hair cats. One is okay with the brush and the other will actually run up to you if she see it in your hand, she loves it that much. So, give that a shot. As for the dandruff, I got nothin'. Dismas|(talk)01:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For regular grooming (well, during the spring and autumn moults) our normally grouchy cat tolerates the Zoom groom pretty well. I am sure there are other similar tools out there! SaundersW (talk) 09:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dandruff might be actually be cat litter. Brushing a cat actually helps them get most of that stuff out of their fur. And they like being comb.Cardinal Raven (talk) 02:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
My mom's cat used to have this problem, and no longer does. The solution was to put him on a diet. He's still fat, but now not so fat that he can't reach his back with his tongue. (Of course you have to cut out the existing dreads anyway -- even if he can reach them he's not going to be able to get rid of them with his tongue, just keep new ones from forming.) --Trovatore (talk) 22:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Air Hockey Table
I've been curious about Air hockey tables. I am wondering whether the air blowing up from the table actually makes the puck float (is it actually touching the table)? Someletters<Talk> 04:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It really isn't touching the table, although it's so close you can't tell by looking. (I suppose it will touch some of the time if it's hit in such a way as to tilt it.) The puck's very light, so it doesn't take a lot of air pressure to lift it. --Anonymous, 04:28 UTC, May 5, 2008.
What is the largest tram network in the world? Tram and light-rail transit systems, and the articles leading off from there, don't address this question directly. Google throws up a number of contenders, including Melbourne, Vienna and St Petersburg, but nothing conclusive (Melbourne seems to be listed as the largest, second largest or third largest, depending on what you read). As a resident of Vienna, I'm obviously rooting for my home town. Any thoughts? --Richardrjtalk email09:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
de:Wiener Straßenbahn says that the extent of Vienna's tramway network measures 231.6 km, and claims it is the third-largest worldwide, after Melbourne (245 km according to en.wikipedia's article, 238 km according to the quoted German article) and Saint Petersburg (285km until 2001 but 220km as of 2007 according to en.wikipedia's article, 288 km according to the quoted German article). In other words, we still don't know for sure. ---Sluzzelintalk11:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"What's the largest?" questions are notoriously difficult to answer definitively, due to the multiplicity of definitions of "largest", and the vast amount of poor information floating around, influenced much more by boosterism and wishful thinking than rigor. —Steve Summit (talk) 11:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Styrofoam or Polystyrene is a petrochemical product or more plainly plastic. Eating that is not good for your digestive system. Some peanut-shaped pieces of "styrofoam" are used in packets to keep the object being sent from breaking. They are called peanuts because of their shape. Similar peanut-shaped packing material is made from starch. Whether or not one can eat those would depend on how it is processed. I'd advise against DIY experiments. Circus peanuts are also peanut shaped. They are made from marshmallow which is basically sugar and gelatin. In contrast to plastic that is very edible. (Although you might get a tummy ache if you eat too many.)--Lisa4edit (talk) 18:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that name is only used by Dow. They are usually traded and available under "packaging peanuts". Our article, now that I've found it, is foam peanuts. Apparently the ones made from starch are edible. Just make sure it's not the other kind before you try. 71.236.23.111 (talk) 10:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stabilized Compressed Earth Block Technology
Can stabilized compressed earth block technology be used to construct modern houses inexpensively in the SouthEastern U.S.? Using on-site dirt, it seems like anyone should be able to provide adequate shelter for themselves (without serious expense and with a small group of helpful folks).
Talking from experience in Georgia and Louisiana we're having lots of trouble keeping wood houses dry. United States rainfall climatology will tell you that we're getting quite a bit of rain (usually, Georgia had a drought last year) Humid subtropical climate unfortunately doesn't give figures on air humidity. Most people run dehumidifiers to keep their houses and basements dry. Given that, even if building in that way would be technologically feasible you'd have to find people who would want to risk it. Since very few people finance their houses out-of-pocket, the lending industry would have to be convinced that there is no threat of their security being "washed away". My guess would be that they'd ask for a horrendous amount of mortgage insurance to cover their risk. Another factor is that you'd have to find trained workers and/or a builder specializing in this type of construction. In the South-West they have experience with adobe houses. In the Southeast most houses are wood frame and board/drywall. Specially trained workers are likely to be more expensive. A lot of the cost of building a house is not the materials, but the labor. Another thing worth checking would be local code restrictions. Any additional requirements can easily exceed the costs saved on building materials. Building a house with neighborhood help happens rarely except for Habitat for Humanity houses and some church group buildings. 71.236.23.111 (talk) 07:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes, and you simply go to the closest elevator with the best price. But much grain is sold on the futures market and now more is being sold through the internet.[5]Rmhermen (talk) 01:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think I saw a clip in The Choice 2004 by Frontline back in 2004 with Dubya talking to reporters after his father lost his 1970 Senate race in Texas. Other times would be Dubya's failed run for Congress in 1978. --Blue387 (talk) 04:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Given that he came from an extremely rich family, it wouldn't surprise me if there is e.g. a private video recording from the 80s or earlier which has never been seen by the general public. Or perhaps just an audio recording e.g. a love song he song for Laura Nil Einne (talk) 16:02, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have a foreign friend who despewrately wants to own and operate a business in the Philippines. How does he get started? what are the requirements? Please help me and I also need a lawyer, probably a CPA lawyer. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.28.174.82 (talk) 03:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I spent some time in the Philippines, and I was told that foreigners weren't allowed to own land. I dont' know if that's true and I don't know if that's relevant. So...yeah. Useight (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
State Defense Forces
I was reading the article about State Defense Forces and was wondering about a few things. Most defense forces are unarmed but if they were federalized, would they be armed? If so, are they armed by the federal government? Could a state arm their own defense forces by themselves? (I'm strangely imagining a governor or something buying HK416's for their own forces.) How about vehicles like armored vehicles, trucks and Humvees? --Blue387 (talk) 04:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As the article discusses some are already armed and they cannot be federalized. So yes state government could buy them weapons. However states already have armed forces, their National Guard units. Rmhermen (talk) 21:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I heard a show on the CBC a few days ago that cited studies saying IQ had gone up substantially in the last few decades. The opinion of the researcher in question was that people had got smarter in the things that IQ tested; specifically abstract reasoning. Fifty or a hundred years ago abstract reasoning wasn't as necessary so we didn't practice it. Now it's pretty essential. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But how can that be? How can the next generation of youth today be smarter? I have seen many children(of this day and age) whom don't pick up books, who don't want to go to school or learn, all they want to do is socialize, they don't study, they get poor grades, they have poor grammar when they should have some decent grammar especially in their teenage life, some of them write like they are texting on a cell phone; and the lack of words being used.
How can our youth be smarter?
Well, of course not all youth do what you have described. Generally speaking, youth in developed countries who are lucky enough to enjoy the listed luxuries might participate in them to some extent. That is not to say, however, it will make them less intelligent. Just because a teenager is using slangs and internet acronyms to chat over the internet or on a cell phone, does not necessarily mean that they will write like that on an academic paper. As well, there is a large population of youth who are not doing the tasks you described, and have access to a much larger database of information, such as Wikipedia, that was previously unavailable to past generations. As well, in developing countries, computer usage and internet access is now spreading as well. Once connected, an onslaught of new information will be available to them. Acceptable (talk) 22:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
<hyperbole> Either you are mixing with the wrong crowd or you live in a suburb where education is considered to be some elitist wank due to the lack of role models. Go to Princeton or Cambridge and most toddlers in their prams write on a PhD thesis. Consider also, that it is a prime characteristic of the next generation to be revolting. <hyperbole>
Currently I live in Liverpool in Britain. But I am a floater. I hear many students, I see many people, I hear many people. Its strange this world is. The many people you see and yet the most I see is someone who has probably never picked up a book once in their life only when it is necessary. I see teenagers using the internet colloquialism and cellphone colloquialism more often now a days. I had recently been in Starbucks and I saw a boy writing his book report as if he were on the internet. Not only that, but I notice two girls in the corner copying each others work.
Some kids wasn't just trying to get it done circling random answers.
All though naturally all the skills I have listed aren't what makes someone more or less intelligent I see know motivation to learn.
When I was their age I wanted to learn. Learning was my power. Knowledge was my power. No one had to motivate me the knowledge and the knowing and the discovering. Many of the kids in my class were exceptional great as well. They had great grades as I did.
Why did the youth of today lose this? Is this really and act of rebelling? Not wanting to learn and to open. And to discover.
Why don't the youth of today want to discover and learn? And why do they appear less intelligent then what test say?
(Btw, to the post up there I am not a stalker. I am just more aware of what is around me. A little to much sometimes.)
I might be judging smartness on the wrong criteria. I know my flaws. I live in the mindset of high class. I am very hard to please and I suffer from classic textbook syndrome. I pass out more information textbook style then any one else. My standards are set to high. I believe that people all should understand what I am saying. I know I tend to be wrong and I know I should lower the standards that I expect people to be at. Cause people aren't perfect and I am not perfect.
I just want to know:
Why doesn't anyone want to learn anymore?
Learning is fun.
I keep thinking it is not the intelligence--the raw ability--of "the next generation" (young adults and adolescents) that is missing, but the motivation to use that intelligence. Willful ignorance, I guess you could say. Of course motivation and wisdom may be another aspect of intelligence in some people's consideration; one that is probably not measured very well in IQ tests. --Prestidigitator (talk) 04:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Being one of those who would likely fall into the grouping of "the youth of today" as a 20 year old junior in college (3rd year of "university" for those unfamiliar with the term) I think I am highly qualified to attempt to answer your question. This may or may not beis a rant but I figure I rarely get a chance to defend my generation to someone who honestly wants to understand it so I feel obligated to do so to the utmost of my ability.
I'll try to go over your statements one at a time.
You said: "I have seen many children(of this day and age) whom don't pick up books, who don't want to go to school or learn, all they want to do is socialize..." - One of the key things I'm seeing here is the assumption that learning necessarily must come in the form of books. Generations prior to my own don't understand or appreciate learning outside the confines of the book or textbook. A few points from this.
First of all, the information that is in a textbooks is in a form which hasn't changed in a large degree in the past 30 or 40 years while everything around it has changed dramatically. Textbooks aren't interesting to us and they rarely provide information in the kind of forms that we are most adapt at absorbing. My generation will be more likely to have very high social skills requirements for job positions then previous generations and that is largely due to our generation having significant social skills because of the enormous communication possibilities that have opened up in the last 20 or so years. The internet of course has changed the way we absorb information and in my opinion has done so in a much better way.
Secondly, schools and the teaching methods of our educators are also sufficiently different from the common social world we find ourselves the remaining hours of the day. As you described later in this section, you "pass out more information textbook style then any one else", and this style while often considered tried and true is not fitting with the world we live in anymore. From my experience with teachers who are looking into more original teaching methods, it's not that my generation doesn't want to learn, it's that they don't want to learn the way their parents or even grandparents did.
Lastly, textbooks are static, the world we live in is anything but (see Wikipedia). In my personal opinion, textbooks are historical objects, like stone tablets and any chance I have to physically get away from paper copies of books (at least), I take it.
You said: "... they don't study, they get poor grades, they have poor grammar when they should have some decent grammar especially in their teenage life, some of them write like they are texting on a cell phone; and the lack of words being used."
Some of us have poor grades of course, but standards are also much higher. The world is far more difficult to exist in in some cases compared to earlier generations due to economic situations. Gone are the days when the average student could expect to go to college for four years on their parents bill. Gone are the days when it was rare that students had full-time jobs along with school. Many of my peers work 30-40 hours a week on to of their school load. Though I personally don't which could explain why I have time to write this...
Grammar is poor in many cases, I'd agree to that, but in my opinion in a world of technology and highly mathematical and scientific work force, they aren't stressed enough because they aren't needed in the workforce as much. This may explain your biggest issue with the IQ tests, which test analytical skills, something my peers are very good at, and little to no emphasis is on grammar, which we often are poor in. Though I'd also urge you to realize that we often use less then proper grammar for speed and efficiency. I use IM or "textspeak" when speaking online with friends or sometimes with professors in e-mail and consider the usuage of better grammar only when I need to look formal, or when I think it's the only real way to get my point across (like right now, or in papers).
You said: "...The many people you see and yet the most I see is someone who has probably never picked up a book once in their life only when it is necessary"
Again, I stress that books are not the be all and end all of information anymore. The internet has information available in not only a wided assortment of topics but also in a far greater depth for all of those topics. Also, morre often you have access to peer-review of the ideas that are being presented. No longer do we read a book and accept it's points at face value, if we think it's wrong we can look up what hundreds of other experts have said on the subject through google. In the past it would perhaps take hours of searching through libraries for more information.
You said: "I see teenagers using the internet colloquialism and cellphone colloquialism more often now a days. I had recently been in Starbucks and I saw a boy writing his book report as if he were on the internet. Not only that, but I notice two girls in the corner copying each others work. Some kids wasn't just trying to get it done circling random answers."
I assume the boy was using textspeak, in which case it's a shame if his teacher doesn't correct him, but if the teacher doesn't I find it hard to blame him for using an efficient mechanism for sharing information. Children copy, though it's naive to think this generation is especially full of cheating students. I'm sure that person who guessed will be punished for it and will either reform or fail out, again, not particularly novel to my generation.
You said: "... All though naturally all the skills I have listed aren't what makes someone more or less intelligent I see know motivation to learn."
Not to be a smartass sir, but it's quite ironic that you'd make such a grammatical error as using "know" instead of "no" after the rest of your points ;).
You said: "...When I was their age I wanted to learn. Learning was my power. Knowledge was my power. No one had to motivate me the knowledge and the knowing and the discovering. Many of the kids in my class were exceptional great as well. They had great grades as I did. Why did the youth of today lose this? Is this really and act of rebelling? Not wanting to learn and to open. And to discover. Why don't the youth of today want to discover and learn? And why do they appear less intelligent then what test say"
Of course some of us don't want to learn, but many of us do. They just don't care to learn using outdated methods. I'm one of dozens of my peers who often wander through wikipedia reading topics as we find them and absorbing whatever information piques our interest. Not just wikipedia but dozens of new media news sources (digg, slashdot, ect.) which arguably have taught me at least as much if not more than any professor I've ever had. A compliment to these internet sources, a failure of the education system, or a poor mindset? You can decide that.
Rebellion for the sake of rebelling is imo (in my opinion) an idea that the older generation likes to place on the younger generations throughout time to discredit the reasons for their actions. Why do I play grand theft auto or other video games instead of reading some "classic" literature? Why do I watch Scrubs instead of a news sation, why do I read the news on the internet and wikipedia? Personally I believe I get far more out of my choices then the others. GTAIV or games like it challenge me, constantly, they are rarely the same any time through and stretch my problem solving skills in new and dynamic ways while having climactic stories in some cases that could rival the greatest movies or literature. Books are interesting, but hardly ever challenge me, they do not force me to use analytical skills and there is no variation, nothing changes, it's static. I watch tv shows like scrubs because I enjoy them but I also recognize the fact that tv shows today are far more dynamic and complicated then anything you may have grown up watching. There are several storylines that interlock and require actual mental understanding and reasoning by the watcher to fully appreciate what is going on. The internet news and "new media" is the same, it puts me into the dynamic and challenges me to try to spread information. It's not me just absorbing information but also being able to challenge those who teach it to me. These skills imo are what make us more superior at IQ tests (which measure this kind of intelligence) while we appear less intelligent.
On this I'd encourage you to check out the book "everything bad is good for you", I own it, a fantastic read and could explain some things to you. [6]
You said: "... I believe that people all should understand what I am saying. I know I tend to be wrong and I know I should lower the standards that I expect people to be at. Cause people aren't perfect and I am not perfect. I just want to know: Why doesn't anyone want to learn anymore? Learning is fun."
I think these students you don't understand feel the same way. We don't understand why you can't see the value in the social networking, in the analytical problem solving, in the nature rather than the content of our entertainment. I think there are some people who don't want to learn, but I think the fact that you ask why no one wants to learn anymore shows that you don't really understand the way we work. There are a lot of ways to learn, and we've found our own ways, they seem to work for these IQ tests, these IQ tests claim to measure analytical problem solving, something that appears to be one of, if not the most important skill in the coming years (along with social skills, which we often excel at). So I don't really see a problem, we're just different generations. You ask why none of us want to read books and get the knowledge and power they hold, and I ask why you want to spend your time simply reading static text, where's the challenge? Chris M. (talk) 08:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear student you make valid points, but I wasn't generally just talking about textbook. I was talking about reading as in reading a book. Like fictional book like Lord of the Rings. I see children won't even read those kind of books anymore.
Fictional books can also help you learn and help you gain powerful knowledge. I read arts of fiction because I believe in the books. Also this quote is something that inspires me a bit more: "Fiction reveals truths that reality obscures."- Jessamyn West.
I don't see why no one to experience a different reality of fiction. I can see sometimes why students don't want to learn.
One of my classes had me read How to Kill a Mockingbird. I absolutely hate hate hated that book. It was boring.
But I read it. I never ever stopped reading it or threw a fit of rebellion not to read it.
Yes I know that I spelled no as in no wrong. I tend to do that when I'm trying to make valid points. My thoughts are so racy and impatient I forget things. I get things mixed up. I am not as good at making points then writing a story.
Writing is another characteristic and I don't see them ever want to write or answer a question. Well now a days that is done on a computer, but still when there is a writing assignment no one wants to do it.
I think there was a question on the reference desk of why they have those essay questions. Anyway my point is that many children don't want to think after they have read a story either. No one wants to know why.
They just want to read the book and have easy questions.
But then again a lot of my knowledge comes from documentaries, textbooks, Internet, and other sources such as a magazine. I learn visually and not audibly. I don't learn from hands on. I learn from graphs, charts, textbook information, and anything on the paper. I have a hard time with audibly and hands on I cannot remember the information.
I think that may be another problem. Maybe some students are audible learners and others are visual.
I remember having a bit of a hard time this year in my class. Cause all we did was watch videos and I could never exactly remember what the video said. I answered the questions with a bit of help of my roommate on some parts I forgot.
When I am watching a video I have to write down the answer right after they said it. The teacher never understood that and kept on telling me to watch the screen and answer the questions later after the video or I was going to miss parts.
I'm going miss parts either way, I cannot remember information audibly I just cannot.
So I think that their should specific classes for each different type of learner. I know that sounds a bit stupid, but maybe that is what they need.
I agree with the separate classes, but perhaps the misunderstanding here is in that you think that kids not wanting to read books means they don't have a desire to experience anything like a fiction world where they can learn those truths that realities distort. But the massive success of other forms of media (video games, tv shows, movies) shows that as a generation we very much want to get involved in these fictional universes, it's just again that we don't as often find plain text paper books that best means to reach that. Chris M. (talk) 20:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I am driving and fall asleep or turn the steer a couple of inches too much or slip in the bathtube that could cost my life. However, we are not scared to death from all these danger in our daily life. Do we have some mechanism that makes us ignore these things? 217.168.0.115 (talk) 10:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Risks that are 1. collective (everyone faces them) and 2. appear to be controllable (you are the one who feels in control in the tub and the car) are usually easy to ignore. Compare this to how one feels when the risks are felt to be individual or non-controllable (say, take-off and landing in an airplane).
People who can't ignore such things, in any case, find it pretty much impossible to get by in the world and are labeled with one or more psychological epithets. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 12:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
basically, the part of our brain which calculates risks is a lousy performer, even in short term risks. you'd think evolution would have done better.Gzuckier (talk) 16:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Evolution did the best it could. How would it be possible for people who can't have a bath or drive a car without getting a seizure to get more of their genes into the gene pool? -- Zain Ebrahim (talk) 18:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If our ancestors didn't walk under a tree for fear of a falling branch killing them, or didn't drink from a river out of fear of drowning, then we wouldn't be here today. Our instinct is to avoid more likely causes of death, or at least - it is supposed to be. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 18:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that if people worried about those things they would suffer from paranoia. What we don't realize in this world is that everything we are surrounded by can kill us. The chair in the middle of the room to the car we drive.
Eventually we die by something or by natural causes. Whatever the cause we can ignore it because we wouldn't be able to live depression. We might even carry out our own lives suicide.
Life, Death, and Birth is the way our world works. Its like the natural recycle life process. We can die at birth as well. Sooner or later someone faces death.
I see that I live my life to the fullest and not to worry about the shower the head killing me. If I live I live. If I die I die.
I accept it and continue on either in this world or the next.
The method our minds use to assess relative risk is not very good, but it's the best method that was available prior to statistics. The more times we've seen something done safely, the safer we think it is. The more times we've seen something result in a death or injury, the more dangerous we think it is. This leads us to think that events we've seen over-reported in the media (like child abductions) are a serious danger, while events which are under-reported (like lung cancer deaths due to smoking) seem like rare events we can safely ignore. We also have some instinctive fears, like falling, which makes many of us nervous whenever it appears that we are high up, such as when standing on a platform with a clear floor, while the same platform with a solid floor would make us feel safer. StuRat (talk) 16:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will clarify what I have said.
If we acknowledge everything that could kill us we would be paranoid.
If we became paranoid we would not be able to live we rather commit suicide or become depressed because we could not live our lives.
Cardinal Raven (talk) 06:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
limptes
If hyperthetivcally the tide never went out, would limptes survive or do they need exposure to air and dryness from time to time?Makey melly (talk) 12:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Last year I collected two fertilized queen ants from my garden during the flying ant season and put each of them into a separate container. My understanding was that they would lay eggs and start an ant colony. However, one of the queens didn't lay any eggs, and the other laid a few but then ate them. I was instructed not to feed or give water until after the first worker ants had hatched because the queens would simply refuse to eat and it would go mouldy in the container. But since the queens hadn't any worker ants, and were looking weaker and weaker with each passing day, I decided to feed them a little honey, which they very much enjoyed. I have since moved the two queens into the same container and they get on well, and have even begun to dig and create a colony by themselves. I feed them regularly and they seem happy, but why didn't they lay eggs and start an ant colony? More importantly, how can I get them to lay some eggs? I am sure they were fertilized because they didn't have their wings anymore when I caught them, like the book said. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.74.154 (talk) 13:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Edison ask a great question. Are you sure the queen ants were fertilized? You shouldn't trust everything a book says. Especially, since the ants began to start trying to create an ant colony after you fed them.
I think what you need to do is get them some workers. I don't think a queen ant will start a colony without a few workers.
The workers are the ones who bring the food to the queen and the workers are the one who protect the eggs, if I am not mistaken. Also it might have to do with the fact that there are two queens, I had always thought that there was only one queen for each colony. Cardinal Raven (talk) 01:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
It would help if you told us which species of ant you have. Many do have more than one queen, although since you mentioned that you separated them to begin with, I am going to assume your species usually has only one. Our article Queen ant says "she may consume some of her eggs" so this would seem normal. But why she hasn't laid any more is a mystery, especially if she has sufficient strength to begin excavating a colony. Could she has laid her eggs underground where you cannot see them? It takes about 60 days for the eggs to hatch. According to this"the queen will create this new nest completely on her own, though it has been known for ... queens to come together and cooperate in the raising of the first brood. If more than one ... queen raise [a] brood together, they will soon fight to the death once the first workers have hatched, until only one queen remains victorious."Think outside the box10:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not have a direct answer to your question, but do want to point out that there is no one voice for Islamic jurisprudence, called Fiqh. So do you want to know what the perspectives are from as many different schools as possible?--droptone (talk) 19:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
an african american who helped in the planning of the united state's capital city?....I found wikipedia had an article on washington dc and under the palnning subcategory there werent any african americans.So If anybody knows the answer.Hola.ASAP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.219.249.15 (talk) 14:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm it seems to have become the first link now. For the benefit of future readers, I'm referring to [8] which mentions the name Macro refers to above Nil Einne (talk) 17:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
the best for reverse phone look up
which is the best site to use in canada to reverse a phone number in order to get the callers details.I want a canadian site because we are using canadian customers only.oooh i'm a transcriber doing canadain voicemail transcriptions and i want to save as much time as possible when researching on callers details.We are currently using whitepages.ca but its not as effective as intelius.But on intelius you have to pay.i want a free site.And Secondly if one can reccommend a site where -if a customer mentions a name of a road or building and i have never heard of it-i want to be spelling it out phonetically and then paste it onto the site that gives me a close to answer.NOTE only canadian info.PS>>>THANKS for the tips on canadian english.Truly wikipedia has massive helpful information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.219.249.15 (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
given that diesel engines don't have vacuum for the power brake booster, how do diesel cars manage this? i know trucks use air brakes, but do cars have a similar system, or do they somehow adapt the regular vacuum powered booster with a pump or something? thanks. Gzuckier (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At least some modern Boschanti-lock braking systems don't use vacuum but instead have an engine-driven hydraulic pump (that usually also powers the power steering). A hydraulic accumulator stores hydraulic energy so you still have a few power-boosted actuations of the brakes should the engine fail. This arrangement is certainly true of high-line Audis.
And unless you can provide more clarification, the answer is still checkpoint. A checkpoint is a point at which people seeking to move from place A (e.g. the street) to place B (e.g. the railway station, if I understand your previous comment) can be stopped and their credentials checked. Back to you. --Tagishsimon(talk)11:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you mean the actual physical gate, which is called a gate or a turnpike, although that second usage is probably obsolete. The civilian checkpoint and border checkpoint articles both have images, although not great ones., "Border crossing" is another term that might apply to the entire area. Rmhermen (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You should probably be aware (if you aren't already) that the most lucrative medical/scientific studies are, not coincidentally, the ones that require the most work, commitment, or are potentially the most dangerous. There have been a number of articles in the last few months (in the New York Times Magazine and the New Yorker, I think) about how poorly regulated some of these studies are. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Turn number algorithm question
Today, when I was at the Helsinki Central railway station, I thought of something I've already thought of many times. I was trying to buy an InterRail pass, to be able to travel from Helsinki to Seeboden. When I got there, I took a turn number for foreign railways. According to the numbers, I was the second to be served. While waiting for my turn, I watched, of people come after me, no less than five people travelling to Russia, and eighteen people travelling within Finland, being served before me. So my question is, when there is a queue system with multiple inputs, generally, how is it decided which input is handled when? Is it a round-robin schedule, or are they prioritised by popularity, do they handle longer queues first and shorter ones later, or is it all just random? JIP | Talk19:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Based on my (limited) observations: in many cases multi-server queues split the queued jobs according to the resources required to handle a specific individual job. In your case it may have been that only one of the different servers (ie. counters / operators) had the expertise / the required hardware / software to handle a ticket request from Finland to Central Europe. Tickets to Finland / Russia may have been available at all counters (because they are the vast majority of jobs handled), but an InterRail pass needs access to the specific ferry services and international rail services for subsequent connections.
It would be uneconomical if all, say, five counters were equipped with human resources / HW / SW for InterRail when only 20% of jobs need this function.
There are actually twenty counters at the Helsinki Central railway station, with three of them dedicated solely for international travel. But I understand your meaning, and find it very helpful. I have travelled by train within Finland more times than I can count, and to Russia once. This was my first time purchasing an InterRail pass. It took me about one or two minutes to fill in the form, and almost five minutes inquiring about connections from Helsinki to Spittal an der Drau. In less than that time, an intra-Finland passenger would have booked a trip from Helsinki to Rovaniemi and back again, and left time to casually chat around. I have now found out that I can go from Stockholm to Spittal completely by train. Danke schön, und ich habe seit Monaten gewartet, endlich diese Reise zu beginnen. JIP | Talk20:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Human Hamster Balls
Does anyone know where I might find a website offering these huamn hamster balls, at reasonable prices, for delivery in the UK.
Its one of these or a OCZ Neural Impulse Actuator, so my time outside kind of depends upon this. I would need one that is fairly hard wearing, and easy to clean. The English Countryside usually tends to be covered in soe sort of equine/bovine detreitus.
Hamster balls for sale? Is this a method of manipulating rodentine procreative capacity?
And, what happens to the rest of the hamster? Do they perform in the defunct choir of the Vatican Castrati?
Mind you, the entire planet is covered in some sort of human detritus, so maybe you may want to donate your spare balls, unless you have become attached to them cute furry critters. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You can also read Sphereing, which details the sport of Zorbing. You can try it out at ZorbsouthUK, or follow the links to a closer UK venue. This site shows that the original Zorb is not available for private purchase, but imitations are available at hypercore. You're looking at about £800 for the cheapest model. Gwinva (talk) 00:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey thanks guys for all your advice, and at paragon, whom I lol'd at because that is exactly the place that meade me want a human hamster ball in the first place. To be honest though I did a bit of research myself and these things do cost da bomb. So I think I will get the NIA and save the rest of my money for a car. Thanks anyway guys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.244.144 (talk) 17:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Which is the smallest metropolitan area, town, village, hamlet and/or city absolutely with a LRT that also operates on the street. It might operate in the air, underground, in the water, but at least, it has to operate in the street.68.148.164.166 (talk) 23:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This question is open to interpretation. First, if the LRT connects two or more towns, do you count only the largest (because the system "belongs to" that town) or the smallest (because you mean the question literally)? [I'll assume you count the largest.] Does it make a difference if the towns do not touch each other? [Irrelevant under my assumption.] And second, does it count as "in the street" if the tracks are in a semi-isolated median or similar setup? [I think it counts.] Finally, are you counting only actual public transit operations where the cars run at regular intervals all day and stop frequently for people to get on and off, or do museum railways count, where they might run once an hour and only on summer Sundays, and only allow trips over the full route?
Of the 30 or so cities I've been to that have public transit streetcars, I think the smallest are Bern and Innsbruck. (Blackpool and Heidelberg are not much larger.) According to http://www.citypopulation.de/, as of estimates at the start of 2007, Bern has 122,422 people while Innsbruck has 117,693. But for all I know there could be much smaller places (much better answers) in other countries. (Here are pictures showing streetcars in the streets of Bern, Innsbruck, and for good measure Heidelberg and Blackpool, if that layout counts.)
As to museum streetcars, Yakima had a population in the 2000 census of 112,816 according to the above web site (but 71,845 according to Wikipedia; I don't know why the discrepancy). Here's a photo of one of their streetcars. But again, perhaps there are much better answers elsewhere.
--Anonymous, 02:00 UTC, copyedited 02:23, May 7, 2008.
Rephrasing my questions:
Which is the smallest (population wise) metropolitan area, town, village, hamlet and/or city absolutely with a LRT that also operates on the street. It might operate in the air, underground, in the water, but at least, it has to operate in the street.
Which is the smallest (area wise) metropolitan area, town, village, hamlet and/or city absolutely with a LRT that also operates on the street. It might operate in the air, underground, in the water, but at least, it has to operate in the street.
Criteria:
If the LRT connects two or more towns, do you count only the largest (because the system "belongs to" that town) or the smallest (because you mean the question literally)?
For both questions: Count the combined total.
Does it make a difference if the towns do not touch each other?
For both questions: Count the towns as if they were one.
And second, does it count as "in the street" if the tracks are in a semi-isolated median or similar setup?
For both questions: It does not count.
For both questions: Finally, are you counting only actual public transit operations where the cars run at regular intervals all day and stop frequently for people to get on and off, or do museum railways count, where they might run once an hour and only on summer Sundays, and only allow trips over the full route?
For both questions: "...actual public transit operations where the cars run at regular intervals all day and stop frequently for people to get on and off..." = Counts
why is the flap of material covering the fly on men's pants located on the left side of the fly/zipper, rather than the right side?66.93.60.182 (talk) 04:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because right is for woman. Woman's bathroom are mostly on the right and woman's buttons on dress shirts on on the right.
Men are on the left side.
71.142.208.226 (talk) 04:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
There are numerous sources for the left/right button issue but I haven't seen one for the zipper. I would say it's most likely because most people are right handed, thus they can hold the material to the side with their left hand while working the zipper with their right. Are women's pants different? Dismas|(talk)04:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's gotta be an article about this weighty issue around here somewhere. Can somebody find it (or if it isn't there, write it)? Clarityfiend (talk) 04:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, woman's clothing is on a different side then the men. The right side. Woman's buttons and zippers are on the right side.71.142.208.226 (talk) 05:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
Wait, I'm not sure what "side" means. It's true that men and women's shirts button differently, but the flap of material on my pants-fly is on the left side of the zipper, and so is my husband's. We are both wearing gender-appropriate clothing. --Masamage♫05:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Think _ Right Handed swordsmen who wore their scabbard on their Left Hand Side so that they could more quickly reach over their midriff from Right to Left to unsheath their sword (the majority of men then and now being Right-Handed) ready for action. This was facilitated by the coat fronts being constructed in such a way as to allow easy access to the sword and scabbard (left front overlapping the right front and being fastened first with tapes, then hooks and eyes, and subsequently buttons and holes), and then continue that thinking to pants/trousers which were first constructed so that the whole front of the trouser was allowed to fall when released by the wearer (or his paramour), continuing to the button-fly (which side to place the buttons? Ahh, let us do it the same as on the gentleman's coat, and that will allow a Right-Handed Lover to more easily undo his Fly when making advances on his paramour - and then carry that thinking forward to the attachment (and undoing) of the Fly-Zipper. Easy when you know how.92.9.48.44 (talk) 09:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I once bought a shirt that was apparently made in China, and they either don't differentiate beween men's and women's shirts or got them mixed up, because it buttoned on the opposite side from a normal man's shirt. I found it almost impossible to button that way. StuRat (talk) 16:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so with most men being right-handed, they use the right hand to unzip. now, mens underwear has a fly on the right side; do we now use our left hand to, ah, continue the process of reaching in there? are most men, thus, "right favoured," so to speak? seems like this is a 2 handed process and i just wonder how this all came about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nsidemark (talk • contribs) 22:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It may mean that the organization is independent and not under any religious authority. It's notable that the organization's mission statement says it is to help "all people in need." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 12:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've heard many times about being hit with the 'flat' of a sword, presumably a broadsword or similar - something that inflicts pain and may break ribs etc. without actually drawing blood. Does this actually happen? (Edit: Maybe this might be better in the historical section...) Lady BlahDeBlah (talk) 12:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think anyone would want to hit or be hit with the flat of a broadsword. Have you seen their size ! Just to swing one takes a very strong, big man. To fight with one would take years of training. Other swords, yes, the side makes a good 'spanking' tool. Not used that way in battle, of course.86.216.249.168 (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)dtm[reply]
There's probably (at least) two ways to look at the question: Has it ever happened, even by accident? Sure; all the time, I'd bet. In a sword fight people would probably be flailing and swinging however they could and to hell with proper form. All kinds of weird injuries could happen, etc. Now, would you do it on purpose? Probably not. In any kind of fair fight you wouldn't want the disadvantage of a very slow swing - not to mention the extremely irritated but mostly unharmed recipient now ready to "hew your head asunder", etc. In a training exercise, you probably wouldn't want to do it either - even if you do it correctly, you've probably maimed the guy, and if you slip a bit, you've, er, disarmed him with extreme prejudice. In training, you'd use a wooden sword, like a waster, which hurt well enough! Matt Deres (talk) 14:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Blow to the head with sword hiltDid it ever happen - certainly, anytime a fighter thought it would give him an advantage. Hollywood has given us a rather incorrect view of swordplay. All that dainty waving of thin metal wands. In reality, swords were constantly redesigned to match the current theory of fighting. Some swords had basket hilts to use as brass knuckles, some had pointed pommels to use as hammers, some had crosspieces to use as ensnaring tools - while holding the blade of your own sword. During the days of armored knights, percussive hits - especially to the head - with large, heavy and possibly dull swords were important to close to grappling and stabbing range. (In later days an Englishman is recorded as lamenting the fact that young men fighting duels of honor are not kicking each other "in the cods" nearly as much since the Italian style of fencing came into vogue.) See also German school of fencing, swordmanship. Rmhermen (talk) 15:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In the very beginning of The Once and Future King, being "bladed", or beat with the flat of the sword, is described as having been a humiliating punishment, but I have no idea if that was based on any sort of historic fact or not. --Prestidigitator (talk) 20:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
sword i dont know, but apparently if you wish to kill someone with an axe, it is much easier, faster and less messy and quiet to do it with the flat side, that is, opposite to the blade, the thinest flat side86.18.34.51 (talk) 20:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)zionist[reply]
ETERNAL YOUTH?
Why do some people age quicker than others?Male and female? I know a guy who is 51 this year,and he looks like about 32? Not only by my opinion,but others as well.What is he doing that other are not? I have asked him,and he says he has lots of sex!
Fluter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.86.15.15 (talk) 14:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are many factors that affect aging, which are either environmental or genetic. One major environmental factor is exposure to sunlight, which ages the skin. Another is diet. Cosmetics and cosmetic surgey can also hide the evidence of aging. StuRat (talk) 15:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm considering refinancing my home mortgage and I've got a couple general questions:
When we got our original mortgage, we got it through an independent "mortgage broker". This seemed to be advantageous because he could compare mortgages from different banks. Is there a disadvantage to this? That is, all else being equal, do you save money by applying to a number of individual banks on your own, rather than going through an independent broker?
Are you normally able to roll the refinancing costs into the new mortgage, or do you have to come up with the cash for this?
I currently have a fixed rate mortgage and I'm certain I'll move within five years. Does it make sense to consider getting an ARM?
Firstly, caveats: you should be as wary of financial advice from some random interneter as you would medical or legal advice! Also, I am not in the US and don't know the precise financial set up there, but I am only offering general comments, so they should still apply.
Mortage brokers make a living from brokering mortgages (obviously) and that income has to come from somewhere. Sometimes, they charge a flat fee for arranging a mortgage, sometimes it is worked into the cost at other points. Many are paid commissions from the mortgage lender, so the temptation may be to point you in the direction of the provider offering them the greater incentive. Others claim to be "independent" but are actually financed by a lender (or group of lenders). Thus, they don't always have all the possible options that exist. (However, occasionally they can offer a special deal that they've negotiated: but check it out before you accept their word it's "special"). Sometimes, the convenience of dealing with one person, in one appointment is worth the extra costs. If you are prepared to put in the foot work, you can check out the various lenders yourself, but it is best if you do a bit of reading up on the various types first. Also check out the financial section of one of the reputable newspapers: look at the ads (with a pinch of salt) but also check for the articles, tables and listings provided by the paper. These often compare some of the major products, from which you can pick out the likely providers. Mortgages lenders often have advisors: if you think a couple of banks/lenders look good, then talk to their advisors about the various products. Don't just walk in off the street and sign up for the one on their billboard out the front.
There are as many different products as lenders. Some will entice you with offers to delay the fees, or even pay them for you. Others ask you to front up with the cash for set-up and so forth first, but offer good rates. Calculate the cost of interest on the fees to decide if it's worth adding to your mortgage or paying cash. Also note: set up fees and other charges vary: check them all over carefully. A good rate might be cancelled out by large hidden "extra" costs, and penalty fees.
Many fixed rate mortgages are also on a fixed term, with heavy penalties if you opt out early. If you're just moving house, then some lenders will transfer the mortgage to the new house, so only admin costs apply, rather than penalty fees. Some mortgages aren't transferable. As well as standard variable rate mortgages, it is possible to get fully-flexible mortages, which allow you to pay back as much as you want (many regular mortages don't allow over-payment), and leave when you want, but the rates can be high. Low rates often come with a hefty promise to stay with the lender for many years. It's a bit of a balancing act.
Also, to add to the potential issues, there are also variations: in capital-repayment mortages, a percentage of your repayments goes towards reducing the actual loan; endowment-type mortages pay the interest, and that "repayment" proportion goes into a term-investment, which should equal the cost of the loan at the end of the term. Another possibility is to take out an interest-only mortgage (which is cheaper) and pay the extra money yourself into a good savings/investment plan (but make sure it's a good one).
So: read up what you can before talking to the advisors, so you know the right questions to ask, and have some idea of what would best suit you. Check out the above links (and links from those), the financial section of your paper, bank literature, and work out what it is you most want out of your mortgage. Hope this helps. Gwinva (talk) 00:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Distribution of crime victims by class in SA compared to US
There is overall much less crime in the US than SA, but in many major American cities, the crime stats start looking comparable. Atlanta has one of the highest rates but its affluent suburb, Buckhead, has the one of the lowest rates in the nation. In grim contrast, all classes in South Africa are highly victimized. Why is high crime in the US confined to only parts of high crime metro areas but spread everywhere in the metro areas of SA?
That is a good question. I don't have a well sourced answer, but personal experience of the two countries, and others, suggests to me that the USA is more typical and SA more atypical. Why is that? I think it is probably a consequence of the huge and historical difference between the wealthy and the poor in South Africa combined with the recent change in race politics.
I recall back in the days of Apartheid, SA was more like USA today. Shocking, I know, but true.. and here is why. The black folks were together (in townships in SA, and inner city ghettos in the US) and the white folks were together (in the 'burbs in both cases). Crime rates were high in SA back then, but the affluent upper-middle class "white" areas were relatively crime free. Why? Because the policing was very much focused on maintaining that: you could get up to pretty much anything you wanted in the townships and the police let you get on with it, but if it spilled over and caused a problem for the whites, then you would see brutal and rapid crackdowns. A similar system is in place in the US and this results in the disparities you note.
Since the end of Apartheid, the system has broken down and people have turned to private security for protection. There is growing lawlessness and the organized protection of the white suburbs is no longer as well organized. There are rich pickings there for those that are poor and with out prospects, irrespective of race. Previously the police only had to concern themselves with protecting whites, now they have to protect everyone and, so the crime has began to equalize. An additional factor is that a lot of the desperately poor African electorate were made extravagant promises by those who wanted their vote ("see the white's houses over there? When we are elected you can live in one of those"). Voter nativity was hardly surprising when you have never had the chance to vote before. And, when the promises were never realized and after years of "freedom" you find yourself in as hopeless a situation as before (or even worse), people begin to stop waiting and start taking.
In time, as "democracy" in SA matures, we will begin to see it swing back like we do in other democracies. Instead of race being the primary factor that differentiates between the high and low crime areas, it will be wealth. In practice that will make very little difference of course, except there will be some black faces in the 'burbs and a few poor white folks in the townships. Maybe thats an overly cynical explanation, but it seems on the money to me. Rockpocket02:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
'Local Market' Feasibility
Can consumers in a 'local economy' purchase locally-produced beef, pork, milk, and eggs at a price that is favorable both to the local consumers and the local producers? In other words, is there any 'local' antidote for the 'globalization' of the food market? --Ckdavis (talk) 22:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are mixing several concepts for starters. Moving local products to local consumers without moving them to some headquarters first. Sure, there are many ways that is done. Look at Farmers' market for one example. There is also a chain of supermarkets in California that advertises using only local products where available. Whether the price is favorable to the local consumers is another concept. Unfortunately produce shipped around half the world can still comes out ahead on price even with all the costs of transportation and overheads added up. The globalization of the food market however also has other reasons. The food market has to some degree been "global" for a very long time. Just the part of the world that is accessible to us has grown with improved transport and Food preservation technologies. Things that aren't locally available or not in season have been transported from other places for ages. Just think of spices, for one example. If you look farther back the Egyptians transported food up and down the Nile. The grain trade was monopolized, but other products could be exchanged for grain. While there are many unfair aspects in global food trade, it's not all bad. It allows people to enjoy foods that are not available locally and removes seasonal limitations on things like fresh fruit. You might find that you have to do without a lot of foods if you only bought things that are locally available. Theoretically the global food trade could also alleviate the effects of failed harvests and natural disasters like droughts. In reality that doesn't seem to work because of uneven distribution of wealth. Even if farmers in most nations don't get fair prices for their products, if they didn't have that income they'd be a lot worse off. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 16:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
please remove pornographic images from your site (eg: homosexual sex & fluffer)
Please remove the pornographic images that appear under particular searches such as "fluffer", "penis", and "sex". Children will be exposed to this destructive material if you fail to protect them.
Thank you. 96.237.188.142 (talk) 22:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear. This refers to a campaign by Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues of the Concerned Women for America, a Biblically principled organization, who has been fulminating at sexually explicit images on Wikipedia. The Christian Newswire has picked up the story & is running with it. Anticipate more such posts on this matter :(
And the answer, in general, is no. If you have specific objections to specific images, argue your case on the talk page associated with the image. If you want a a wikipedia sanitized according to your particular belief system, you need to fork this one and implement it yourself, or else enter into discussion with the community to see if we'd care to be sanitized. I think you'll find the answer is "no". --Tagishsimon(talk)22:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A real professional outfit, they can't even get our web address correct: "... parents around the world may want to make every effort to keep their kids away from Wikipedia.com" Rockpocket00:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's the first time I hear the word "fluffer". However, it sounds like an interesting profession. I could employ my seductive knowlegde to arouse female stars and still get paid for doing so. 217.168.3.246 (talk) 22:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Had I know that that existed as was a teen, I would also know how to answer the question 'so, what do you want to do professionally when you grow up?'217.168.3.246 (talk) 23:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please read our policy on censorship. In short, "offensive" is subjective. What is wrong and disgusting to you is not wrong and disgusting to others. If you look up something dirty, what do you think you are going to see? Mattbuck has it right; if you want a "family-safe" encyclopedia, Conservapedia is the way to go. Just watch out for the ridiculous cabal-ism over there. Instead, you can just read a regular encyclopedia. Paragon12321 (talk) 00:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you've some issue with the images, you could block upload.wikimedia.org on your internal network / on your PC. Or, just don't surf here. There you go, no problem. No need to enforce your religious beliefs on others when you can easily avoid the material. 206.126.163.20 (talk) 03:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do enjoy the fact that "penis" is considered destructive. It is not our duty to protect other people's children by depriving the world of information. Protect your own children please. Mad031683 (talk) 16:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has images that are sexually explicit in places where such images will help a reader learn more about the subject. Wikipedia also has images that are explicitly violent images in places where they will help a reader learn more about the subject. I am curious about why this organization is demanding the removal of non-prurient sexual images, but has no apparent objection to the depiction of, for example, the victims of violent crime, or of war. If you are concerned that your child may see material that would not be appropriate for a child, you should take the standard measures that many parents use- employ an internet filter to prevent your child's access to adult material, and keep the family computer in a public room, where you can see what your child is looking at online. A standard keyword filter should prevent your child from accessing such objective concepts as penis and vagina, although there is no way to stop your child from seeing at least one of those things in reality. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)16:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, why does wikipedia has more than one picture of a penis? Why doesn't it have a drawing instead? BTW, are you sure that anyone is able to see a penis (exclusive) or in reality? Some woman perhaps don't look downunder.
I don't think we are going to persuade you that no one organization, not even Concerned Women for America, has the right to censor another organization's publications. And I know you're not going to persuade Wikipedia that its goals should be changed to be the same as CWA's goals. So we'll just have to disagree with one another. Wikipedia will continue trying to create a complete collection of information; sharing information makes us happy, so we will be happy. CWA will continue looking for things that offend them; being offended makes them happy, so they will be happy. We are now all happy. Hooray! -FisherQueen (talk · contribs)17:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, if you think that a few pictures of male anatomy are what are going to be corrupting your children, you really need to take a look a little wider both on the internet and in the world around you. There are vices, charlatans, and demagogues on practically every street corner (metaphorically speaking, of course—from a more literal point of view, they are blasted on every media outlet). There are multiple wars going on. There are governments failing to provide the basic protection to their citizens from natural disasters. Rather than trying to keep things hidden away—which only makes them more exciting for kids and everyone else, as we all well know, having been kids—perhaps you should spend more time talking to your children about critical reasoning skills, about developing a deep understanding of what morality means (which is more than just memorizing rules), and thinking about how they are going to make it through the next century. The twentieth century was likely the bloodiest in human history. The twenty-first is not shaping up well itself. Pictures of genitalia have nothing to do with any of that. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it's best that you deny your children the use of a computer at all; that way, there's no possibility they can surf the net and find such appalling images as actual human body parts. Why not send them off to find some good wholesome educational books in a library - but be sure to warn the librarian to put a lock on "Grey's Anatomy" or any other medical textbooks when they see your kids arriving. I'm sure they'd be only too happy to oblige; they must get such requests all the time; they're there to serve, as we are. In fact, they probably employ staff on kiddie-watch to ensure kids are denied the basic information about how their bodies actually work, as of course they should be. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why do some companies - like software companies - have offices?
There's no substitute for talking to people in real life. Besides, it means they can easily run a development server or something, explain concepts properly - it is incredibly hard to communicate complex ideas just using text. Sometimes you just need a pen and paper. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not everyone who works at a software development company writes software. There are also people in marketing, accounting, management, sales, etc. That said, it isn't always a good idea for someone to write code from home all the time. While I do it a lot for my job, I do have to spend so many hours a week there for conferences, meetings, evaluations, testing in the like. Some things just can't be simulated over the internet. CelarnorTalk to me23:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some servers can be rebooted remotely, and some servers can also be virtual.
I still don't see why paying rent (a huge cost) is an advantage. Linux and Wikipedia were both created without offices around the world. => it's possible to create quality without offices. 217.168.3.246 (talk) 08:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Linux and Wikipedia are non-commercial projects where people don't have to trust each other. If you are buying or selling something you will want to be able to assess people and decide if they are trustable or not. Other emotions are also relevant here. Do you really want to cooperate with someone that you don't know?
A second point is protecting information. In the case of Linux or Wikipedia there is still a difference. In both cases there is no intention of protecting the copyright of the project. If you want to fill a patent in the other hand you will want to keep things secret. In a large team with 50 or more people working online you will not be able to protect trade secrets efficently. Mr.K.(talk)08:47, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not so much a question of logistics as it is one of social dynamics, for starters. First of all, while some people can easily work from home, many others cannot. Or, to put it bluntly: how do you know people are actually working instead of goofing off? Some people don't work well without at least some degree of supervision, even if it is only implied.
But that's just a part of the thing, because there are many benefits to actually physically working with other people. Having co-workers you like makes you motivated. Being able to grab lunch with the nice guy from marketing (Ha ha! I joke! There are no nice guys in marketing!) is going to make your work day a little more fun, and that can help a lot, especially in times of stress. It's also very useful to be able to brainstorm with a group of people easily, especially in work that has a strong creative element. Yes, programs like Skype and instant messaging applications can be very helpful, but they are not an easy substitute for face-to-face communication, especially in the long run and when multiple people are involved. It can work, but it's difficult and requires a lot from the participants.
And, of course, if you're meeting clients, you're going to want to have an office. Not just because it creates an image of professionalism and dependability -- although that probably doesn't hurt -- but because it allows you to easily present your key people, processes and practices to people who will give you money to do what you do, if they think you can do it properly.
In any case, using Linux and Wikipedia as evidence that offices aren't necessary or useful is a little disingenuous, because for every successful project like that, there are a hundred -- or a thousand -- projects that never take off or that crash and burn somewhere during the process. Also, Linux, for example, was created by Linus Torvalds when he was studying, as a hobby. He was motivated and got it done, and it really took off, but it's not as if his project was unique -- there were thousands of other geeks doing similar things, they just never completed their projects. Torvalds wasn't exceptional because he had the ability or because he had the idea, but because he actually had the drive to complete the project. (As much as Linux is ever complete, but anyway.) And these days, to my knowledge, Torvalds works in an office.
Also, a lot of people want to work in an office, because it creates a clear divide between work time and personal time. For the most part, I've been working from home for many years now (I do a lot of freelance work), and while being able to sit around the house in my underwear has obvious benefits, it's not necessarily that great in the long run: I'm always at work, pretty much. There's no real way of telling when I can relax and when I'm supposed to be working. There are obvious benefits to putting on my coat and going home, and knowing that when I'm home, I can kick back and not worry about work, because I'm off the clock, period. Most of the time, I don't have that, unless I make a lot of effort to segregate my work activities from other activities, and that's not as easy as you might think, at least not for me -- and, judging by the discussions I've had with people in similar arrangements, for most people. Sure, if I want to stop working and go watch a couple of episodes of Futurama in the middle of the day, I can do that, and that's very nice, but it's definitely a mixed blessing. I don't really mind working from home, I should stress, but the idea that it's easier or even an optimal arrangement is kind of misguided. So when I work with clients who require my daily presence in an office, I like that -- even if it means I have to put my pants on in the morning. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 10:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I personally think a mix-up of office and virtual work is the perfect combination. People don't want to be tied to a specific place - be it your home or office. Virtual communication is still not so perfect and sometimes you have to draw a complex structure on a whiteboard to better visualize it. Testing software remotely can also be difficult. As a tester you are supposed to test in several machines and most people only have one at home. GoingOnTracks (talk) 11:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikimedia foundation does have an office, and I'd be a little surprised if any of the major Linux distros didn't, even though they don't have to keep track of most of their contributors in the same way paying employers do. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 14:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any company has some sort of registered office. It is legally binding, in the US at least. Further advantages are saving in license cost of software, ebooks and other digital media. Privacy of the employee towards friends and family (not anyone has a spare room at home). Guarantee that no children, dog or the like will be crying, barking or the like in the background. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.205.37 (talk) 17:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Beatles on iTunes
Does anyone have any idea when, or if, the Beatles catalogue will be availible on iTunes? I have every CD except Magical Mystery Tour, and I wanted a few songs. Maybe I should just get Limewire. Thanks!
Grango242 (talk) 23:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No-one outside the relevant parties seems to know. Every so often some source claims it is about to happen imminently (the most recent being last month but this was quashed by Sony, who owns some of the publishing rights with Michael Jackson. Presumably they would know.) Nevertheless, a "A high-level music industry source" is still claiming a deal will be done this year [12] and Mr McCartney himself is "pretty sure" you'll see it in 2008. [13]Rockpocket01:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In George Orwell's dystopian novel, 1984, is the totalitarian government of Oceania communist or fascist? Their policies appear to be fascist, but yet, seems to bear resemblance to Stalin's communism. Acceptable (talk) 00:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know... fascism implies nationalism, and Orwell makes it clear that the Party is not identified with any particular ethnic group but rather includes "Negroes," Jews and Amerindians. In that regard, The Party clearly reflects the multiethnic Communist Party of the Soviet Union much more closely than any Fascist party. On the other hand, the antique shop in the prole quarter appears to be privately owned (won't put a spoiler here), inferring that the Party allows at least very small businesses to remain in private hands, unlike full-blown Communist regimes. Whether the Party is left- or right-wing is really irrelevant; it's an extreme example of authoritarian totalitarianism, which is what Orwell was criticizing. As a moderate socialist in a country where moderate socialists were dead-set against both fascism and Soviet Communism, it perhaps makes sense that the Party has characteristics of both forms of totalitarianism. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're right that Party may not be purely fascist, and contains elements of Soviet communism. However, the Party is really in complete opposition to the ideals of "original" communism (don't know if it has an official name) as described at the beginning of the Communism article. This version "promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society" through "the working class, or proletariat, [replacing] the wealthy bourgeoisie." The Party creates and enforces a strict structure of social classes and keeps the proles from ever rising in status or rebelling.— Insanity Incarnate02:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And I think that's part of Orwell's point. The Party, which represents Stalinist Communism, was originally a socialist party (The "soc" in Ingsoc) but has instead simply replaced capitalist oligarchy with another oligarchy. Goldstein's book (really Orwell's commentary) says the Party "rejects and vilifies every principle for which the Socialist movement originally stood, and it does so in the name of Socialism." Just like Stalin in the mind of socialists like Orwell. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One ear of earbuds is crackling
Apparently, there's an issue with my earbuds (Shure e2c) such that one of the two sides cuts in and out. It looks like it's an issue where the wire for the right ear meets the plastic interconnect thingy (that splits it from one to two cables for each ear), as wiggling the cable around at that point will cause it to go in and out. Of course, this bit isn't really made for taking apart, being a solid chunk of plastic. Any suggestions here? Should I just attack it with something and split it? What is that part even for / will I damage something? 206.126.163.20 (talk) 02:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Earbuds are extra-low voltage, so at least you are not going to electrocute yourself if you fiddle with them. It sounds as though one of your wires is broken and has a faulty connection. The ends are still held in contact by the insulation at least occasionally. That's why you get an intermittent signal when you wiggle the wire. Since your device is not usable in it's current state without repairs, you lose nothing by attempting to do so. Success is rather unlikely though. The wire broke just above the "chunk of plastic" just like a credit card will eventually break when you bend it to and fro often enough. Stabilizing that part, like one would stabilize a bone fracture with a splint, might get you a little more use out of the device, until the wire breaks again a little higher up. The plastic piece usually only keeps the 2 wires from splitting all the way to the plug. It's fused into one solid piece, if you cut it you are very likely to cut the wires inside, too, (not to mention your fingers). When I was younger the "cure" would have been easy. Cut the wire, strip the 2 ends and twist the ends together. Soldering or a suitable screw terminal would have secured the connection. A little Electrical tape. Done. These days that won't work anymore because the wires you are dealing with are too thin there is little chance you will be able to strip off the insulation without cutting the wire. If you melt off the insulation (NB toxic fumes! Fire hazard!) you won't win anything because the wires inside are so thin. Even if you manage to twist the wires together without breaking them, all you'll create is two or more new points where it will break next. So, yeah fiddle away. Experiment. Just don't expect it to work. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 04:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Earbuds and earphones never last long because the wires are thin and fragile. Repairs never last long. I have to replace mine regularly.--Shantavira|feed me06:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather not roll that way. My NES is still working, and I could have given up on it a long time ago. It should be fixable, and the wires aren't *that* thin that I would expect them to break immediately after. Cutting, stripping, and reattaching (electrical tape or solder) the wires doesn't seem that hard. 206.126.163.20 (talk) 01:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I don't admire your willingness to put in a little time and effort instead of just throwing something away (I do, and I wish more people thought that way), but it should be noted that the NES comes from an age where things generally tended to be a little more robust than modern electronics are. Also, earphones are generally subject to constant mechanical wear and tear -- they are constantly moving, people often wrap the wire around the device they're being used with multiple times a day (at least I do that with my iPod all the time, probably at least half a dozen times every day), they get jammed into a pocket, they can get easily caught in things if you're not careful, etc. It just isn't the kind of technology that is going to last very long. Still, if you can get a couple of months of extra use out of them by working on them for an half an hour, that strikes me as a worthwhile pursuit, as well as a good way to avoid spending money on new stuff until you really have to... and you might even learn a thing or two, or at least keep your skills up, if you already know what you're doing. I dig it. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 03:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
lol. Medical pioneers are generally referred to as the Father of (specific field) but I cant seem to find one for ENT. It is possible it developed gradually from either general surgery or respiratory medicine Fribbler (talk) 11:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Look in googlebooks or your library for this one "Offbeat Otolaryngology: What They Didn't Teach You in Medical School By John D. C. Bennett, John Riddington" I think that has your answer, sort of. Before there were onotolgist and there were laryngologists and they seem to have joined. One guy Sir Henry Trenton Bultin is named as doyen of ontolaryngology. Whether there were others before in some other country, is another question. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 04:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello
hello
i expect to know a vilage of city of NEW YORK who is bell port .may you tell me about it very well ? i hope i can got a map of there too .thank you
It's obvious why Pakistan would not want to see India seated but I can't understand the opposition by these countries against Brazil and Germany:
Argentina, Colombia, Mexico - opposed to a bid for Brazil
Italy, Netherlands, Spain - opposed to a bid for Germany
Lotsofissues 06:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Looks like regional power plays to me—the sort of thing where countries don't one one other country elevate to a position of prominence above them, making them more minor players as a consequence. But I don't know for sure. Argentina and Brazil have hundreds of years of rivalry. Italy, Spain, and Netherlands have more modern gripes against Germany, but I don't know if those are at play here or if it is just an economic consideration. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
wikipedia photos GNU licence
I am helping a friend to publish a book about dogs, and we used Wikipedia information on a no of dog breeds,and we cited Wikipedia as one of the sources in the Biblioraphy.
We also used some dog photos from Wikipedia Commons and from the Wikipedia free encyclopedia, some as public domain and No with GNU licence. The book is not published yet, but we would like to get a written permission apriori in order to be able to use this photos.
We, however cited at the beginning of the manuscript that "A no of photos under Public Domain and GNU licence are sourced through Wikipedia and through Wikipedia Commons"
My name is Slavica Ivanovic.
If you need any more information, and Would certainly liked to be contacted, my email is <removed as per policy for your protection>—Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.215.207 (talk) 06:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Slavica, you might like to put your question at the Help desk for using Wikipedia here[14]. If you open an account, you can be emailed without your details being across the net. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Slavia—the public domain ones you are free to use without any difficulty at all.
The GFDL ones technically require you to do a few things. The license itself says that you can use them if you label them as being created by whomever made them (not Wikipedia itself, but the actual author), and indicate they are licensed by the GFDL.
Technically you are supposed to include an entire copy of the GFDL license with the book. Personally I think the authors would be happy if you just said it was licensed under the GFDL and had the GFDL hyperlink in the back of the book. The requirement to include the entire GFDL is a holdover from the idea that the files would primarily be used online, and doesn't make a whole lot of sense when talking about printed matter and especially photographs. But I should point out that this is just my personal opinion—technically the GFDL does say you have to include an entire copy of it.
The easiest way to resolve it is to get in contact with the authors of the photos and ask them for special permission to use the photos in your book without including the entire GFDL. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 13:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If it is printed, it is not just links, it is an entire copy of the GFDL. I know the GFDL front and back, I'm just trying to emphasize that it's better when doing a printed book to try and secure alternate arrangements with the authors because the GFDL is very hard to implement correctly or elegantly when you only wanting to use a photo or two. (And while I am all in agreement about reading it yourself, some of it is in a rather legal language and without an accompanying straightforward translation, like the CC licenses have, so I've seen more than a few people get totally confused about it when they aren't used to reading in that language.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 12:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
investigating
How can I find out what was written on the previous page of the notebook? I can see some of the words clearly, but others I can not. I know there is a method that can be used to reveal what it says. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.203.242.142 (talk) 07:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your easiest way is to use a soft pencil (say a 4B) and gently colour the page that the previous-one (The one you want to read) was below. This should reveal most of what you do, takes very little time and can be removed afterwards with a rubber if you so need. ny156uk (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
LRT Excluding Trams
Which is the smallest (population wise) metropolitan area, town, village, hamlet and/or city absolutely with a LRT excluding trams that also operates on the street. It might operate in the air, underground, in the water, but at least, it has to operate in the street.
Which is the smallest (area wise) metropolitan area, town, village, hamlet and/or city absolutely with a LRT excluding trams that also operates on the street. It might operate in the air, underground, in the water, but at least, it has to operate in the street.
Criteria:
If the LRT connects two or more towns, do you count only the largest (because the system "belongs to" that town) or the smallest (because you mean the question literally)?
For both questions: Count the combined total.
Does it make a difference if the towns do not touch each other?
For both questions: Count the towns as if they were one.
And second, does it count as "in the street" if the tracks are in a semi-isolated median or similar setup?
For both questions: It does not count.
Finally, are you counting only actual public transit operations where the cars run at regular intervals all day and stop frequently for people to get on and off, or do museum railways count, where they might run once an hour and only on summer Sundays, and only allow trips over the full route?
For both questions: "...actual public transit operations where the cars run at regular intervals all day and stop frequently for people to get on and off..." = Counts
For both questions: "...museum railways count, where they might run once an hour and only on summer Sundays, and only allow trips over the full route..." = Does not count.
why is MARY called Our Lady of Fatima?
what is the origin and history of name FATIMA in this connection?
Did MARY herself commanded 3 children to call her Our Lady of Fatima?
It's a form of address to Mary, see Titles of Mary, and it seems the place is attached according to where she appears or where she is connected to, or even what qualities she offers (eg, Our Lady of Guadaloupe, Our Lady of Perpetual Sorrow). As to who invents the title for any time or place, don't know. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it's far and away the single most important event in its history. These visions put Fatima on the map and made it a world-wide centre of pilgrimage. Previously, very few people outside Portugal (and probably a lot of Portuguese as well) had ever heard of it. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's because it's a pretty intricate joke. The site in question directs people to arrange their fingers in the "horns" position, which Avril Lavigneappearsto befond of. I don't know a damn thing about organic chemistry, so perhaps this even works for its stated purpose (that of determining a stereocenter's configuration), but if it does, Avril Lavigne didn't contribute to it in any scientific capacity. She just likes to throw up horns. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe. I mean, if the method actually does what it purports to, then yes, it's named in her honor. If it doesn't, then it's more of a joke on her (albeit clearly a good-natured one!). Like I said, I'm not knowledgeable about organic chemistry, so I don't know if it works. (I wouldn't recommend assuming that it works unless you understand the subject matter enough to know that it does, or find a credible source that says it works. It could just be a complex geek joke.) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 14:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have answers for all those, but I know Maaco will paint your entire car for about $500. However, other auto painters (who convienently charge four times that amount) say you'll wish you didn't go to Maaco about 2 years after the paint job. When I needed to paint the hood of my car, I went to a paint mixing place and had them mix the pain to match the rest of my car, then just spray painted the hood. Sure, it looked real amateur, but the color matched, so I would guess they could match a sweater as well. Useight (talk) 16:18, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many dealers will just "shop out" the job, sending your car off to their favorite auto body shop.
As to whether or not the car should be disassembled, well, that depends on how many places you want to find the old color later. There's are plenty of places that can't be painted if the car is fully-assembled (think about door latches, all sorts of rubber weatherstripping, and the like). The no-disassembly job will look okay to the casual viewer, but it will be blatantly obvious to anyone who cares that you changed the color of the car.
Matching color of a different material is more difficult than if you asked them to match the color of another piece of painted metal, e.g. your bike. If you say you want to buy a "new" car but want to get it "painted" are you talking used car or custom color? In any case I'd say that you are getting the better service if they take the car apart. Otherwise you could end up with "seams" where the new paint could start to peel off or allow moisture to creep in. For simple decals you could try to look what your local automotive store has available or look online (gooling for "car decal" order online, will get you lots of choices) If you don't trust yourself with applying those, a local workshop should be able to help you without charging oodles of money. Prices tend to be negotiable. Phone around to get quotes. Also check whether your area has an online review site. (Otherwise ask people who had their car painted.) 71.236.23.111 (talk) 17:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know of a single dealer that has a paint booth of their own. Don't go to Maaco. And Do go to different shops for to get quotes, ask for advice about good and bad shops, etc. Dismas|(talk)00:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Narcotics
Why are drugs illegal? i read war on drugs and it told me when and how, but not why. It is a victimless crime so why? I dont mean to start a debate, i am just curious. Thanks 86.18.34.51 (talk) 17:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Zionist[reply]
Law is something created by society, so at some point in history society has decided that these 'drugs' are bad for society and thus their use needs to be curbed/prevented. Some people have moral reasons for disliking drug-taking, some claim a link to crime/social devastation, some believe for safety/health reasons. Each of the drugs will have been banned/made illegal for a variety of reasons, I suggest picking a drug and trying to understand its history - there is no one reason. The question of 'victimless' is the one that is most disputed by opponents of relaxed laws on drugs. under the influence of drugs people have been known to do things that are far from victimless (this is not to suggest that the drug should be blamed but that is a line of argument oft used). I suspect your question will draw the usual set of 'not a forum' responses (fair enough I suppose), but it is a reasonably interesting question which can 'sort of' be answered. ny156uk (talk) 17:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not everybody believes it is a victimless crime, clearly. There are those who believe that drug users themselves are victims of the drugs themselves (which, from a libertarian standpoint, might be seen as an argument that the effects of the drugs are strong enough to deny rational activity), and those that believe that drug activity leads in most cases to a strong criminalistic lifestyle (some of which is obviously due to the fact that the drugs themselves are illegal, but one could make the argument that drug addicts are in so little control over their abilities that they will have an extremely hard time not resorting to crime to pay for their habits). Which is to say: you seem to be assuming that the only people who want to make drugs illegal do so out of a moral compulsion or out of a desire to regulate the lives of others, deprive them of their own rational choice, etc. I'm not sure that's necessarily true, though it is obviously for some. There are arguments, though, that would favor even someone who believes in libertarian rational choice to lean away from legalization of all drugs.
Of course, the whole debate is quite muddled by the fact that there are many different types of drugs being considered under the same heading here. The effects of marijuana are more on the scale with alcohol and cigarettes than, say, methamphetamine and crack cocaine. Personally I don't think the latter should be legalized, for reasons relating to what I've stated above, whereas I'd have no problem with marijuana being legalized, even though I wouldn't use it even if it was. From a standpoint of rational actors, criminality, and likelihood to get out of control, some drugs are more justified than others to be legal or illegal. (I would personally say that marijuana and alcohol are able to make a stronger case for legality than cigarettes, personally, because of the highly addictive and long-term danger associated with the latter, whereas the former can be partaken in moderation without serious long-term effects or addiction.) (Personal note: I haven't done crack cocaine, though I did, for awhile, do meth, now many years ago. It is fiendishly addictive over the long term, and has horrible health effects. The people that dismiss its dangers and effects in the same way they'd dismiss the dangers and effects of marijuana do not really know what they are talking about, in my opinion. They are qualitatively worlds apart in terms of effects and long-term consequences.)
Note, of course, that much of the "why" today is political: to be "soft" on drugs is political suicide at the moment, though over time this has gotten better and over more time I suspect we will eventually get to a more sensible place (where the "softer" drugs will be decriminalized if not legalized, and treatment, rather than punishment, will become more standard for users of the "harder" drugs). This is, though, just a personal opinion. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 17:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The concept of drug use being "victimless" is problematic. There are always knock-on effects of every action. Discussion about legalisation should not deny the effects occur, but consider whether they are significant enough to warrant continued legislation. On a more specific note, I am always intrigued to hear people refer to marijuana as "harmless". This is certainly not the general belief within the field of psychiatry: anecdotal and peer-reviewed evidence suggests direct links between marijuana use and psychiatric illnesses (this does not mean that every marijuana user will become mentally ill, but that high usage significantly increases the likelihood that they will) . In such a case, even if you discount the individual's problems, the state/health system/tax payer can be considered a "victim" of drug-use, for they must support those who have become mentally ill through their drug use. So, such things must be considered, and weighed up against the benefits of legalising the drug (and there are believed to be some positive health benefits, also). Cannabis (drug)#Health issues considers some of these issues, and it's also worth reading the Beckley Foundation Report, which begins: "There is increasing apprehension about [marijuana's] possible role in triggering or exacerbating mental health problems, or of inhibiting young people’s emotional or social development." Note: "There is abundant research evidence that cannabis can cause shortlived psychotic episodes"; "People who used cannabis on a daily basis were 2.4 times more likely to report psychotic experiences than nondaily cannabis users"; "Regular cannabis use increased the chances of developing later schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychotic illness by approximately two to threefold" but also: "the vast majority of young cannabis smokers do not develop psychosis, supporting the hypothesis that a small minority of users may be vulnerable to the effects of cannabis." (all p 5) The report also looks at legalisation (both pros and cons) . Since cannabis is the "safest" drug, you can see that debates about drug legalisation can never be simple. Gwinva (talk) 23:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very true—though I wouldn't say using cannabis on a daily basis is really what the "safe" benchmark is. I drink alcohol (usually red wine of some sort) on maybe a weekly or bi-weekly basis and it doesn't seem likely to be doing me any real harm. Similarly I think if one were to adopt moderate attitudes regarding marijuana one would not expect to find serious damage. The real point is that the short-term effects are relatively mild (that is, on a scale comparable with alcohol or cigarettes), putting marijuana (for me) more in that category than the other schedule III drugs (the opiates, the amphetamines, etc.) and the addiction is nonexistent (at least compared to alcohol and cigarettes), and thus on the end of the scale that should be up to individual choice. The same cannot be said of most of the others we are talking about. The question isn't whether it is "safe" but whether it is "safe enough" to be considered an issue of individual responsibility rather than social mandate; we allow people to do "unsafe" things all the time (driving a car, by itself, is immensely more dangerous than marijuana), the question is at what level we are satisfied with individuals being responsible for their own choices in such a thing and at what level do we blame the thing itself. (Among other debates one can have.) --98.217.8.46 (talk) 04:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Opposite Attracts
Is there any truth in the saying: Opposite attracts? and why is it truthful?
Is there a point were opposite attracting can be dangerous?
When it comes to immune systems, yes. Researchers have found that there are olfactory processes that let us be attracted to immune systems that are complimentary (dissimilar). 71.236.23.111 (talk) 19:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, consider the crypto-historical case of Eve and the Apple. Mac users, of course, see it as evidence that their product is a remnant of paradise and the fruit of divine knowledge.
As to the successful mating, let me point out that the global population was 2 (two) prior to this "human has a close encounter with a plant" incident. It has somewhat increased. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, opposites in humans do not attract (one study, others can be found if you require and Daniel Gilbert's book Stumbling on Happiness talks about this). Why is this considered common wisdom? I don't know. Is there a point were opposites attracting can be dangerous? Yes, when your hand is between opposite poles of strong magnets.--droptone (talk) 20:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have to disagree with the conclusion based on the study adduced by droptone. Humans have an enormous number of characteristics, and any two people will have some important ones in common and some important ones that differ. By being selective about the characteristics, you could always find "proof" that it's the ones in common that are attracting them. Equally, you could find "proof" that it's the differences that are attracting them. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lunatic
If the 'pockmarks' on the moon are meteor strikes, and we always see the same side, then by definition these must have come very close to, or from earth, can some one please explain this to me. I realize that alot of them may be glancing blows to the moon, but the thing that made me think of this was a photograph of the moon i am looking at, and just off center to the bottom left is a crater and one can clearly see the debris that was ejected from the impact point and it seems to be spread evenly in all directions, so how is this possible? unless it can from earth, directly into the moon. Thanks 86.18.34.51 (talk) 20:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Zionist[reply]
Bear in mind also that while the moon may appear like a flat disc to you, it's not. For instance, the prominent Tycho crater (which may be the one you're thinking of) is about 45° off the Earth-Moon line shown by Friday. Even if you were to assume that meteors only impact perpendicular to the surface, which is in no way a correct assumption, such an impact path wouldn't get much closer to the Earth than the Moon's distance. While this is astronomically close, it's also trivial -- anything that impacts the Moon passed astronomically close to Earth. — Lomn21:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well this is becuase no one has uploaded one (to my knowledge) Im sure if it was properly licensed it could be put into an article. БοņёŠɓɤĭĠ₳₯є22:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is easier to be sure the male picture is real than it would be to tell whether the female was faking it. Edison (talk) 01:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was inspired by the "flat of the sword" question above. Who were the best sword makers in the world for different cultures and were there any tests that pitted their works against each other? I'm pretty sure some countries were renowned for their smithing skills. I know that Japanese swords are good but I think the lore is overexaggerated, especially in animes.--Lenticel(talk)23:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, they really are that good. Their secret is in the folding, which AFAIK, is not found in other "traditional" sword types. The other secret (if you can call it that) is that they take the quality of their blades very seriously indeed - spending months on the creation of a single blade, with different experts overseeing each stage of the process. Check out Katana construction. While I'm sure swordsmiths all over the world have practiced their art with all due attention to detail, the Japanese have really ingrained it within their society, thus bringing more societal support to the process. The only other contender I know of might be the blades made of Damascus steel. Matt Deres (talk) 23:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Spanish swords had a good reputation in the Middle Ages, espcially those from Toledo. On the other hand, if you wanted good armour, then you'd look to Germany or Italy. Gwinva (talk) 00:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, they're good, but they really aren't that good -- by which I mean that they're not anime good. The lore is definitely exaggerated to and past the point of ridiculousness, as Lenticel says. I'm not dissing the skills of Japanese swordsmiths, you understand, but you're not going to be, oh, slicing through solid steel with them, for example. Katanas in fiction deals with some of this stuff. Also, Mythbusters did an episode of movie myths, in which they tested whether swords could cut through other swords, as well as another in which they tested the myth of Japanese WW2 soldiers slicing through machine gun barrels with katanas. Great swords, sure. Absolutely. But also really, really exaggerated, particularly in fiction. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 00:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So Damascus and Toledo blades are good as well. Darn I missed that Mythbusters episode. I want to know what sword beat whom. Anyways, thanks for the info--Lenticel(talk)07:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's some old, probably apocryphal story about a contest of sword quality between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. Richard's club-like sword was able to break an iron bar or something, while Saladin's damascus steel scimitar was able to slice through a pillow, thus winning the contest. I'm nearly positive the tale is basically a work of fiction, but it stuck in my mind as an good description of the quality and sharpness of damascus steel. Pfly (talk) 08:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
May 9
Finding a girl
I am 19 and still now I haven't being with a girl in an intimate relationship. The girls I know seems to be fascinated about funny guys, guys with cars, or good in sport. How can I make a girl like me? GoingOnTracks (talk) 11:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not here in the Language RF. I'm moving your question to the Miscelaneous.11:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
If those are the girls you like then you should maybe pick up a sport and then start saving for a car. Learning some jokes on the way won't hurt.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!)11:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The hottest girls like guys who are smart enough to figure out a reference desk isn't the place to ask questions about personal relationships. Doesn't your local radio station have a car-talk or gardening show you could pose this on? Matt Deres (talk) 12:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose the question could have been put in a more formal tone: "How do we choose our partner?" In my opinion the most important trait is vitality. Active people are not just more attractive, but the have a higher chance of being healthy, meeting someone, earning money or being funny. 217.168.1.109 (talk) 12:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And in that formal tone: "How do we choose our partner?" Its simple we choose our partner by who seems healthier, whose chemistry matches whose, and who is more fertile out of my choice. That is how we scientifically choose our partners.Cardinal Raven (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
CONFIDENCE
Clean yourself up. Meaning, wear nice clothes - but be comfortable and true to yourself, groom yourself, exercise, don't smell; basically look presentable.
Personality. Don't be a clown shoe. Being funny is swell, but there is an imaginary line that some "funny guys" cross where they stop being funny and come across as dickheads. Same thing with guys who are too into one hobby or interest (cars, work, or anything really). Be well rounded with your shit. Don't let your interests define who you are. You gotta show a serious side as well as a lighter side.
You need to like yourself and to consider yourself "a catch" before someone else will think of you as a catch. Work on achieving these attitudes, and confidence (and interest from girls) will follow. Marco polo (talk) 18:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It might come off as something of a cliché, but confidence matters. If you trust you look reasonable, you will appear better in face of others. Also, it makes the 'waiting' more bearable, as you spend less time doubting yourself. Unfortunately, everything here and above is original research at best. Vanity is part of us all, but there's likely a reason for why we have it. :) Scaller (talk) 21:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, but they are the basis for an initial attraction. Ideally, an initial attraction leads to an appreciation of the attractive person's core goodness. Without an initial attraction, the core goodness may pass unnoticed. Marco polo (talk) 01:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I'm not convinced that great "vitality" is necessary for attraction. On the other hand, a degree of self-confidence is probably indispensable, particularly when it comes to attracting females. The good news is that self-confidence can be cultivated. You can do this by learning to accept and like yourself, and by projecting your self-comfort. Marco polo (talk) 01:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Being natural is nice, when you're not an overt display type of person. I was going to say it helps not to be anxious, but Woody Allen made a career of an anxious quirky type attracting women, so every taste is out there. Julia Rossi (talk) 01:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Use of wikis for posting library reference question answers
I am surprised China has a higher gini (47) compared to India (36). I assumed, since India has many top 10 billionaires, but a per capita poorer than Sudan, it would have a high gini. China has many billionaires too but I figured the large manufacturing base spread wealth more evenly. So how did I make the wrong conclusion?
Count a pulse, one two three four one two three four. Add the word "and" between each number. Now emphasize or say more loudly the words in caps: ONE and two AND three and FOUR and one and TWO and THREE and four and. Repeat the pattern over and over. There, I just taught you the common clave rhythm. Pfly (talk) 22:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not so ! You merely gave counting and a timing. (It could be a metronome.) Enforced rhythm is not true rhythm since the person cannot maintain a rhythm without the counting. So, in my opinion (and I would love to be able to dance) if one has not got at least some degree of natural rhythm then the artifical version is not of much help. i.e. Finger off pulse, rhythm vanishes.90.4.117.42 (talk) 15:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)DT[reply]
This sounds more like the difference between teaching and learning. Learning a rhythm takes practice. If it feels "enforced" you just need to spend more time and effort practicing until it starts to feel natural. The amount of practice needed differs among people. Some people have a natural talent and catch on quickly, while for others it will be harder and take longer -- and it helps to have pointers on how to practice this kind of thing. I would say that anyone can learn rhythmic patterns if they want to, but there are some rare neurological conditions that might prevent some small number of people. Oliver Sacks writes about "rhythm deafness" and how it sometimes develops after a stroke. Che Guevara was supposedly rhythm-deaf. But Sacks points out that rhythm deafness is rare, and profound rhythm deafness is extremely rare, and almost never total, "because rhythm is represented widely in the brain". The same thing is true for "pitch deafness", which a lot of people seem to say they have -- usually meaning they have trouble singing in tune. Neurological pitch deafness is more common than rhythm deafness, but still quite rare. For the rest of us, even those like me who lack a great natural talent for pitch and rhythm, it takes practice. Maybe lots of practice. In short, you can teach rhythm, you can teach pitch, you can teach practice, but you can't make someone practice if they don't want to. Pfly (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could Not Live Our Lives?
What mental disorder hinders us from living your lives paranoia or depression?
When you post a question like this, simply saying "I don't want opinions" doesn't make it appropriate Ref Desk material. Look, I'm sorry your roommate has locked down your computer but you're going to need to find another place for your philosophical musings. --LarryMac | Talk15:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So you want to know which mental disorder is worse? If so, then do you mean worse on average or worse when the disorder is severe?--droptone (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How could you not understand the question:
What mental illness hinders the person more?
Paranoia or Depression.
So, I guess I am asking: Out of Paranoia or depression, which is of the two is worse so that the suffer cannot live a normal life?71.142.222.245 (talk) 16:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
Perhaps -FisherQueen meant she could not understand the question before you edited it, which also served to make my initial reply meaningless. You are moving perilously close to trolldom, and I think you ought to seriously consider what you're doing here. --LarryMac | Talk16:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Basically everyone that has ever lived has lived with depression, many of them with "normal" lives. So I would have to say that paranoia might be worse. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 16:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't state the degree of mental illness, the question is somehow senseless. You can live normal life with mild depression and some people indeed don't even notice that their bad mood is an illness. 217.168.1.109 (talk) 17:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry if it seems I'm a bit rude and trollsome today. I guess I woke up on the wrong side of the bed. I didn't want to sound rude.
Well then lets make it that the life they have is with severe depression and paranoia.
So we can level the playing fields here.71.142.222.245 (talk) 17:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven[reply]
It's not a reasonable or sensible question. Depression and paranoia can both be extremely problematic, but it's not like breaking your kneecap, which has pretty much the same result every time. Mental problems like this can be very different for different people in their symptoms. Some people cope better than others. Some people have better social support networks than others. For some people, medication works better than for others. People come from different circumstances and backgrounds, which can impact on their illness by making it easier or more difficult to deal with. Some people have better doctors than others. Both depression and paranoia can be debilitating; there's no definitive answer here. If you absolutely insist that one of them must be worse, frankly, that betrays an overall lack of understanding about the nature of mental illness. That said, paranoia is often a delusional state, whereas it's not as common with depression (but it can be a symptom in some cases of depression). Delusional people are often worse off than people who don't suffer from delusions -- but even then, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are hindered more than other people. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 19:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just give a bunch of people who are diagnosed with Paranoid personality disorder or Major depression inventories in the disorder they have and a quality of life assessment. It's irrelevant whether people vary in how well they deal with mental problems since this character wants to know which one is generally worse unless the variability is astronomically high (which I doubt).--droptone (talk) 20:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A completely random question, but I can't seem to figure it out anywhere: when do car dealships in the US close on Saturdays? My mother told me that they are like banks and close early on weekends, but I want to go look at some cars after 3 o'clock. If it varies by dealer, then I'm out of luck - since I haven't found a single dealer website that lists the times. 206.252.74.48 (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It will indeed vary by dealer, there's no regulated times, as far as I know. Surely some of those websites include telephone numbers - just call and ask. --LarryMac | Talk16:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately that kind of business tends not to be very good at answering email in the sort of timeframe that would be useful. If you're uneasy with the telephone, plan in advance your opening sentence or two.
Get somebody else to phone them on your behalf. But that still leaves you with the phone problem. Paul
Background Recording Software
Is there any kind of (free?) software on the internet that will allow me to record the sounds being played through my speakers, if I want to record sounds like music from music videos on the internet?
Thanks from me, too. I'd been looking for something like that. I have lots of old audio training tapes that I want to transfer to CD. --Lisa4edit (talk) 00:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just one point, I strongly recommend that you do not infringe copyright by recording sunds like copyrighted music videos on the internet Anonymous101 (talk) 15:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This point is valid, but copyright law is complicated and varies depending on where you live, among other considerations. In almost all cases, if you transform a copyrighted work in this manner and then convey it to a third party, your will be in violation of the copyright laws. In some jurisdictions, you may copy the material for your own use under the "fair use" provisions of copyright law. You must consult a lawyer about this. -Arch dude (talk) 04:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bulova watches and 1st Tv commercial
In reading on Bulova they are credited with the first tv commercial which was a 10 second spot, however, under television commercials Bulova is credited with the first tv commercial that lasted 20 seconds. Which one is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.129.115.68 (talk) 19:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Regions that begin with "X"
Are there any world regions that begin with the letter "X"? I know there are no countries, but are there any other large regions or cities? Abeg92contribs19:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have to correct myself. After some searching, I have concluded that we do not have even extant copies of Caesar's letters. We have copies of some of his writings, but not of his dispatches or letters. There are a few excerpts from Caesar's letters in the writings Cicero, which have likewise survived only in copies. Marco polo (talk) 00:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There a friend of mine, and we sold my Best friend's pictures on the internet, I gavew him some of my pictures to sell too, but i don't know what it's called. The site i mean.
Description- Picture are uploaded, then people pay to have the picture printed out, and the site sends you the check. I THINK theyu said it was an Ebay site, but I'm not sure. can you help me find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.12.226.34 (talk) 00:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like eBay -- maybe a "shop" within the auction site that reproduces art works by arrangement, but on the net, I don't find anything quite like that. Other sites like yessy.com allow people to put up their own work which can be sold as reproductions and there are probably others. Look for sites that act as agents for online sales, maybe. You need to ask your friend for details. Julia Rossi (talk) 04:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
car value percentage of net worth
what percentage of my net worth do financial planners recommend should be invested in my car?
for that matter, what's the breakdown in general for where my investments should be (obviously it changes with age, how bout for a young adult?)
With the exception of a few classic cars, the purchase of an automobile is almost never an 'investment'—at least, not in the sense of having any hope of increasing in value for eventual sale.
When buying a car, a rational individual is deciding that the convenience of an automobile is worth the costs (car payments, insurance, maintenance, fuel, parking) is more valuable to him than the other purposes to which the same money might have been applied (larger home, retirement savings, tuition fees, other luxury goods, annual vacation, etc.).
To be fair, in many communities (particularly in the United States) car ownership is a virtual necessity caused by sprawling low-density development and appallingly underfunded public transit. In practical terms a well-maintained used vehicle provides essentially the same conveniences as a new vehicle; anything you spend over and above the cost of basic transportation is a luxury, and each individual must decide for himself exactly what his budget is for luxuries. In other words, a sensible financial planner will advise you that tying up net worth in a car isn't an investment. How much you can afford to blow on a car is a matter of your personal priorities and budget. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ten's answer is excellent as usual. To address the second part of the question, a general rule of thumb is that a young person can tolerate more risk than an older person. One question to ask yourself is, how active do you want to be in picking and/or managing the investments? A lot of people just want to put money in monthly and have someone else worry about the details. To get more specific advice to your particular situation, you really should consult someone in the business rather than the reference desk. Friday(talk)16:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How the heck does Todd do this!?!?!
My best friend Todd and I often browse Wikipedia to keep abreast of first hand knowledge.
Anyways, Todd, my best friend and like a brother, God love him, is one of those annoying know it alls. Somehow he's managed to memorize every gosh darned page on Wiki! I click random page and sure eneough, he'll recite it. He'll miss a sentence here and there, but for the most part- he nails it! Does anyone know how the heck he does this? He browses this website every waking moment, but still... Please show me how to get a photographic memory to this degree so I can put Mr. Smartypants in his place.
'Everyone has a photographic memory, some just don't have film.' Apparently. I would say you probably just need to link your long term memory, which seemingly remembers almost everything, to the rest of your brain. There's probably a way to do this, but I've forgotten it.HS7 (talk) 19:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Soil Moisture Measurement
Which method would be more reliable to measure soil moisture: resistance or capacitance? Does different soil type contribute much to the measured resistance/capacitance? Does capacitance method still work at freezing temperatures? I'm working for a automatic watering controller using soil moisture measurements and the accuracy doesn't have to be very high, but I do want it to work reliably between different soil types. --antilivedT | C | G07:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(i) blow-waved upwards; (ii) ponytail. For the former, tell the hairdresser you want to look taller. (Actually you'll just look ridiculous, but you'll think you look taller till you notice people giggling at you.) In the second photo, her fake eyelashes look truly grotesque. (I hope they're fake; if not, she's a freak.) Well you're full of questions, Bean. Would you care to contribute any content to this encyclopedia? -- Hoary (talk) 09:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think it makes her look cool, especially the second one as it shows she's not afraid to let down her guard when she's out and about. Of course it depends where you are; I wouldn't suggest the first one if your attending a business meeting or competing in the Olympics! xxx User:Hyper Girl13:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No idea on the first but the second really just looks like a ponytail. Although, I usually wear my ponytail lower on the back of my head and unless you're trying to be avant-garde or something, I'd suggest the same if your username says anything about your gender. Women tend to put their ponytails higher on their heads than men. Dismas|(talk)16:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I saw a bird while I was in Plymouth, MA. it had a hot pink cap on its head, and hot pink on its back and wings. do you know what kind of bird this is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Btmgm (talk • contribs) 12:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suppose a midget worked in a pub. Would it be discrimination if the management made him / her ware a t-shirt with the phrase "pint-sized" on it, similar to McDonalds having "I'm lovin' it"? Mr Beans Backside (talk) 13:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What! In a pub I said. On Earth - its a little blue green planet, you might have heard of it if you didn't have you head up your ass! :~) Sorry, thats a little harsh, I know your just kidding. To be more specific I mean if only the midget was made to ware the "pint-sized" t-shirt, but other staff members wore t-shirts with say "full brew" on them. Mr Beans Backside (talk) 14:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Legal definitions of what constitute discriminatory employment practices would differ from one jurisdiction to another, hence the request for further clarification of your initial question. The attitude you've expressed towards good-faithReference Desk editors attempting to assist you by relating seriously to your query isn't likely to be tolerated here for long. Kindly take note. -- Deborahjay (talk) 14:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand I may have been slightly harsh (as I said above), but Hoary's request of "it is in space" was a bit silly, wasn't it? How is that "relating seriously" to my query? I mean, come on, I'm not on the space station. Also, he seems to be stalking me, because he is aware of my other question and linked to it. Or maybe not. Nevertheless, I think it was he who didn't show "good-faith" when he asked that. Mr Beans Backside (talk) 15:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken, Mr B B. I'm just so glad to have had the opportunity to read the following response by Dismas which I consider a worthy model to improve my response style. -- Sincerely, Deborahjay (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Probably the best answer that we can give you without knowing more details is "probably". If it were the US, the little person (if that's how the rest of us are supposed to refer to them these days) would probably have a very good discrimination case on their hands. Especially if they were told that their employment depended on it. As to whether it's morally wrong to have them wear the shirt... That's a matter for you to decide. Dismas|(talk)15:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be absolutely clear here: whether it would be considered discrimination in any legal sense depends on the country and/or state the pub happens to be located in, which is exactly what Hoary referred to in his answer... but perhaps that wasn't obvious enough, which is why I'm spelling it out here. Therefore: no one can answer the question unless they know what jurisdiction this is taking place in. (A pub is not a jurisdiction. A pub is located in a jurisdiction.)
However, it should be pointed out that regardless of whether it would be discrimination in any legal sense, it would definitely be the kind of a thing that falls squarely in the "asshole behavior" category -- even if someone were to do it in a place where it would be completely legal. I can only hope that this is a hypothetical question. I mean, as far as acting like a complete jerk towards your employee goes, that's pretty unambiguous. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 02:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd guess it wouldn't be an issue if the little person agreed to do this as part of their work if it was in a promotional role, otherwise it's issue-filled. Julia Rossi (talk) 04:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Normally, banks will put your payment towards the interest that has accrued on a loan in that pay period (usually one month) first, then whatever is left will be applied to the loan amount. This way you're paying off that month's interest so that it isn't carried over to the next month and then you're paying interest in the second month on the interest from the first month. Dismas|(talk)15:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Does it matter? It seems like a silly accounting distinction. Interest increases the amount owed. Payments decrease it. At time t1 you owe x1; at a later time t2 you owe x2. x2-x1 would equal interest minus payments during the period. What purpose does it really serve to keep track of whether payments "go toward" interest or principal? (Yes, I am seriously interested in an answer. I want to know what benefits there might be to tracking things like this, to either the loaner or the borrower or both.) --Prestidigitator (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While the home equity article explains it in a technical way, I generally think of it in more basic terms. The bank helps you buy a house, land, a car, whatever. That object or real estate represents a sum of money. So each month you pay off the interest (a monthly fee for the bank allowing you to use their money) and after that, anything that's left, gets used to buy a little more of whatever it is you bought with their money. Dismas|(talk)19:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be pedantic. It is people who win medals, not countries. A major Olympic movement's objective is to bring people togther in peace. The drive for countries to total medal wins is a recent phenomenon.90.4.117.42 (talk) 14:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)petitmichel[reply]
That really is pedantic, petitmichel. Of course only people can physically compete, but they do it on behalf of their country, not as independent competitors. They can only compete if their country's organising committee permits them. Which is why their country's national anthem is sung and their flag is raised, and the win is added to the national tallies. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To be accurate, the International Olympic Committee does not keep any national tallies, and never has. The tallies are kept by just about everyone else, though. — Michael J01:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of course they compete against other athletes from their country for the right to compete at the Games. But they compete under the auspices of their sport. Not a State organised competition. Of course several countries have seen some kudos in winning - East Germany, USSR, now China, but they are not working within the Olympic ethos.86.200.4.208 (talk) 10:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)petitmichel[reply]
Liechtenstein only seems to win Winter Olympics medals though, so it still doesn't answer the question. Maybe there's a list somewhere of every country that has ever won a medal?HS7 (talk) 12:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because we (sub)consciously think that by pressing harder and thus trying to make the buttons make better contact, that what little power is left will be able to make the button work the way it's supposed to. Dismas|(talk)15:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in my experience it's not because I think it'll increase the signal but it might send more of the same weak signal (though of course the idea that it is pressure sensitive is erroneous). A brief experiment with my own TV remote (aiming it at the little camera circuit in my phone) shows that holding down the button does send out a continuous signal. Pushing harder shouldn't do anything, of course, but holding down the button could. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 18:55, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to any reasons that have to do with technology, I suspect it has quite a bit to do with the fact that we really tend to be kind of stupid, or at least irrational, about this sort of thing. It's not unlike pressing the elevator call button multiple times when we're in a hurry or yelling at a computer when it's not doing what we want. Frustration can be a pretty powerful motivator. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 02:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes a remote can miss the push of a button because the push was accidentally too weak or off-center. By pushing the button hard and carefully aiming the remote towards the TV you eliminate the possibility of user-inflicted failure, and confirm that it is the device itself (or the receiver) that is not functioning properly. 84.239.133.86 (talk) 07:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And likewise with the elevator button, if it's not the kind that lights up to confirm that it was pressed. --Anonymous, 09:07 UTC, May 11, 2008.
My rabbit (buck) matted with another rabbit (doe) and a couple of days later he started to have seizures and died. Will he infect the doe or shoulden't I worry Mr Beans Backside (talk) 15:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can't give you advice without knowing more about the illness. I suggest you visit a vet as it is hard to give advice over the internet when I don't know anything about the type of illness etc. Sorry I couldn't be of more help Anonymous101 (talk) 15:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you should remove the corpse of the rabbit. It's not healthy to have dead bodies laying around in the same confined space such as a rabbit hutch. Dismas|(talk)15:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is this covered in the rulebook?
I hope this question isn't too stupid, but I've always wondered how this would've been called. Just before a World Series game in 1989 there was a major earthquake. My question is; if the earthquake had happened during the game, how would umpires have ruled in most situations?Let's say a guy is running home and loses his balance because of the ground shaking. Could he then get tagged out, or would it be a do over? Or an outfielder falls and drops a routine fly ball? What if a fan panics and runs onto the field disrupting a major play? You get the picture. In all the ballgames that have been played in California there's never been an earthquake during a game, and it would be interesting to know what would happen. --Baseball and and and Popcorn Fanatic (talk) 16:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that the fact of the earthquake doesn't change what happens in the game. After all, no one can be certain why the man running home fell or why the outfielder dropped the ball.
In 2005, during a crickettest match in Faisalabad between England and Pakistan, an exploding gas canister was taken to be a bomb, and the game was stopped for ten minutes. Unfortunately, nothing was happening on the field at the moment of the explosion. Xn421:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would probably be covered by Rule 5.10 (a): "The ball becomes dead when an umpire calls "Time." The umpire-in-chief shall call "Time" — (a) When in his judgment weather, darkness or similar conditions make immediate further play impossible." Presumably he would have the good sense to call time as soon as the earth starts moving, but 5.10 (c) allows him to stop the game once a player is injured, which might also happen during an earthquake. See MLB official rules, 5. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There have been a couple of instances in which crazy stuff has happened during a play in American football, the most famous being The Play between Cal and Stanford. In the 2005 Alamo Bowl, dozens of people, including the guys hauling the awards podium, went onto the fiend unaware the final play hadn't ended. In both cases, the officials treated the play like any other one, waiting until the player scored (in Cal-Stanford) or was tackled (in the Alamo Bowl). There is a football rule that in case of a palpably unfair act, the officials can take any measure they feel appropriate to rectify it. Had the Cal player not made it into the end zone, the officials may have awarded Cal a touchdown anyway under that clause. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 17:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
what can we do for Burma?
Tens of thousands of people died immediately in Cyclone Nargis. Thousands more, some say hundreds of thousands, are at risk of death. Mainly these will be babies, children, and old people who die from water-borne diseases and starvation. What can we do? I mean this specifically, as a factual question. What can Wikipedia editors, with our skills of internet collaboration, do to alleviate the existing and growing crisis? What organisations with an online presence need experienced researchers and wiki editors? Yes, there are many worthy charities to donate money to. That is not my question. Are there satellite photos that need to be compared to those of a month ago and labelled, linked, tagged? (Has Google Earth taken new photos, or how can we lobby for them to update their images?) Are their Burmese NGOs (maybe in exile) who need their websites improved, if this data would help save lives? What else can we do? BrainyBabe (talk) 19:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The current problem is that the people running the government won't let others help. (I shall refrain from pointing out the similarities to another hurricane aftermath under a completely different type of government.) It unfortunately seems as though things need to get worse before they can get better. Many organizations have rallied and mobilized their resources and are waiting for the word "Go!" Then I guess there are going to be lots of ways one could help. Lisa4edit (talk) 21:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After Hurricane Katrina, the US government spent a lot of time trying to co-ordinate a response. By contrast, the Canadian government (and specifically the Canadian military) reacted immediately without any formal co-ordination. As a result, The first help that many people in Louisiana saw was from Canada. This worked because the Canadian military could depend on the US to honor pre-existing over-flight agreements. The moral of this story is that we need to get pre-approval to permit intervention during a disaster, even with governments we dis-approve of. -Arch dude (talk) 03:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know the Burmese government is not going to help. Governments and foreign NGOs are hampered by this. I am thinking about people power -- not money, not feet on the ground, though both of those are needed, but remote information work. There must be something we can do. BrainyBabe (talk) 07:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For a picture on the internet and Myanmar, ghits show blocking, crackdowns etc in 2007 articles; this[15] is May 2008 with a list of articles on the junta, the poll, China's backing, devastation stats, etc. It's not your everyday disaster, but a pretty awful mix of power, politics and brinksmanship (if that;'s the word) and international hand-wringing. Julia Rossi (talk) 12:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, there an advert in the UK for O2 which features a guy dancing around. If you know what I mean, could anyone tell me what song it is he's dancing to? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.210.91.252 (talk) 22:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What is it about termites that bite instead of sting?
A lot of bugs I know even stink up the place and arent of the carniverous kind. But why did nature equip certain bugs with a stinger? Will God ever invent a bug that shoots flames? lol:)--Dr. Carefree (talk) 22:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it isn't flames, but the noxious, boiling chemicals spewed by the bombardier beetle are pretty close. As for why certain insects are equipped with stingers, teeth, etc., they are always either defensive or offensive mechanisms, used for deterring enemies and/or attacking prey. Pretty straightforward evolutionary adaptation, one that conveys obvious benefits to the species that have them. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 23:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With such an advantange how come the bombadier beetle hasn't taken over the world? I believe in evolution, dont get me wrong but it seems the time has come that a super duper insect will someday soon TAKE OVER THE WORLD! Wont evolution be fun to watch when they fight -each other? Couldnt bees decide to get together and collectively sting everyone and everything!? Ive always wondered why insects with thier great numbers, weapons, and social structure haven't eliminated man. Maybe because we have Raid?Dr. Carefree (talk) 00:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's all about energy. A hypothetical flame-throwing insect would need to accumulate enough energy to produce the flame effect. An insect accumulates energy by expending effort to eat plant matter or prey. It's a lot more efficient to manufacture a poison or a repellent than to manufacture a flame. -Arch dude (talk) 03:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Talk to the cockroaches in our kitchen about attempts at domination. Unfortunately some other species has developed insecticides. ... but they will win yet. :-)--71.236.23.111 (talk) 04:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Different culture = different personality?
Do people from different cultures have different personalities? Or do they only have different belief systems (in religion, politics and whatever)? 217.168.0.94 (talk) 22:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Depends what you define as culture, but much of what we consider to be "personality" has cultural aspects. As an easy example, those who grow up in Japanese society generally (but not always, of course) have a much more deferential attitude to elders than those who (generally) grow up in American society. Is that personality? It can sure look like it, if you're one of the elders in question! --98.217.8.46 (talk) 23:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't see a respectful attitude towards elders as a part of my personality, but as a social value. If I travel to Japan, and I want to fit in the society, I probably would also be respectful toward elders. 217.168.0.94 (talk) 23:41, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen matter that says that "Conservapedia" has charged that the FBI is probing Wikipedia about the posting of a photo of a female subject that may be considered "kiddie porn", Does this mean that Jimbo Wales will be arrested and Wikipedia shut down? If I did not ask, someone else would have and be reallynasty about it. 205.240.146.247 (talk) 07:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best course of action is to take everything Conservapedia takes with a pinch of salt. It does intrigue me though how these people have JUST noticed that sex and nudity exist on wikipedia. I'm fairly certain those were about the first articles to be created. Damn internets. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re the Austrian incest case, it seems unusual to me that a person charged and in prison (especially before trial) can release statements to the public which could influence a jury. I had the impression people had to wait until their court appearance or legal defence spoke on their behalf during a trial. Is this a first? or is this allowed in Austria? Julia Rossi (talk) 09:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Checking the Austrian papers / el. media indicates:
The statement you are referring to seems to originate from interviews the legal counsel of Josef F. (his full surname must not be mentioned by the media) has given to a sensationalist tabloid (which, however, is widely read). This lawyer appears to be a rather controversial practitioner, who - inter alia - has publicly speculated on the potential insanity of his client and has demanded psychiatric experts to evaluate his client´s capacity to stand trial.
Your question, presumably, must be rephrased as: "Can a lawyer publicly quote privileged information entrusted to him by a client?" to which I know no answer.
Josef F. has, as yet, not been charged nor is he in prison. As the prime (and hitherto only) suspect in the case he is in police custody (de: Untersuchungshaft / remand) but must be assumed to be innocent (de: Unschuldsvermutung / presumption of innocence) until he is found guilty by a court of justice. This period of custody was prolonged today (11.05.08) by one month, as Josef F. still is a suspect and, if released, may manipulate the evidence or flee the country.
Also bear in mind that any questioning of the victims / witnesses is in the far future, as they must first learn to cope with daylight, with mobility, with wider and open spaces, with humans and, of course, with their own reality. I can not imagine a trial to take place in the intermediate future.
It may be possible that the counsel´s strategy is to prolong such a period, it may be his aim to reach a time when statutes of limitation come into play (they may have done so already) or when the health of the suspect / defendant has deteriorated to make him unfit to stand trial. His statements, almost certainly, serve a legalistic purpose which can only be speculated upon.
I guess the rules on this are different in every country, Julia. In the U.S., under the First Amendment, both the accused and the police/prosecutors can say whatever they want to the press before, during and after the trial. A thorough jury selection procedure is supposed to weed out potential jurors who have been tainted by pre-trial publicity. If a trial is covered extensively in the media, the judge can order that the jury be sequestered, or kept away from TV and newspapers, during the trial. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 16:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No Western legal system that I know of prohibits public statements by the accused about his case. Also, Austria (like several European nations) may not provide for trial by jury any more. Sandstein (talk) 17:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I need help, sorry.
I don't usually talk to anyone about this sort of stuff, but now I have to, and you're the only people I can think of that could help.
Now, I'm really shy, I find it very difficult to say anything to anyone, even my family. And this has been the cause of one of the biggest problems between me and my girlfriend. She is a bit annoyed that I don't talk much, and is worried because, well it's hard to explain really, but she doesn't see much future in us being together, something like that. I can't be bothered to try to find out her exact words. Anyway, I was sitting and thinking yesterday about this, and about why i am the way I am, and sort of worked out it was mostly due to the way I acted at school, hiding from myself, just getting through each day without really thinking much or bothering to do anything. I was going through a rather rough time back then. I'm past that it now, but can't seem to break the habit of hiding all the time. There was some other stuff too, but that's most of it. Anyway, I am getting better now, and i think it might be largely to do with her influence on me. But our relationship is suffering at the moment, and I'm not sure what'll happen. She blames herself for a lot of what's wrong, but I'm sure I'm much more responsible for our problems. Anyway, that's enough background for now.
All the time I was thinking this I couldn't stop thinking about her either, and afterwards I went and listened to music for some reason i'm still not quite sure of and anyway long story short it affected me a lot and I knew I had to do something to fix the mess we're in. Now, anyone that has been stalking me and memorising everything I say here probably already knows that we live a long way apart and mostly communicate through the internet at the moment, which obviously makes my not talking a little bit less of a problem for now. So, I somehow got the idea that I could record myself singing one of the songs i had listened to and send it to her, along with a message explaining basically everything i've just said here but a bit differently. it made sense at the time. But the main problem that I have is that I don't know if this is a good idea. Is it? what might happen? is there anything else i can do? You know, that sort of stuff.
I also don't know what to sing. I've narrowed it down to probably either 'sorry' by Chris Daughtry or 'temporary insanity' by The Weekend. I think the first one is more relevent to my problem, but the second one, for a few reasons is sort of 'our song'. And i say sorry to her rather a lot and she sometimes seems a bit annoyed that it doesn't mean as much as it should. But I'm not sure 'our song' should be used to make up for something like this, and it doesn't really get my point across. So, any advice on which one I should choose? Or are there any other songs anyone here knows of that are even better?
That's about it, I think. So yea, which song should I choose, will it work, what else is there I could do, just someone help me with this, I don't know what to do.
Yes, I'm aware that this isn't what this site is for, but it's the only place I can think of that might be able to help, and I really need help. I don't have any experience with this sort of thing, I don't even know what quesions to ask you. I'm hoping people reading this might be able to help me with that too.
Have you considered writing your own song? Reciting someone else's lyrics may not be the thing, and no matter what the song is it can never say exactly what you want to say (or that would be what I have found). aseninesay what?17:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to, but I would be absolutely terrible at it. I really fail at writing poems and songs, for some reason :(.HS7 (talk) 18:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Where humans of all races, boa constrictors and butterflies all frolic together creating energy that generates rainbows, an end to disease, and permanant "we are all one, lets love each other bullsh*t" euphoria?--Dr. Carefree (talk) 16:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, if you think that everyone loving one another is bullshit, why bother asking such a question? But in case you were serious, we unfortunately have no more insight into the future than anyone else, and this isn't the place to go into speculation about such a matter. -- JackofOz (talk) 16:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My crystal ball says: There will be peace on earth. But not while humans are still on it. In the meantime, we might end up with periods of greater stability and wealth than others. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 16:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be wrong for a parent to plant a GPS tracking device on their 16 year-olds car - without their knowledge - in order to track their whereabouts and driving speed - or would that be considered a breach of trust? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Beans Backside (talk • contribs) 17:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As for the ethical portion of the question (which is what I think is really being driven at here, pardon the pun), that's a matter of personal opinion. There are plenty of editorials and articles in the media that may help inform your decision. — Lomn17:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No clothes
If you had absolutely no clothes in the house, what household items would you use to cover yourself so you could go out and get some? (Extra points for creativity) Mr Beans Backside (talk) 17:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wear the sheets off your bed, then you wouldn't need to go out and buy any. Or order them online and have them delivered.HS7 (talk) 18:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Birth of a calf
Last week I witnessed the birth of a calf. I have seen this many times in my life time but was curious as to just how many have also seen this. So my question is have you seen any animal give birth? Mr Beans Backside (talk) 17:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a question, it's an attempt at a poll. Some people here might not like it, sorry.
Can somebody make me a pokerstars account please? It won't let me make one on my computer. The username I want is: aakkqqlol. Make the password: password. You can just make up the biographical info. Thank y'all so much!!!!!--Stolevel (talk) 17:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What to do now (any advice?)
This seems to be the right place to ask all manor of questions, so here goes... I'm sitting at home on my computer and I'm very bored. I playing with the idea of vandalizing Wikipedia, but I'm holding back in the hope that someone can suggest something betting for me to do. Preferably something on the internet. I've had a look around this website and its all a bit highbrow for me, and encyclopedia editing isn't exactly my strong point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.162.18 (talk) 17:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Etiquette
If you saw a garage sale sign and looked for the sale but couldn't find it, would you take down the sign? This happened to me. I found the house, but nothing was going on so I rang the bell and was informed that sale had been last week. What is the etiquette on this? Mr Beans Backside (talk) 17:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, it would depend on where the sign was. If it were placed in a public place I might take it down, whereas if someone has it in their front garden or on their gate it would be ruder to touch it. Daniel(‽)18:07, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suicide
While walking in a wooded area that is known for black bears, I wondered why more people who want to commit suicide don't go off into the woods and taunt black bears so they get mauled to death. Did you ever think anything close to this? Mr Beans Backside (talk) 17:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That would be such a sweet way to go. If I ever get suicidal again, I won't race cars on the highway, I'll fight fucking bears!
Cause it would be very painful? Most people want the quick and easy way to get something done.It could work,but it seems like too much effort.Unless of course,you're wearing a pork chop necklace,which could speed the process along ;) Makey melly (talk) 17:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't there such a thing as suicide by policeman that's almost the same as this, just with police instead of bears? I'm sure I read about that somewhere.
Resolved
_107v.jpg)
